- Messages
- 1,398
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
One of the frequent criticisms made by the medical community of the low-carb, low-med (or zero-med) treatment for Type 2 diabetes is that there aren't enough controlled medical studies (as far as I can't tell, there aren't any such studies) proving that it works in the long term.
Personally, as someone who adheres to the scientific method, this bothers me quite a lot. Indeed, it bothers me even though places like this forum provide overwhelming anecdotal evidence that the low-carb treatment works. Plus, it bothers me even though I have now become an anecdote myself: the low-carb method worked, in my case.
From Wikipedia: Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but may be considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable, e.g. in the use of case studies in medicine. Other anecdotal evidence, however, does not qualify as scientific evidence, because its nature prevents it from being investigated by the scientific method. Full definition here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence.
The "gold standard" in medical science is the long-term, double-blind controlled study. We don't seem to have any of those, as far as low-carb/no-meds treatment for T2 is concerned. (I hope I am wrong about this. If there are such studies, where can we find them?)
So here is my question: Is there any forum member reading this who has been on the low-carb programme for at least 20 years, and is still showing healthy BG levels without taking meds? Plus a corollary question: If so, have you seen any signs that the low-carb diet, while successfully controlling diabetes, had any drawbacks whatsoever for your health?
Personally, as someone who adheres to the scientific method, this bothers me quite a lot. Indeed, it bothers me even though places like this forum provide overwhelming anecdotal evidence that the low-carb treatment works. Plus, it bothers me even though I have now become an anecdote myself: the low-carb method worked, in my case.
From Wikipedia: Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but may be considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable, e.g. in the use of case studies in medicine. Other anecdotal evidence, however, does not qualify as scientific evidence, because its nature prevents it from being investigated by the scientific method. Full definition here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence.
The "gold standard" in medical science is the long-term, double-blind controlled study. We don't seem to have any of those, as far as low-carb/no-meds treatment for T2 is concerned. (I hope I am wrong about this. If there are such studies, where can we find them?)
So here is my question: Is there any forum member reading this who has been on the low-carb programme for at least 20 years, and is still showing healthy BG levels without taking meds? Plus a corollary question: If so, have you seen any signs that the low-carb diet, while successfully controlling diabetes, had any drawbacks whatsoever for your health?