Reversing Type 2 diabetes

[Mbaker]

@Freema I may have to try that but on the whole I try and avoid any processed foods as it is as if I eat them I cough sneeze and have runny nose for hours.

@Oldvatr you could be right I hate to think it but today I have had a real knock back.

Started the day OK at 5.3 then after lunch got a reading of 10.4 then after dinner found my self at an unheard of for me any way 13.8 time to start worrying as to my next move I think.

Would you do us a favour and get some full blood tests, including c-peptide, I think with your good control you can justify this and by this time next week you should be fully in the picture as to what is going on; I know you have been questioning some of your numbers which although were in a good range, not your norm for a little while.

 

[pleinster]

@Freema I may have to try that but on the whole I try and avoid any processed foods as it is as if I eat them I cough sneeze and have runny nose for hours.

@Oldvatr you could be right I hate to think it but today I have had a real knock back.

Started the day OK at 5.3 then after lunch got a reading of 10.4 then after dinner found my self at an unheard of for me any way 13.8 time to start worrying as to my next move I think.

I hope it change direction just as swiftly, John. Could be an infection, eh?

 

[ickihun]

I'm guessing you have checked the battery in your meter? People have reported readings way off if battery running out. Fingers crossed it's that.

Temperature is low here in the north-east. Chilly night and cold batteries, for sure.

 

[ickihun]

It couldnt be accumulative added carb could it @JohnEGreen ? I know you were thinking about moving diet around to keep healthy weight. I know it takes my liver a while to catch up on an extra carb but when it does it takes days to put right.

 

[ickihun]

I wonder how I'm going to fair after bariatric op. Type2s diagnosed less than 10yrs can reverse their meds needs from op.
I wonder if low carbers over 10yrs diagnosis can reverse their type2 with my op?

Diagnosed 14yrs ago but have evidence of diabetes symptoms for 40+yrs.
I'd love to be one of the first.
I will give it all I have.

Still no date for op as still in tier 3 stage.
Have lost target weight loss by low carbing and less insulin use.

 

[Freema]

Many of us diabetics have more diseases , if one also have a slow metabolism and are low in thyroid hormons Then it can be difficult to get blood glucose low almost no matter What one does of effort , so if a long term low carb diet stops working the first thing I would have checked was my metabolism , it is very important to me with my artificial metabolism of tablet-levothyroxine that it is in the High area of normal levels . I also red somewhere of a trial of American soldiers having done a long term low calorie diet , that after the first half year most of them ended up adding weight on a lower levels of carbs than before the fast , and more resent measuring of f.x. the brains weight after long term diets seems to indicate that the brain also shrinks as do the heart from long term low calorie diets , which is why more and more dietists now promote diets that vary like the 5:2 diet where one only eat low calories 2 days a week and where the body does not adapt to preserve itself on an much lower enduring lower capasity and size . I dont know if all This is truth to the general dieter But it seem to me a fine suggestion to why most dieters have less and less long term succes's with long term low calorie diets after doing one greater weightloss after the other

What du you Think of This theory of the body addapting to permanently Living from low calorie by reducing also Brain and heart size permanently as well as all other inner bodyparts ...???

 

[pleinster]

Many of us diabetics have more diseases , if one also have a slow metabolism and are low in thyroid hormons Then it can be difficult to get blood glucose low almost no matter What one does of effort , so if a long term low carb diet stops working the first thing I would have checked was my metabolism , it is very important to me with my artificial metabolism of tablet-levothyroxine that it is in the High area of normal levels . I also red somewhere of a trial of American soldiers having done a long term low calorie diet , that after the first half year most of them ended up adding weight on a lower levels of carbs than before the fast , and more resent measuring of f.x. the brains weight after long term diets seems to indicate that the brain also shrinks as do the heart from long term low calorie diets , which is why more and more dietists now promote diets that vary like the 5:2 diet where one only eat low calories 2 days a week and where the body does not adapt to preserve itself on an much lower enduring lower capasity and size . I dont know if all This is truth to the general dieter But it seem to me a fine suggestion to why most dieters have less and less long term succes's with long term low calorie diets after doing one greater weightloss after the other

What du you Think of This theory of the body addapting to permanently Living from low calorie by reducing also Brain and heart size permanently as well as all other inner bodyparts ...???

