Prof Taylor on the subject of Reversal.

Little Bird

Well-Known Member
Messages
110
I think the opening statement bares accuracy to what the Newcastle Diet is all about; however unless I missed the point, the proponent has to in maintenance eat two thirds of the original amount of foods and exercise, the exercise for me is no problem, but less food is a no go.

The statement "Whether LCHF, LFHC, vegan, carnivore or any of the many other paths, all roads converge here!" I believe is not entirely accurate, as it suggests all of the protocols can have the same outcome. I have yet to see a high carb diet produce under 42 mmol continuously. Although if stuck to, a low calorie diet can match LCHF for weight loss, a recent study (sorry don't have the reference) shows at least better body composition with LCHF.
Apologies for the confusion @Mbaker I meant that all roads converge on the issue of reversal being conditional upon maintaining your diet/lifestyle whatever that may be.
 

Oldvatr

Expert
Messages
8,470
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
Thanks @Oldvatr you're a gent. And yes I agree entirely that reversal is indeed an emotive subject and that there are no magic bullets or holy grail. I do think that if someone is Type2 and armed with a sound understanding of the pros and cons, and willing to keep an open mind then it is definitely worth a shot. However, if someone does try it and then fails to reverse their T2, and probably without ever knowing exactly why that it is, then that can lead to a very real disappointment and maybe self blaming, especially if they are considered overweight, and there may little or no help or support for this if the person is doing it on their own, unlike Prof Taylors subjects who had help and support.

Whilst reversal may be an emotive subject, I personally think the subject of weight loss is an even more emotive one. I have been obese for most of my adult life and have had more than my fair share of fat shaming and blaming, and it is deeply hurtful. I think fat shaming and blaming is abusive and bullying and medical professionals especially should know better!

I have lost a lot of weight since my diagnosis, over 5 stone, and even if it had not reversed my T2 I would not regret losing that weight for a moment. Before I used to get out of puff just walking up a flight of stairs, now I can practically sprint up one. It was major battle with my belly just to cut my toe nails or tie my shoe laces up! I don’t miss all that stuff for a moment. I have more energy now, I sleep better and am able to be so much more active and involved in life. I feel twenty years younger!

BUT it was not easy by any stretch. It wasn’t about anything so simple as just finding ways to not feel hungry, for me the difficulty was more about life changes. Losing weight for me involved some major lifestyle changes. I had to learn to give up an entire lifetimes worth of eating habits, rituals and crutches etc. It was psychologically and emotionally hard!

It is so easy just to say lose weight and you could reverse your type 2 diabetes, but actually doing it is not nearly so easy. If you do try it and it doesn’t work out then there is all too often a sense of failure and shame, and that can be harmful and destructive to a ones self-esteem and self-worth.

So yes! I couldn’t agree more, it is very important to make it clear that it is not the silver bullet or holy grail that someone may be seeking. You do right Oldvatr!
You make an excellent point wrt failure and lack of support/ knowledge etc, which is why a forum such as here is so important. I am all for everyone being able to make an informed choice with their eyes open and their pocket book closed.

Going back to the weight loss topic wrt reversal /remission. Personally I have lost a maximum 2 kg weight due to following Low Carb WOE and I have myself had a brief spell of remission but sadly now back on the meds and the diet. That 2 kg however dropped my midriff waistline by 5" so I wear braces now to save on buying a new wardrobe. I ain't proud!
 

jjraak

Expert
Messages
7,444
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
For those scientific responses, most grateful and will consume over coming days.

But for a simple lad like me, it goes (mostly) like this.

*1) Eat poorly for many years, (aka SAD) and we 'Fill up' our bodies with the issues that present as T2
*2) Get Dx and continue on that path until...:wideyed::woot::arghh:
*3) Take alternative actions.
*4) Resulting drainage of stored glucose, results in diminished Glucose / insulin intolerance issues
*5) Return to SAD, and the process simply begins again, most possible accelerated as we are already damaged.

So whatever type of wording we use, that old way of eating has sailed off into the sunset.
eat the SAD way once 'cured' if you wish, but expect the return, sooner then you think of the beast within..imho.

Whichever version of LCHF is chosen, it is seemingly more sustainable over many years for so many.
Dr Unwins cohorts perhaps.

happy those who choose other methods are successful, however would have preferred the LCHF to also have been studied in such depth and properly evaluated as in Liver scans etc,

As i understood it, the original debate was can the results of Bariatric surgery be replicated, without the surgery.
and yes..if people don't eat enough, it can..BUT can they replicate it, year after year..imo No.

Find it hard to incredible that such a way (LCHF) can exist, have so many managing this disease successfully using it,
yet is almost ignored in the preference to a diet that they last tried in 'Tenko'..:rolleyes:.imho.
 

Listlad

BANNED
Messages
3,971
Type of diabetes
Prediabetes
Treatment type
Diet only
I wish I could interview one of my practice GP’s. He had bariatric surgery a few years ago. He says it stops him from eating (so much) and he said he loved carbs,
 

Mr_Pot

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,573
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
I actually believe that, in a sense, it's really rather simple in the majority of cases. Of course there are myriad confounding factors in many, but by-and-large I think it goes like this;
  1. Overconsumption of excessive glucose leads to furious fat generation.
  2. Fat cells run out of capacity to cope (in some this may be obese, in others it may not).
  3. Diabetes.
If that is the case then why doesn't it also work the other way?

1. Reduction of glucose consumption.
2. Fat cells have enough capacity to cope.
3. Diabetes cured.

I think there has to be another step (maybe damage to beta cells) that makes the process irreversible, not to the extent of being able to cope with modern excesses, but at least to be able to have the diet of say the 1930's when much fewer people developed Type 2 diabetes.
 
