- Messages
- 8,470
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Tablets (oral)
I concur. Probably the most appropriate solution for most of us.Better than nothing, so long as the persons on the trial are aware that they need to eat a third less, exercise a bit and that their metabolism decreases. It is great that the NHS recognises that Type 2 can be reversed.
With the options I have reviewed, if money were no object I would take myself off to Germany and do a 21 day fast under clinical supervision or the Russian equivalent, and maintain with Keto; failing that Keto and IF / multi-day fasting.
I agree that long term maintenance is tricky if you've done 800 calories of shakes for 8 weeks and people will need lots of dietary re education. There was follow up of the original trial and some people had kept some of the weight off....... Low carb seems the better option and the VIRTA health trial should have been considered although it isn't of the RCT gold standard which NICE demands...Then there is all politics of reversing out of the energy balance and fat is bad messaging.An attempt at least.
It still sites being overweight as a cause not a symptom.
The shakes still have an appreciable carb content with skimmed milk and porridge being some of the elements. So it still sounds like a NHS plate in a drink just smaller portions.
It's only for people over a bmi of 30.
Lastly. How will this help long term. Changing people to meat and salad/veg is sustainable for life and costs far less. These people will need hand holding through the experience and then when their 'treatment' ends what do they do. They will be told to eat the NHS plate and got straight back to where they started.
Bet weight help organisations are behind it. We know how wonky they can get the healthy ideas.
It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be selling this as 'the eat 800 cals diet which works because it is LOWER CARBS than you have been eating' followed by 'then eat lower carbs for life'...but they won't because they are still perpetuating the myth that if only fat people didn't eat so much'. No mention of the thin type 2s of course, do they start this 800 cal thing?
Your predjudice is showing, There are other valid diets apart from Low Carb. The Newcastle Diet study on which this NHS venture is based has indeed shown promise of reversal that is sustainable in the longer term. This diet (ND) is discussed at length in many threads in this forum and in the Success Stories section too.It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be selling this as 'the eat 800 cals diet which works because it is LOWER CARBS than you have been eating' followed by 'then eat lower carbs for life'...but they won't because they are still perpetuating the myth that if only fat people didn't eat so much'. No mention of the thin type 2s of course, do they start this 800 cal thing?
It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be selling this as 'the eat 800 cals diet which works because it is LOWER CARBS than you have been eating' followed by 'then eat lower carbs for life'...but they won't because they are still perpetuating the myth that if only fat people didn't eat so much'. No mention of the thin type 2s of course, do they start this 800 cal thing?
The diet was originally developed as the Cambridge Diet, so is in essence a weight loss program, It has been in use for many years now so is not a Fad diet by any means. It evolved into the Slimfast Diet, which is still in use today, and is considered viable and safe by nutritionists. WW is a variant of the plan.It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be selling this as 'the eat 800 cals diet which works because it is LOWER CARBS than you have been eating' followed by 'then eat lower carbs for life'...but they won't because they are still perpetuating the myth that if only fat people didn't eat so much'. No mention of the thin type 2s of course, do they start this 800 cal thing?
It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be
@KK123 - if you google "Richard Doughty", you'll see what. Can happen to slim T2s adopting this approach, and the span of his personal years required efforts.It sounds like a gimmick to me, no more than a fad diet. Of course an 800 calorie shake diet will work if it's only about losing weight, and scientifically that weight loss (which is basically from consuming fewer carbs) will 'result' in lower numbers at the end probably due to metabolic reasons.....oh look, reversed type 2. What about after that?, I am assuming nobody stays on this 800 cal diet for ever? I know it's a start as others have said but what advice follows it? What is that person told to do then?, if it's the eatwell nonsense, well just wait until they unfortunately start the type 2 issue all over again a week after. The focus is wrong as far as I am concerned, the 800 cals will enable a person to lose weight as if THAT is all this is about but it most certainly does not reverse type 2 other than very temporarily at the moment they take the end result tests. They should be selling this as 'the eat 800 cals diet which works because it is LOWER CARBS than you have been eating' followed by 'then eat lower carbs for life'...but they won't because they are still perpetuating the myth that if only fat people didn't eat so much'. No mention of the thin type 2s of course, do they start this 800 cal thing?
The NHS plan is targeted at T2D specifically. It seems to reduce the Insulin Resistance that is a characteristic of that condition, and is something that a T1D is unlikely to suffer from. The diet is therfore probably not so suitable for T1D except as a pure weight loss program. T1D would need to continue insulin treatment during and after the diet period, so will not experience reversal. Some Insulin Dependant T2D et al may see improvement depending on the reason for their insulin need.
I agree, When you explain it like this then it becomes clearer, and I was just concerned that Newbies may get the wrong ideas which is why I added the explanation since although I am a Low Carber myself, I do see the ND as viable especially for those not wanting the extra fuss of LC.Wow, I didn't realise I would get so many replies to my post! Oldvatr, I really am not prejudiced in any way, my point was more to do with the way the diet is being portrayed, ie as a lose weight and you'll be fine way. Isn't that the same way as saying 'you're fat and that's why you got diabetes'? I am all for whatever works for people, I can see that such a diet will work to begin with but surely diabetes will come back unless it (or something similar) follows? My description of it as 'fad' was too much I accept but I meant in the way of diets that are only short term., @Oldvatr, @DCUKMod - I will read Doughty, thank you.
IR is a moving target, and what goes can come around again if the original stimulus is continued. So some form of lifestyle change will be required to maintain 'normal' levels. Having done some IR reversal by another route I find that I am more carb tolerant, but it gradually fades, and I need to take repeat steps to bring me back down again. I need to continue testing my sugars else I would not realise I was falling by the wayside, The NHS does not support SMBG for T2D so they are at a severe disadvantage to start with.Hi there, is it that once any IR is sorted, a person can go back to eating 'normally' then or what happens after the trial period, what advice would be given?
According to a mild twitter spat with Partha Kar yesterday that's not true! Although he didn't come up with any evidence and I have struggled to find any concrete data.NHS does not support SMBG for T2D so they are at a severe disadvantage to start with
According to NICE Guidelines NG28 as last updated in 2017According to a mild twitter spat with Partha Kar yesterday that's not true! Although he didn't come up with any evidence and I have struggled to find any concrete data.
My own views on ND are fairly well known but if anything can be considered a "fad diet" then surely replacing food with artificially concocted shakes must be a prime contender. Yes the results have been promising but I still haven't seen any 5 year follow up data even though the initial trials started in 2011? It does make me wonder why?