:lol: :lol: :lol: EXCELLENT, KaMon!! Well said!Ka-Mon said:Did anyone actually read every post in the thread, especially the very long ones? I tried but gave up very quickly, too long, too scientific and most of all TOO BORING.
For the time it takes to read all the (very long) posts that (more than likely) do not lead to any concrete proof/conclusion I think I'm better off reading short replies that actually help.
Sitting in front of the computer = High BG + boredom.
One hammer + one handsaw + some dead wood = exercise = low BG + less rubbish - boredom = priceless. :lol:
NewdestinyX said::lol: :lol: :lol: EXCELLENT, KaMon!! Well said!Ka-Mon said:Did anyone actually read every post in the thread, especially the very long ones? I tried but gave up very quickly, too long, too scientific and most of all TOO BORING.
For the time it takes to read all the (very long) posts that (more than likely) do not lead to any concrete proof/conclusion I think I'm better off reading short replies that actually help.
Sitting in front of the computer = High BG + boredom.
One hammer + one handsaw + some dead wood = exercise = low BG + less rubbish - boredom = priceless. :lol:
Though I will say - for some this issue really DOES matter. And there was only 'conversation' and 'discussion'. Discussion is not 'one upmanship'. Clarifying one's position to another that hasn't understood what you've said yet isn't one-upman-ship either. Let's just relax. Those of you who are uninterested or 'bored'.. just don't comment and ignore the thread. Seems simple - right?
For the record, when it comes to our disease - from my perspective there's no such thing as 'too scientific' - but I knew what you meant..
pixor said:I find it disappointing that people with no medical background dismiss the findings out of hand.
Toms Grandma said:Slimfast like Literlife are low calorie diets and they work by making your body use its own fat to survive. ...It works, but you have to be incredibly dedicated and stick to it.
Well I started to respond a bit to this here. But the mods have asked us to keep this thread a little cleaner with ideas that could go off topic. I'm not sure I agree with several comments above. But I've posted my response in the other 600 calorie diet thread here:Toms Grandma said:Slimfast like Literlife are low calorie diets and they work by making your body use its own fat to survive. It takes about three days of eating 600 calories a day to get into 'fat burning'. It means the fat around the liver, pancreas etc is being used and when thats gone it uses the rest of the fat in your body for energy. Once in 'fat burning' one often gets a feeling of well being. Rarely, but it does happen, some people feel tired to begin with until the body 'switches gear'. Whilst on this type of diet, you need to drink 2 litres of water a day, this is to help push the ketones out of the body that you make by being on this diet. If the diet is adhered to, you can lose about 10lb in the first two weeks and then 3lb a week on average thereafter. I have known people lose 10 stone over 10 months. I myself lost 4 1/2 stone in 4 months. It works, but you have to be incredibly dedicated and stick to it.
ernie100 said:I have decided to try this diet, albeit slightly modified to provide 300 more calories on the days that I work out in the gym (in excess of 1 hour with a personal trainer 2 or 3 times a week) which will comprise of non starchy veg rather than an increase in Optifast,,,on the other days I will keep up general exercise eg cycling etc. I am not a medical person but understand how the body works and have listened to people who know a hell of a lot about this subject...and whose judgement I trust.
borofergie said:This also made me think twice:
http://diabetesupdate.blogspot.com/2011 ... erses.html
Kenny said:borofergie said:This also made me think twice:
http://diabetesupdate.blogspot.com/2011 ... erses.html
Take heart. I followed this link and read the rant. She seems to have omitted to actually read the research paper properly. The researchers were not testing a diet. They were measuring fat content of the liver and pancreas. After 12 weeks of resumption of a normal diet, excess fat had NOT returned to the liver and pancreas, and BS readings were non-diabetic for 7 out of the 11 subjects.
It's not a dangerous diet, because it's a short-term diet (only 8 weeks).
Edited to remove personal comment.
..which is 'itself' a 'perception'. And of course it would make 'sense' if you desire to do things her way.. :wink:Sid Bonkers said:Strange how different people perceive things isnt it, I have always thought that Jenny Ruhl talked a lot of sense
You're not alone here. Many ultra low carbers have found her blog to be a sort of 'bible' of the 'purer way'.and she certainly helped me on the road to diabetic control,
You do not pick up from her writing about it that she's a fan of it though. But rant? Well - perceptions are what they are.. agreed.I just read the blog and I didnt see a rant at all just a thought provoking piece of writing and she does mention the fat surrounding the liver and pancreas within the first paragraph or so.
Though I'm hopeful (I'm more 'glass half full' on the outcome potential than you are are, Pianoman, about this diet) I do think asking hard questions of the study is completely appropriate in addition to pointing out what it can conclude and what it can't claim as a result. And I really wish we could email or visit a blog or YOuTube series of several of the test participants (the 'testees', if you will :shock: ) to see how they're doing now.pianoman said:Read the paper again... that was 12 weeks after the start of the 600 calorie diet. This study only ran for 12 weeks total... so this improvement (to Pre-Diabetes levels -- not normal levels -- for 7 out of 11 test subjects) was only tested out to 4 weeks after the diet ended.
Maybe they maintained this improvement at 12 weeks after the study ended, or maybe they didn't... that has not been documented.
andThe striking results seen at 8 weeks demanded experimental follow-up, and additional ethics permission was obtained to repeat the MRI studies and carry out OGTTs 12 weeks after completing the dietary intervention.
Post-intervention observation At follow-up 12 weeks after completion of the dietary intervention, mean weight gain was 3.1±1.0 kg. Hepatic triacylglycerol remained low and unchanged (2.9±0.2 vs 3.0±0.3%; p=0.80), and pancreatic triacylglycerol decreased further to a small extent (6.2±1.1 vs 5.7±1.1%; p=0.005). HbA1c was unchanged (6.0±0.2 vs 6.2±0.1% [42±2 vs 44±1 mmol/mol]; p=0.10) and fasting plasma glucose increased modestly (5.7±0.5 vs 6.1± 0.2 mmol/l; p<0.01), with a 2 h OGTT plasma glucose of 10.3±1.0 mmol/l. Three participants had recurrence of diabetes as judged by a 2 h post-load plasma glucose >11.1 mmol/l. Fasting plasma insulin concentrations were unchanged (57±11 vs 65±15 pmol/l) and fasting plasma NEFA decreased further (0.72±0.06 vs 0.54±0.05 mmol/l; p<0.02). One individual was unavailable for retesting, having had surgery for an ovarian cyst (non-malignant).
NewdestinyX said:You're not alone here. Many ultra low carbers have found her blog to be a sort of 'bible' of the 'purer way'.Sid Bonkers said:and she certainly helped me on the road to diabetic control,