M

Member496333

Guest
If that is the case then why doesn't it also work the other way?

1. Reduction of glucose consumption.
2. Fat cells have enough capacity to cope.
3. Diabetes cured.

I think there has to be another step (maybe damage to beta cells) that makes the process irreversible, not to the extent of being able to cope with modern excesses, but at least to be able to have the diet of say the 1930's when much fewer people developed Type 2 diabetes.

In my view this is exactly what does happen. Or rather, this is what can happen, but only with enough motivation, some good fortune, and almost total glucose abstinence for a very long time. Perpetually treading water by eating as much glucose as the meter allows, doesn’t cut the mustard. In my opinion only, of course.

But yes, I do agree that a return to old habits would likely see the diabetes return more quickly than it first arose. For sure there is bound to be some metabolic scarring, as it were. My post was painting the picture with very broad strokes. I’m aware of course that the biochemistry is unimaginably complex. I’ve been studying nothing else, every single day, for three years solid, and I’ve still only just scratched the surface :D
 

Mr_Pot

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,573
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Who says it's irreversible though?
Do you know of anyone who has successfully gone back to the sort of carb level that was normal before the increase in diabetes in the last few decades?
 

bulkbiker

BANNED
Messages
19,576
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
sort of carb level that was normal

Is it "normal" though? That is the main question.. did we eat so many processed carbs in the 1930's ?

Our current SMD (standard modern diet) way of eating makes us sick.. why should being able to go back to eating in such a disordered way be looked upon as any measure of success?

I'd say it was crass stupidity to reverse a condition and then go back to what created it in the first place..
 
M

Member496333

Guest
Seed oils don't help, as they can damage the mitochondria and diminish their ability to process glucose.
 

Mr_Pot

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,573
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Is it "normal" though? That is the main question.. did we eat so many processed carbs in the 1930's ?

Our current SMD (standard modern diet) way of eating makes us sick.. why should being able to go back to eating in such a disordered way be looked upon as any measure of success?

I'd say it was crass stupidity to reverse a condition and then go back to what created it in the first place..
I said the level of carbs that were normal in the 1930's when diabetes wasn't so prevalent. Not the modern diet that that people had before they were diagnosed.
 

Oldvatr

Expert
Messages
8,470
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
Do you know of anyone who has successfully gone back to the sort of carb level that was normal before the increase in diabetes in the last few decades?
Does anyone know of any athletes that have regained the same performance as they had in the 30's? Time marches on, and so do we. This search for Eldorado is pointless. When the boffins solve the conundrum, then shout "yes please" but till then please donate to diabetes research and be thankfull that our ability to control better than our forebears were able to is a step in the right direction. My mother never had a bgl meter
 
Last edited:
M

Member496333

Guest
From memory, @bulkbiker passed an OGTT not long ago? That's very impressive for someone who was previously diabetic. I'm reasonably confident I could pass one myself if I loaded up on carbs a few days prior to the test, but I have no desire to ever go there again so that's not gonna happen :nailbiting:
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjraak

Mr_Pot

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,573
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Does anyone know of any arthletes that have regained the same performance as they had in the 30's? Time marches on, and so do we. This search for Eldorado is pointless. When the boffins solve the conundrum, then shout "yes please" but till then please donate to diabetes research and be thankfull that our ability to control better than our forebears were able to is a step in the right direction. My mother never had a bgl meter
I don't understand your point.
There is apparently a big increase in the incidence of Type 2 diabetes in recent decades.
If, instead of eating the modern diet, people ate the diet typical in the 1930's (which had quite a lot of carbs) then the theory is that they wouldn't have developed diabetes due to the lack of processed food, seed oils or whatever.
My assertion was, that there must be some irreversible change, like beta cell decay, that occurs, or we should be able to successfully revert to the 1930's diet that wouldn't have given us the diabetes in the first place. This was in response to @Jim Lahey 's three steps:
1. Overconsumption of excessive glucose leads to furious fat generation.
2. Fat cells run out of capacity to cope (in some this may be obese, in others it may not).
3. Diabetes.
And my comment that in addition to this there must be also be a permanent change if we are still susceptible to diabetes even if we now adopt a 1930's diet.
 

lucylocket61

Expert
Messages
6,435
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
I don't understand your point.
There is apparently a big increase in the incidence of Type 2 diabetes in recent decades.
If, instead of eating the modern diet, people ate the diet typical in the 1930's (which had quite a lot of carbs) then the theory is that they wouldn't have developed diabetes due to the lack of processed food, seed oils or whatever.
My assertion was, that there must be some irreversible change, like beta cell decay, that occurs, or we should be able to successfully revert to the 1930's diet that wouldn't have given us the diabetes in the first place. This was in response to @Jim Lahey 's three steps:
1. Overconsumption of excessive glucose leads to furious fat generation.
2. Fat cells run out of capacity to cope (in some this may be obese, in others it may not).
3. Diabetes.
And my comment that in addition to this there must be also be a permanent change if we are still susceptible to diabetes even if we now adopt a 1930's diet.
They can't go back to the diet of the 30's unless we also revert back to the old grains we ate for centuries. The new grains damage us. I hope someone can find the information on the new grains, from the 50's (which made the Chorley wood process possible) and insulin regulation damage. I can't find it now.
 

lucylocket61

Expert
Messages
6,435
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
This is not only about amounts of grains eaten, it's also (mainly the problem in my opinion) the way grains have changed in the last 50 years.
 
M

Member496333

Guest
Can I have some more information on this please?

I'm afraid, as ever, I do not have any to hand. My knowledge, for better or worse, comes almost exclusively from books and podcasts. The internet is a seething cauldron of misinformation and misdirection, so I tend not to save links for future reference.