Yes, there are different kinds of starches.
But I'm talking about
first insulin response that in me seems to be what is impaired. As well as my insulin sensitivity (but that last one is affected by the extra fat I carry around so that should be improved via any method of weight loss and aided by exercise).
I can go back to a base of 5 after 3 hours of a high carb meal with no extra fiber added. Some people will react differently than other people regardless of the starches.
By what I am understanding people refers to "reverse" then I am already there since two weeks after hospital ???
I am hoping for improvement over these spikes, therefore the question, which I have also placed on low carb high fat people to see the different opinions and experiences.
Some people seem to tolerate bread and wheat better than I do. I know that delayed emptying of the stomach and re-heated pastas (or adding fiber content to a meal) might produce lower spikes, but BG's tend to reflect this over the following hours or days.
In my little experience with a pizza on sunday, I spiked and went back to base after 3 hours, and it didn't affect my BG's before bed or the two days after, it remained stable.
This happened, while my BG's are slightly above what they have been for the previous month due to a confluence of factors: having the flu and having an infection altogether (you can add stress to that), and because all of this, not being able to exercise either which doesn't help. When I mean higher I mean it went for 4.7 to mid 5's (still non diabetic levels).
From my normal 4.7 I went to a 6.8 at one point (I believe it was liver dump for not eating after a long fasting and at the worst point of the infection).
At all times my BG's were in the mid 5's otherwise. And now they are coming back on track to lower 5's but I am still on antibiotics and recovering. They will come back to normal range I hope but we will see.
I haven't experimented more because I am happy with my weight loss and want to keep it going on. I'm well away from my target weight.
I do too put weight on when I eat carbs (we all seem to agree on that fact), as it has happened in the past when not diabetic (I don't need too much of them for that to happen, particularly wheat).
As for too much fat I don't know how it works (been asking around) because I don't eat "too much fat" (in my opinion) and have never reached my target weight.
However I don't gain all the weight immediately, and my weight increments are slow after losing weight and I put it down to carbs. I have read about the people that has incremented their levels of exercise while doing low caloric approaches. So I was hoping that that people might reply to my questions, I'm thinking I will message them directly and see what they say.
I am asking questions in the hope that some people might have tested and we could see some improvements that we can take into consideration and measure.
I believe if you are having over 30 grams of carb a day then you need to be watchful of your consumption of fat, below 30 grams of carbs I think it works in a different way. At least in my personal case it does make a difference. As consumption of carbs increases, fat should come down (is my believe at least), reaching a balance in that, in my opinion will probably more look like a low calorie diet where most calories will come from non starchy foods.
Some people follow high fat diets indefinitely but find problems after reaching target weight and controlling weight loss. I can't talk about this because I have never reached that point. But I am learning from them as I learn from the low calorie ones.
If we are talking about "reversal" in terms of OGTT (which some people said is possible and I have the feeling it is so), definitely (I think.. is an opinion not a known fact by me) there should be a change in these spikes, and they would be a good illustration for others that is achievable because it would show, as Glitter suggests in his blog, that the pancreas beta cell functions had been restored to normality in some people.
So we both agree on what "reversal" should mean and therefore I keep interested in his story (and everyone elses who claims reversal by any means). I don't think sensationalism works to our benefit when reality hits me, it hits me hard, but that doesn't mean I don't believe things can change, or that breakthroughs in science can't be achieved, totally the opposite.
But I apologise if I'm not a happy reader of sensationalism or seem to be sceptic. I'm not a sceptic but I want contrasting results and measurable facts that I can take into account for the improvement of my personal condition.
I know from direct contact with science that there are lots of politics involved when producing papers and studies. I have respect for scientists as much as for any other person, I take what they produce, I read, I contrast info, I ask questions. I'm not judging other peoples choices or trying to make them change their mind.
I addressed my question to the people that has already reached those non diabetic levels and has managed to stay in that reversal stage (which it seems to be where I am at, judging by their definition of "reverse").
Going up or down weight wise doesn't tell me much about what I really would like to know in terms of diabetes, and all its variations and consequences.
I'm on non diabetic levels already, since two weeks after my diagnosis, I have remained there very comfortably. But my spike for wheat (not for other starches like sweet potatoes) is there and I am interested to see if in the long run that could be improved by the weight loss and increases insulin sensitivity. If it can, great, I want to know how and if it applies to me
.
I feel I have to clarify this: I personally have no particular preferences for how people achieve low BGs on a constant basis (low calorie or low carb both work in terms of BG control as proven by so many different experiences, or low carb high fat both saturated or not, I have issues with high protein but each to their own).
I'm interested in seeing what can really be improved and what remains impaired.I'm not trying to prove you guys wrong, or anyone for that matter.
I think low calorie works just fine to lose weight and achieve low BGs. I prefer something else different to low calorie for me, but I have never implied it doesn't work.
But if the term used to promote certain approaches is "reversal", then I want to know what this means and how does it could affect me given my genes and circumstances, I can only do that by learning from both my own experiences as well as seeing all the diverse approaches that people might have.
I never heard about the NC diet before because I wasn't diabetic and my attention wasn't there. I knew about low calorie diets as everyone else from the general knowledge of a healthy balanced diet and it normally included bread, that doesn't do me any favours so far.
I found them difficult to follow but I understand a lot of people can follow them just fine. I think that's great, it doesn't bother me at all.
I am trying to learn and understand how this all works, as it seems to me, no one has satisfactory answers. If we did, Prof. Taylor wouldn't still be doing research in this field, or anyone else for that matter.
My questions are raised in the spirit of learning and sharing information. So if anyone has info on how First Insulin Response gets affected after "reversal" (achieved by any dietary approach) I would be very grateful to be kindly pointed out in that direction.