I remember my first two years studying archaeology as part of my first degree many years ago...and there was quite an emphasis on the evolution/development of "man" from early hominid/australopithecus through homo erectus and other "branches" of the early human family before reaching homo sapiens and homo sapiens sapiens (ie. us...well...most of us). It was pretty well accepted then that we adapt to our environments where we can/where it is possible for us to do so or we die out. A great deal of adaptation took place the and has done since. Diet was and is a massive part of our development at living being who (and may forget) are still evolving. We know that the brain can sometimes adapt if there is serious brain injury to part of the brain, the rest taking over certain functions. Mankind is both fragile and resilient at the same time. It is worth noting that certain sub-species or branches died out because they has specialised too much in terms of diet so that when dramatic change came they could not adapt enough. I think anyone suggesting that the brain and the body (and parts of it) cannot adapt to function physically in a particular environment or with only certain foods available does so in ignorance or defiance of the evidence of evolution of our species and of the evolution of all life on this planet. We are still evolving..and we have to. Of course, I am no an old fart as far as many state of the art scientists are concerned and the period in which I studied is now in fact bloody well archaeological!

 

[Avocado Sevenfold]

I find this post incoherent. On the contrary, the high carb diet since circa 1977 has delivered arguably the biggest self inflicted biological damage to human kind (and domestic pet diabetes is soaring) ever. Just look at the obesity, diabetes / pre-diabetes numbers since this date across the globe, this is not coincidence. Nobody can argue that carbs are not the primary reason for the major insulin response, and that carbs turn to glucose in the body which if not used either turn to fat or cause outside of the accepted medical range blood sugar levels. This diet even makes some sports persons who train 3-4 hours a day pre-diabetic. The facts are crystal clear:

View attachment 23543

No, I don't think the facts are crystal clear. In replying to a post about WFPB, you are discussing "the high carb diet since circa 1977" and posted a graph about low fat diets since 1977.

Do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a diet of high fibre, plant based, whole foods with a small amount of unprocessed plant based fat?

Or do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a low fat diet based on meat with the visible fat trimmed off, skimmed cows' milk, Muller Light yogurts and processed low fat ready meals?

I believe it is muddying the waters to suggest they are in any way the same way of eating. For balance, Venus Williams is an example of a plant-powered sports person.

 

[Oldvatr]

No, I don't think the facts are crystal clear. In replying to a post about WFPB, you are discussing "the high carb diet since circa 1977" and posted a graph about low fat diets since 1977.

Do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a diet of high fibre, plant based, whole foods with a small amount of unprocessed plant based fat?

Or do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a low fat diet based on meat with the visible fat trimmed off, skimmed cows' milk, Muller Light yogurts and processed low fat ready meals?

I believe it is muddying the waters to suggest they are in any way the same way of eating. For balance, Venus Williams is an example of a plant-powered sports person.

The original WFPB diet was, I believe. conceived as a Low GI, ultra low fat diet, which I have little problem with. But it has been corrupted by some of its gurus and books like Forks over Knives to become a high carb medium fat diet, and the benefits of low GI seems to be put aside. This makes WFPB more like SAD and Eatwell'#2 which do not appear to help diabetics (mainly T2D on orals or diet who cannot bolus for carbs). I know that vegetarians can also do LC type diets to good effect, but WFPB does not restrict carb intake at all, so I know from personal experience that it would be harmful for me. It is this potential to do harm that is my worry, and without proper explanation as to why it is safe for diabetics, I cannot accept the sales pitch. For non diabetics, then WFPB may be a good diet to adopt, as is Eatwell'2 for most of the population, except that the Low Fat message may be not such a good idea. But then again, the HF message in LCHF may also be wrong and easily corrupted.

