NHS Dietician or Nutritional Therapist ?

[NoCrbs4Me]

In all fairness, don't knock it, until you've tried it

After managing to control my carb intake during the day with good levels, it was all sabotaged with high morning readings.... The only thing that stopped the overnight glucose production was the Newcastle Diet 500 - 600 calorie intake of low carb, fresh, organic food. I didn't use sachets as I have a real problem with the consumption of any processed ****. I no longer take any diabetic drugs, my liver stopped the overnight glucose production 3 weeks into the diet and I haven't felt so well in a long time

You are not actually doing the Newcastle Diet. You should contact the doctor who came up with this and let him know that you did something similar to the Newcastle Diet, but using real food instead of chemicals. I think that is a much better way to do it.

 

[Celeriac]

If it doesn't have the meal replacement sachets it's not a Newcastle Diet, just calorie-restricted and millions of people around the world, do that.

 

[photognut]

You are not actually doing the Newcastle Diet. You should contact the doctor who came up with this and let him know that you did something similar to the Newcastle Diet, but using real food instead of chemicals. I think that is a much better way to do it.

When reading the study my heart sank when they mentioned Nestle and only 200 cal of real food. Then I thought, how would you get everyone to eat the same things in a non controlled environment? I can see why they had to introduce sachets, which sadly does not provide a sustainable long term plan. The part I extracted from the study was the prospect of rejuvenating Beta Cells, which were previously thought to be dead along with a metabolism re-boot. The pain of only eating 500-600 calories a day of low carb has paid dividends (I also take high doses of various vitamins, minerals & amino's).
I'm writing a report for my GP who is interested in what I've done, I'm looking forward to my HBA1C next month - I might send a copy to the Newcastle research team, with a thank you for providing a way forward.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

When reading the study my heart sank when they mentioned Nestle and only 200 cal of real food. Then I thought, how would you get everyone to eat the same things in a non controlled environment? I can see why they had to introduce sachets, which sadly does not provide a sustainable long term plan. The part I extracted from the study was the prospect of rejuvenating Beta Cells, which were previously thought to be dead along with a metabolism re-boot. The pain of only eating 500-600 calories a day of low carb has paid dividends (I also take high doses of various vitamins, minerals & amino's).
I'm writing a report for my GP who is interested in what I've done, I'm looking forward to my HBA1C next month - I might send a copy to the Newcastle research team, with a thank you for providing a way forward.

This highlights one of the major problems with researching diets, which is why not enough research on diets is done. It's very hard to control and verify exactly what people eat for any length of time. But to get solid research evidence it's necessary.

 

[photognut]

If it doesn't have the meal replacement sachets it's not a Newcastle Diet, just calorie-restricted and millions of people around the world, do that.

Yes, I expect most of them have not had compromised hearts or metabolic disorders. To go against all the diet advice given by the NHS on heart health and diabetes.... I very much doubt that there are many who would take the risk.

 

[photognut]

This highlights one of the major problems with researching diets, which is why not enough research on diets is done. It's very hard to control and verify exactly what people eat for any length of time. But to get solid research evidence it's necessary.

Exactly! We are all individual in our food consumption and how our body converts and utilises it. The art of a diet and research is cherry picking something of value to fit your specific needs.

 

[Celeriac]

The reasons why I won't do such a calorie-restricted diet are:
(a) I eat real food not processed stuff
(b) I have read Gary Taubes' books and watched his lectures on YouTube and not all calories are equal. In fact I'd go further and say that if you count calories then you're stuffed because the Frenchman who invented them, was measuring how much energy it took to heat a specific amount of water to a specific temperature.

Calories weren't designed to estimate energy burned by the body in response to food. We all have different metabolisms and we don't usually eat a measured amount of one food at a time either It's how the Glycemic Index falls over compared to Glycemic Load.

Despite the dinosaurs, it is known now that if you starve your body of food, it slows down metabolism and that exercise alone won't make you super-skinny.

(c) studies have shown that for the majority of people, calorie-restricted diets don't work. They aren't sustainable because people can't stick to them or resume normal bad eating habits so the weight creeps back on. There is some evidence to show that the body aims to replace weight to its set point (which may not be your idea of ideal weight) and not just keep that but build up an extra buffer against what the body feels, is starvation.

I may try Intermittent Fasting because I can go many hours without eating, thanks to Metformin SR.

(d) I certainly won't restrict vegetables, wild fish, poultry, game, lamb and fats when eating and eat low calorie with supplements.

The reason I want to see a dietician or nutritional therapist is because I want to know how much of the nutrients I need and how that translates into quantities of actual food.

Dr Sarah Hallberg MD said recently in a vlog that we should all be able to get all the nutrients we need from our food.

 

[SunnyExpat]

........... studies have shown that for the majority of people, calorie-restricted diets don't work. They aren't sustainable because people can't stick to them or resume normal bad eating habits so the weight creeps back on. There is some evidence to show that the body aims to replace weight to its set point (which may not be your idea of ideal weight) and not just keep that but build up an extra buffer against what the body feels, is starvation...........

Sadly, I don't think as a type 2, I fit into the category of 'majority of people'
And I certainly agree, an 800 calorie a day diet isn't sustainable, 8 weeks seems long enough to me.
But if you did read the study on the Newcastle diet, after 8 weeks, there is a long period of guidance on re-introducing food.

 

[photognut]

@Celeriac I fully appreciate how you want to tackle your condition. I don't consider myself "Stuffed" for taking on a 500-600 day calorie restricted diet for 60 days - I no longer need Metformin or, any diabetic drugs... tis the pharma companies that are now stuffed, not I As for supplements, I take those in therapeutic doses as replacements for the heart drugs that I couldn't tolerate.

