• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Diet To Help Type 2s Who Are Not Obese...

Guzzler said:
As an n=1 this makes sense to me. I was a painfully thin child, a super skinny adolescent, I was thin in my twenties and after having children and reaching my forties I was slim. Perhaps I am genetically predisposed to being a scrawny elder which is what I am now.
Click to expand...
Me too
Carol
 
NicoleC1971 said:
https://blogs.diabetes.org.uk/?p=10727

Professor Taylor is looking into this issue on hehalf of Diabetes UK. I beleive his contention is that we all have a personal fat threshold thus someone who has a bmi of 24 may need to reduce it to 22 or lower to get into remission.
Interesting but I am frustrated by the article regarding remission of type 2 which totally fails to mention low carb/high fat.
The options are Newcastle Diet or weight loss via the low fat diet or bariatric surgery with various dietary studies compared then disclaimed because they aren't studying the same things anyway.
No mention of the various studies where low carb/high fat has gone head to head with low fat and even the Mediterranean and either beaten it or done equally well. Low carb appears to be Voldemart as far as DuK are concerned.
I am seriously wondering if they have been getting any funding from those shakes companies to show the ND in a favourable light (starvation does sound slightly more appealing than irreversible surgery or the v.low remission rate quoted for cal contolled low fat!).
Click to expand...
I feel the key to remission is in the liver not the pancreas so...... What I'd be asking is .. .... Is my liver working to its best and have I got rid of any fatty liver?
Loads of slim people have fatty liver. None diabetics too of course but maybe their not genetically flawed like most of us are.
A fatty liver messes up the metabolism, even in slim people. You may be slim due to your thyroid or pituitary gland not being influenced by the metabolism your fatty liver creates?
Have you definitely no fatty liver?
 
lindisfel said:
I doubt if the Newcastle diet as administrated is a random example of diabetics. I suspect the 'low hanging fruits' are picked as subjects, from what I read those older than their late 60's are not chosen.
I suspect the same may apply to waist versus height ratio.
Does anyone have any evidence on candidate selection.
And
How in fact do they choose the later diet.
I hope it's not by BDA recommendations.
D.
Click to expand...

https://www.directclinicaltrial.org.uk

Screen Shot 2018-09-26 at 15.06.15.png
 
ickihun said:
I feel the key to remission is in the liver not the pancreas so...... What I'd be asking is .. .... Is my liver working to its best and have I got rid of any fatty liver?
Loads of slim people have fatty liver. None diabetics too of course but maybe their not genetically flawed like most of us are.
A fatty liver messes up the metabolism, even in slim people. You may be slim due to your thyroid or pituitary gland not being influenced by the metabolism your fatty liver creates?
Have you definitely no fatty liver?
Click to expand...

How do you know if one has fatty liver?
 
My endo asked if I had low carb'd before starting the 800cals diet last week @DavidGrahamJones .
So i think low carb is freely accepted but not high fat element. I wish the high fat wasn't necessary for some as I for one cannot get my injected insulin to work well with high fats. So to lose I have to be low(ish) fat. I believe my shakes aren't high fat but definitely once added to milk isn't very low carb but far lower than a high carb diet. I'm looking into no soy option for better thyroid health but only half way there. No soy milk but not yet found a no soy milk shake powder.
I'm getting great 5s again but not as straight a line as very low carb steady 5s. Because of sugar in shakes+milk and sugar on some tablet coatings I'm getting variants.
I envy a person only type2 and diagnosed right now. So much to fight it back into remission, if they're serious. Envious but very happy for them. They won't have to struggle as much as I am.
Hoping 800cals diet loses enough weight to satisfy any bariatric surgeon, even the most strictest of ones.
Because I'd lost nearly 4st on metformin, insulin and very low carb he wants the same similiar result without metformin. Metformin has always been my stabiliser of diabetic care, even longer than the insulin treatment but without it I'm not as protected from increasing insulin resistance.
I wonder if ND can boast as the same or better? I wouldn't of thought so, unless eating those 800cals constantly, I'd of thought! :(
 
Last edited:
bulkbiker said:
I hadn't noticed before but they took people who were on "anti-diabetes drugs" but had already put their diabetes into remission using their own criteria (HbA1c below 48 mmol/m) onto the trial... hmmmm half way there already perhaps? I wonder how many of those made it through to the "in remission" group.
Click to expand...
Or proof of their resolve?
 
lindisfel said:
Thanks bulbiker, they seem to equate T2D with being over weight.