This has nothing to do with the ongoing debate of vegetarians vs vegans vs meat eaters, so I found your posting also confusing the issue and clouding the waters.

 

[Avocado Sevenfold]

The original WFPB diet was, I believe. conceived as a Low GI, ultra low fat diet, which I have little problem with. But it has been corrupted by some of its gurus and books like Forks over Knives to become a high carb medium fat diet, and the benefits of low GI seems to be put aside. This makes WFPB more like SAD and Eatwell'#2 which do not appear to help diabetics (mainly T2D on orals or diet who cannot bolus for carbs). I know that vegetarians can also do LC type diets to good effect, but WFPB does not restrict carb intake at all, so I know from personal experience that it would be harmful for me. It is this potential to do harm that is my worry, and without proper explanation as to why it is safe for diabetics, I cannot accept the sales pitch. For non diabetics, then WFPB may be a good diet to adopt, as is Eatwell'2 for most of the population, except that the Low Fat message may be not such a good idea. But then again, the HF message in LCHF may also be wrong and easily corrupted.

This has nothing to do with the ongoing debate of vegetarians vs vegans vs meat eaters, so I found your posting also confusing the issue and clouding the waters.

I am sorry that my post was confusing for you. It was simply pointing out that there were two low fat ways of eating being discussed and that they are not the same.

 

[Oldvatr]

I am sorry that my post was confusing for you. It was simply pointing out that there were two low fat ways of eating being discussed and that they are not the same.

OK, I can see how that happened. @Mbaker was describing High Carb diets in the text, but the graph was definitely low fat, so that is confusing.

I do think that in essence the two actually kicked off at about the same time as a direct result of the 7 Countries study by Ancel Keys in 1977 and this led to Eatwell #1 Plate being made the diet of choice by NICE and ADA

 

[Mbaker]

No, I don't think the facts are crystal clear. In replying to a post about WFPB, you are discussing "the high carb diet since circa 1977" and posted a graph about low fat diets since 1977.

Do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a diet of high fibre, plant based, whole foods with a small amount of unprocessed plant based fat?

Or do you think the world became obese and unhealthy by eating a low fat diet based on meat with the visible fat trimmed off, skimmed cows' milk, Muller Light yogurts and processed low fat ready meals?

I believe it is muddying the waters to suggest they are in any way the same way of eating. For balance, Venus Williams is an example of a plant-powered sports person.

My response was accurate to the referenced post, you are contradicting an answer to another point that was raised, which was not the main thrust of this thread. It is clear that the downward spiral in health occurred form 1977 with the demonisation of fat and a move to low fat, the evidence is there for all to see. I do not think you are suggesting that the alternative Keto / LCHF diet has not produced great results and that points such as it causes high blood glucose are even true / logical.

In regards to WFPB, I made no negative comment and suggested this for me was viable if low carb, you and I are probably on the same page in regards to the main topic.

 

[Mbaker]

OK, I can see how that happened. @Mbaker was describing High Carb diets in the text, but the graph was definitely low fat, so that is confusing.

I do think that in essence the two actually kicked off at about the same time as a direct result of the 7 Countries study by Ancel Keys in 1977 and this led to Eatwell #1 Plate being made the diet of choice by NICE and ADA

I chose this graph as usually high carb goes with low fat and essentially this is what has been pushed as the standard diet. The backdrop to my comments is also in context to what you have stated with Ancel Keys and the American food authorities.