Sincerely, good luck with whatever regime you adopt, please be aware that others have had a huge success in taking a different path.

 

[Celeriac]

To reiterate, long term studies on diets, show that they don't work.

I lost weight before and since my diagnosis with diabetes and since without going on a diet.

Using myself as an example, I have been low carbing since 2010, organic since 2012. My health has improved, my blood glucose control is much better, but despite not eating any cakes, biscuits, pasta, rice, pizza, puddings, other processed carbs and root veg I have gained around a kilo in weight since 2010 - not enough to need to buy bigger clothes.

But if I were in a study a kilo more than 2010 would put me in the failed diet category.

I don't believe in calorie restricted diets. My mother is a serial dieter even though currently size 8/10 and I've watched her on diet after diet my whole life and all it did for her was give her early onset osteoporosis and obsessions about calories and putting on even 2lbs. So she also would be considered a diet failure because her weight has been anywhere between 8 stones and 15 stones.

Most people, regardless of diabetes status, fail to maintain weight loss on or after diets. If your weight declines, your body tries to increase insulin levels to hang on to your fat. Before exogenous insulin, Type 1s always died, because no matter how many calories they were fed, they couldn't hold on to the fat.

I don't see low carbing as anything but a tool to reduce the type of food which my body has major problems in processing. I'm not restricting calories or non - starchy vegetables. Mine isn't a very high fat or very high protein interpretation of low carb, either.

I was reading a University of Sydney PhD thesis from 2014 yesterday, and though I've not finished reading it yet, it shows that the Type 2s studied were putting out 142% more insulin than people without diabetes, in response to protein + glucose meals.

Dr Jason Fung says that high blood glucose levels are a symptom of diabetes and controlling the BG is like treating a fever caused by infection, without treating the infection. At this point, I don't think we entirely know why the insulin goes haywire and produces Type 2 and weird levels. It could be due to a gene. Not all obese people get diabetes and not all Type 2s are obese.

Professor Taylor and Dr Fung can rave about the Newcastle Diet and Intermittent Fasting and short-term they may work. It can be shown that short-term low carb works better than low fat. Long term studies will come in and the sole one I've seen, showed that low carb was no better than low fat or calorie restriction.

So it doesn't matter how people lose weight, if they wish to lose it. We cannot trump the evolutionary survival process, long-term. Diets only seem to work, if they kick start lifestyle changes.

 

[photognut]

So it doesn't matter how people lose weight, if they wish to lose it. We cannot trump the evolutionary survival process, long-term. Diets only seem to work, if they kick start lifestyle changes.

I was always fortunate up until a couple of years ago to be skinny, my children are extreme sports fanatics, thin and fit. I actually don't view what I have done as a diet fad, the old lifestyle that included grain obviously became a toxin and my body responded to it in a negative, systematically destructive manner. We are all different, my lifestyle change is a permanent change, if another food decides to turn into a destructive toxin, then I will permanently eliminate that too. I've got 2st more to lose before I'm back to my pre-diabetic skinny status and I'm certainly not going to entertain the thought of having to go through all that pain again to re-learn what I can't eat

I hope you find a good nutritionist or dietician, I'm sure there will be much to take away from it.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

To reiterate, long term studies on diets, show that they don't work.

I lost weight before and since my diagnosis with diabetes and since without going on a diet.

Using myself as an example, I have been low carbing since 2010, organic since 2012. My health has improved, my blood glucose control is much better, but despite not eating any cakes, biscuits, pasta, rice, pizza, puddings, other processed carbs and root veg I have gained around a kilo in weight since 2010 - not enough to need to buy bigger clothes.

But if I were in a study a kilo more than 2010 would put me in the failed diet category.

I don't believe in calorie restricted diets. My mother is a serial dieter even though currently size 8/10 and I've watched her on diet after diet my whole life and all it did for her was give her early onset osteoporosis and obsessions about calories and putting on even 2lbs. So she also would be considered a diet failure because her weight has been anywhere between 8 stones and 15 stones.

Most people, regardless of diabetes status, fail to maintain weight loss on or after diets. If your weight declines, your body tries to increase insulin levels to hang on to your fat. Before exogenous insulin, Type 1s always died, because no matter how many calories they were fed, they couldn't hold on to the fat.

I don't see low carbing as anything but a tool to reduce the type of food which my body has major problems in processing. I'm not restricting calories or non - starchy vegetables. Mine isn't a very high fat or very high protein interpretation of low carb, either.

I was reading a University of Sydney PhD thesis from 2014 yesterday, and though I've not finished reading it yet, it shows that the Type 2s studied were putting out 142% more insulin than people without diabetes, in response to protein + glucose meals.

Dr Jason Fung says that high blood glucose levels are a symptom of diabetes and controlling the BG is like treating a fever caused by infection, without treating the infection. At this point, I don't think we entirely know why the insulin goes haywire and produces Type 2 and weird levels. It could be due to a gene. Not all obese people get diabetes and not all Type 2s are obese.

Professor Taylor and Dr Fung can rave about the Newcastle Diet and Intermittent Fasting and short-term they may work. It can be shown that short-term low carb works better than low fat. Long term studies will come in and the sole one I've seen, showed that low carb was no better than low fat or calorie restriction.

So it doesn't matter how people lose weight, if they wish to lose it. We cannot trump the evolutionary survival process, long-term. Diets only seem to work, if they kick start lifestyle changes.

While you are not intentionally restricting calories per se, you happen to be eating fewer calories than you are using, which is associated with weight loss.

It's true that most people do not maintain weight loss after intentionally eating fewer calories, but some people do. I prefer low carbing to calorie restriction alone, but I end up eating reduced calories anyway... it's hard to know which one is causing the weight loss but either way, I'm happy.