When I got down to 13stone at 1.95 I still was predibetic and my ribs were showing.
Daughters and wife complained I was overdoing it.
D.
Click to expand...
That fitted their agenda Im afraid.. no TOFI's allowed...
 
Hmmmm. I would rather eat a bucket of cold vomit than milkshakes especially expensive milkshakes but each to their own I agree. Trying to achieve a health gain via food requires IMO, a change of personal strategy. It makes sense for the change to be something that is healthful and sustainable in the long term. I don’t believe someone can eat milkshakes for the rest of their life. I loathe salad and all who sail in her but I am eating various salady things because given the potential personal gains, I need to do this. Low carb, very low if I can, is my choice. I make a delicious very sweet and spicy satay sauce, always a favourite in my friendship group. Now i make it differently using xylitol plus nuclear quantities of plus peanut butter - great with cucumber chunks. I will only do milkshakes when all my teeth have dropped out.

Edited by Mod
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bulkbiker said:
I hadn't noticed before but they took people who were on "anti-diabetes drugs" but had already put their diabetes into remission using their own criteria (HbA1c below 48 mmol/m) onto the trial... hmmmm half way there already perhaps? I wonder how many of those made it through to the "in remission" group.
Click to expand...

My understanding is, if you have HBA1c's in the prediabetic or non-diabetic range assisted by anti-diabetic drugs - you are not in remission. Remission (and of course resolution/reversal) is your body functioning on its own, not with help from medication. This makes complete sense to me, as there is no 'remission' if your liver still has major signalling issues, say, but is functioning well due to metformin doing its thing, for example.
 
Thank you, good point re meds. I think I will wait for next HbA1c then if in same area of result as current then i can think about the stop metformin discussion with my GP.
 
AloeSvea said:
My understanding is, if you have HBA1c's in the prediabetic or non-diabetic range assisted by anti-diabetic drugs - you are not in remission. Remission (and of course resolution/reversal) is your body functioning on its own, not with help from medication. This makes complete sense to me, as there is no 'remission' if your liver still has major signalling issues, say, but is functioning well due to metformin doing its thing, for example.
Click to expand...

Indeed but I had never noticed in the ND trials that they accepted people who were actually at a "pre diabetic" level with medication into the trial. Looking at the criteria for acceptance it would seem that they did I just found that a bit odd.
 
NicoleC1971 said:
No mention of the various studies where low carb/high fat has gone head to head with low fat and even the Mediterranean and either beaten it or done equally well. Low carb appears to be Voldemart as far as DuK are concerned.
Click to expand...

They have been fighting low carb high fats diet for decades. Doubt they will admit they are wrong anytime soon...they will just double down on WFPB SDA type diet. Animal Fats remains the villians in their minds.
 
bulkbiker said:
Indeed but I had never noticed in the ND trials that they accepted people who were actually at a "pre diabetic" level with medication into the trial. Looking at the criteria for acceptance it would seem that they did I just found that a bit odd.
Click to expand...

I would have been interested to understand how many trialist applicants they had, and sort of wondered if they were short of volunteers. I know from discussion with researchers and recruiting researchers that finding volunteers is always a struggle.

I just don't seem to fit any criteria for any of the studies I have seen. I don't even qualify as a "well" participant.

Hey ho. There are far worse problems around if you're me.
 
bulkbiker said:
Indeed but I had never noticed in the ND trials that they accepted people who were actually at a "pre diabetic" level with medication into the trial. Looking at the criteria for acceptance it would seem that they did I just found that a bit odd.
Click to expand...

For sure. I don't recall them using 'prediabetics' either, but I am not so up with the ND play these days. I do know that those, like I was, who were UK diabetic level 49 who got to below that - 42-48 inclusive (or is it 41? I can't remember), via the ND, and maintained it, were (are?) considered remission successes.

I would only go as far, personally, as calling it a 'partial remission', but who could I say that to? :). My adult daughter, maybe.

I much prefer the phrase 'intermediate hyperglycemic' as I think it describes the state so much better - as in it is clear one is still significantly BG system-dysfunctional, and not normal. And it suggests a 'maintenance level' thing going on which is indeed the case for me, otherwise called, 'well controlled'. But even though 'intermediate hyperglycemic' is the official phrase in my own country (NZ), no-one but no-one uses it, sadly for me. Not even in lab results and in my medical records. So, not sure what is going on there. Perhaps as more and more people in the population are in the 'prediabetic' (intermediate hyperglycemic) range? At the moment in NZ, the stats are that one third of the population have BG dysfunction in that range. That's a lot! But still not a whisper of 'intermediate hyperglycemic'. Oh well.
 
Back
Top