 

[Freema]

I remember my first two years studying archaeology as part of my first degree many years ago...and there was quite an emphasis on the evolution/development of "man" from early hominid/australopithecus through homo erectus and other "branches" of the early human family before reaching homo sapiens and homo sapiens sapiens (ie. us...well...most of us). It was pretty well accepted then that we adapt to our environments where we can/where it is possible for us to do so or we die out. A great deal of adaptation took place the and has done since. Diet was and is a massive part of our development at living being who (and may forget) are still evolving. We know that the brain can sometimes adapt if there is serious brain injury to part of the brain, the rest taking over certain functions. Mankind is both fragile and resilient at the same time. It is worth noting that certain sub-species or branches died out because they has specialised too much in terms of diet so that when dramatic change came they could not adapt enough. I think anyone suggesting that the brain and the body (and parts of it) cannot adapt to function physically in a particular environment or with only certain foods available does so in ignorance or defiance of the evidence of evolution of our species and of the evolution of all life on this planet. We are still evolving..and we have to. Of course, I am no an old fart as far as many state of the art scientists are concerned and the period in which I studied is now in fact bloody well archaeological!

well, no-one is talking of extinction, it seems children who had a mother starving during pregnancy seems to become diabetic more frequently than their other siblings where the mother didn´t starve during the pregnancy, the adaption you are talking about can have many faces of which some are maybe not as totally flexible as you suggest.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425424/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081030110959.htm
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-11286462
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/5/811.full
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3857581/
http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-an-1836-famine-altered-the-genes-of-children-born-d-1200001177
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/features/142195/beyond-dna-epigenetics
http://newsroom.cumc.columbia.edu/blog/2014/07/17/effects-of-starvation-inherited/

 

[Avocado Sevenfold]

@Oldvatr and @Mbaker Now I am getting confused lol

The thread, as far as I understand, was started about a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating. This is a very specific way of eating. I am not a fan of Ancel Keys, the prescribed ADA diet, the prescribed NHS diet, NICE guidelines, Eatwell #1, Eatwell #2, Eatwell The Directors Cut, whatever.

I am plant based, but I don't have a dog in this fight as I am not whole foods (yet) I was simply pointing out that all these ways of eating are not the same as a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating.

 

[Oldvatr]

well, no-one is talking of extinction, it seems children who had a mother starving during pregnancy seems to become diabetic more frequently than their other siblings where the mother didn´t starve during the pregnancy, the adaption you are talking about can have many faces of which some are maybe not as totally flexible as you suggest.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425424/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081030110959.htm
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-11286462
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/5/811.full
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3857581/
http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-an-1836-famine-altered-the-genes-of-children-born-d-1200001177
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/features/142195/beyond-dna-epigenetics
http://newsroom.cumc.columbia.edu/blog/2014/07/17/effects-of-starvation-inherited/

The list of referenced reports is impressive, but I read the EPIC study referenced, and I have a few problems with it.

Firstly participants were requested to self submit personal details of lifestyle and eating habits. Now they used this info as prime source to identify the diabetics. In common with all the other EPIC studies I have reviewed, none has asked for this info directly, so relies on every diabetic owning up to it and agreeing to share that info, so not necessaily a robust data collection method.

Secondly on the 3 year follow up, they sent out urine test strips to again find the diabetics, Now I know that most of my screening tests since diagnosis have shown ZERO glucose levels, not even trace,

Thirdly, they have identified the mothers suffering from the Hongerwinter, and the severity of the deprivation. They have identified children from the same area being diabetic, and they seem to have found a way of linking a child to its respective mother but this mehanism is not referred to in the study description. How can they be sure that Diabetic <n> was exposed to a defined level of deprivation - the child does not necessarily know. I mean I know I grew up during sugar rationing, but was I severely deprived? From a child's POV, probably !

It is true that severe starvtion is expected to be grossly detrimental to a childs health, but if the link to diabetes cause is true, then this will show up as blips in the WHO database showing an increase in diabetes patients being treated which correlates to known famine events in the world (Ethipoia, Somalia etc) but the data seems to show it is primarily a Western disease but other countrues are catching up as Western culture and diet become popular. So is it a starvation event or decadent western diet causing rise in diabetes?

I Have not read the other reports, but the BBC one seems to be on cognitive decline rather than diabetes.

 

[Mbaker]

@Oldvatr and @Mbaker Now I am getting confused lol

The thread, as far as I understand, was started about a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating. This is a very specific way of eating. I am not a fan of Ancel Keys, the prescribed ADA diet, the prescribed NHS diet, NICE guidelines, Eatwell #1, Eatwell #2, Eatwell The Directors Cut, whatever.

I am plant based, but I don't have a dog in this fight as I am not whole foods (yet) I was simply pointing out that all these ways of eating are not the same as a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating.

The response I gave was to the following:

<<<<<
It makes me cry guys, stop that low carb, high animal fat ******** for the sake of the millions' health.

Most people using keto diet dont want to find out more about it.

For example ketogenic diet causes insulin resistance and high gasting sugar blood level yet people claim it lowers blood glucose levels.

It also destroys your gut micrflorsa,leads to glutathione depletion etc

There arent ANY primal people who thrive on keto diet (no Inui arent in ketosis) whereas there are plenty of being healthy and strong on high carbs diet.

Most keto believers dont even get basic stuff like that you dont need insulin responae to be fat etc.

I have many of science links to back up my claims but fighting with cultists is just waste of time,its lije discussing **** in /earthisflat>>>>>>>>

These comments I sum up as saying LCHF / Keto is dangerous to millions, causes insulin resistance and high blood glucose and that high carb diets are healthier - this is the context of my response.

 

[Oldvatr]

@Oldvatr and @Mbaker Now I am getting confused lol

The thread, as far as I understand, was started about a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating. This is a very specific way of eating. I am not a fan of Ancel Keys, the prescribed ADA diet, the prescribed NHS diet, NICE guidelines, Eatwell #1, Eatwell #2, Eatwell The Directors Cut, whatever.

I am plant based, but I don't have a dog in this fight as I am not whole foods (yet) I was simply pointing out that all these ways of eating are not the same as a Whole Food Plant Based way of eating.

Sorry, mea culpa. It as me posting a slightly off-topic post that Mbaker was replying to, I should have posted it in the Humour thread, but it does show how we are sometimes thought of by people outside this Forum.

 

[JohnEGreen]

To answer any queries on my slightly of topic contribution.
I used back up meter to confirm readings, batteries were not low, am not sickening for anything and though I have changed my diet marginally have not done any thing drastic so I still cannot understand what happened.

Thank you to all those who showed concern on my behalf.

With some of the posts on here I thought I would have a little look around for stuff on WFPB, and stumbled across this.

"Dieters sometimes consume extra protein to stave off hunger and prevent loss of muscle tissue that often comes with weight loss. But in a study of 34 postmenopausal women with obesity, researchers found that eating too much protein eliminates an important health benefit of weight loss: improvement in insulin sensitivity, which is critical to lowering diabetes risk."

I know it primarily concerns posmenopausal women but thought it may be of general interest as well.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161011130002.htm

 

[badcat]

To answer any queries on my slightly of topic contribution.
I used back up meter to confirm readings, batteries were not low, am not sickening for anything and though I have changed my diet marginally have not done any thing drastic so I still cannot understand what happened.

Thank you to all those who showed concern on my behalf.

With some of the posts on here I thought I would have a little look around for stuff on WFPB, and stumbled across this.

"Dieters sometimes consume extra protein to stave off hunger and prevent loss of muscle tissue that often comes with weight loss. But in a study of 34 postmenopausal women with obesity, researchers found that eating too much protein eliminates an important health benefit of weight loss: improvement in insulin sensitivity, which is critical to lowering diabetes risk."

I know it primarily concerns posmenopausal women but thought it may be of general interest as well.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161011130002.htm

I would hypothesise that it might have something to do with gluconeogenesis ( ie the alchemy of the liver creating new glucose, primarially out of protein) - thats an equal opportunities process that would effect both men and women