Dr Unwin and co giving the Daily Mail another go..

[bulkbiker]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...octors-helping-patients-REVERSE-DIABETES.html

 

[HSSS]

A really good article IMO. Hopefully it’ll get a lot more people on the street asking questions of their doctors and getting a lot more doctors and nurses taking the education courses available.

 

[KK123]

It still puzzles me how many GPs etc, claim not to have known this simple fact, carbs increase glucose levels! It's not rocket science then to assume that fewer carbs equals lower levels. Now they are going on about it being a miraculous discovery, after ALL this time?? Also, I do wish they would stop referring to 'sugar levels', ie, 'test your sugar', the sugar in your body, etc. This gives people the impression that we have the white stuff swirling around our bodies and if only we stopped eating it raw we would all be fine. If people knew that carbs turn to glucose (no matter whether it's sugar cubes or pasta etc) then they just might have a fighting chance. Probably too busy advising people it's all because they are fat!

 

[Oldvatr]

At last, a proper discussion involving front-line GP practices reporting their experiences. The experience with Byetta was new to me, and I think we should print this off and share it with our own GP's. I did read the Pulse article some time back but it was only one anecdotal-based review. This media exposure carries more weight IMHO, and although David Unwin is mentioned, this article is not written around promoting his work per se. Roy Taylor's work is also mentioned, as is NAFLD and its connection to T2D. Interesting to note that most of the GP's quoted are working in the south of the country, so the word is definitely spreading.

 

[BrianTheElder]

Great stuff!
I expected this to happen about 4 years ago, perhaps things are changing at last.

 

[Mr_Pot]

Was that really the Daily Mail? I hope they don't spoil it by publishing a completely contradictory article next week.

 

[Oldvatr]

Was that really the Daily Mail? I hope they don't spoil it by publishing a completely contradictory article next week.

I would imagine that PHE, SACN, the BNF and DUK will wish to have proper redress for this affront to Eatwell which must remain sacrosanct and worshipped daily by the masses.

 

[lucylocket61]

The article is still emphasising the weigh loss as the main reason for lower blood sugar levels.

 

[Oldvatr]

The article is still emphasising the weigh loss as the main reason for lower blood sugar levels.

Yes, the Newcastle study gives emphatic science-based evidence that this correlation exists and is strong. This is what NICE and other NHS institutions require to hear if they are ever to be persuaded to change course in their guidelines. It is what rules, ok?

It also allows the article to attract more followers of the DM to investigate the advertised Unwin roadshow in that paper since Joe Average has a need to lose weight but is not interested in blood testing or diabetes.

I am TOFI and even I see that my bgl control is affected by any weight gain / loss that I incur, so I go along with this idea too. For long time obesity has been associated with T2 diabetes, it's in the gameplan so it is nothing new to hear this. After all, most of the older diabetes treatments work on the principle of force-feeding excess glucose into the fat cells for storage, and insulin is called the storage enzyme. This ignores the fact that it is actually the gatekeeper that allows or inhibits the transfer of glucose into the cells in the first place before we even get to storage or use (Citric Cycle). Insulin also applies to both muscle tissue as well as adipose fat cells. Thus as a T2D, I can suffer IR that stops my cells from getting any glucose or another form where it just inhibits storage, In the worst case I have both forms concurrent, and this is why my diabetes is probably different from yours. Also the way I control my IR can be very different. This is why I need to keep my mind open to not only my LC diet, but also the other regimes such as ND and IF since they may all be needed to get Remission. HIIT is probably not an option for me given my comorbidities. There is no magic bullet (yet).

 

[MrsA2]

An interesting article, but even more interesting is the comments where the vast majority agree with each other, that low carb works. Very few naysayers. Must be a record fro Daily Mail readers to agree so much!

 

[NicoleC1971]

Dr Unwin is charmingly understated and modest. He seems genuine and only ever discusses his own clinical experience rather than getting polemic about big pharma and big food etc. which makes him more effective IMO as he hasn't made himself a target by getting too popular on Twitter nor linked himself to the great viral issue as far as I am aware so deemed to be safe enough for the Mail.
Weight loss is click baity of course as is 'reversing diabetes' . Whatever ;you think of obesity as maker or marker of our current problems with metabolic ill health, we could agree that whatever helps you to keep your weight down consistently over the long term is likely to improve your diabetes, hypertension, fatty liver etc. And vice versa. Some are more worried about their underlying health and losing a few pounds is a happy conicidence but for many it is the other way around.

 

[NicoleC1971]

Yes, the Newcastle study gives emphatic science-based evidence that this correlation exists and is strong. This is what NICE and other NHS institutions require to hear if they are ever to be persuaded to change course in their guidelines. It is what rules, ok?

It also allows the article to attract more followers of the DM to investigate the advertised Unwin roadshow in that paper since Joe Average has a need to lose weight but is not interested in blood testing or diabetes.

I am TOFI and even I see that my bgl control is affected by any weight gain / loss that I incur, so I go along with this idea too. For long time obesity has been associated with T2 diabetes, it's in the gameplan so it is nothing new to hear this. After all, most of the older diabetes treatments work on the principle of force-feeding excess glucose into the fat cells for storage, and insulin is called the storage enzyme. This ignores the fact that it is actually the gatekeeper that allows or inhibits the transfer of glucose into the cells in the first place before we even get to storage or use (Citric Cycle). Insulin also applies to both muscle tissue as well as adipose fat cells. Thus as a T2D, I can suffer IR that stops my cells from getting any glucose or another form where it just inhibits storage, In the worst case I have both forms concurrent, and this is why my diabetes is probably different from yours. Also the way I control my IR can be very different. This is why I need to keep my mind open to not only my LC diet, but also the other regimes such as ND and IF since they may all be needed to get Remission. HIIT is probably not an option for me given my comorbidities. There is no magic bullet (yet).

Whilst you are correct that there's no magic bullet, HIIT is effective and I do not know of any co morbidities that prevent someone doing it. It has got a bad reputation because Andrew Marr had a stroke after being sat on a rower with untreated hypertension!
In fact HIIt doesn't imply that you need to do any particular form of exercise though rowing/cycling hard are the easiest way to achieve maximal effort but they can be done safely with a warm up beforehand and sufficient recovery time after each 20-30 second burst. For example if I have a very de conditioned person with joint issues I won't get them to sprint or do jumping jacks when they can get their heart rate high by power walking or biking with 1-2 minutes recovery. If its a fitter and younger person they may need to do fast sprints or squat jumps with much less recovery.
All I know is that its a very efficient way to get people fitter faster and get the muscles using glucose up without chronic stress if done correctly.
If you can walk you can do this by walking as fast as possible for 40 seconds then recovering over the next 40 seconds. Will be trying this with my walking group once they've done 10 minutes ambling pace!

 

[Oldvatr]

Whilst you are correct that there's no magic bullet, HIIT is effective and I do not know of any co morbidities that prevent someone doing it. It has got a bad reputation because Andrew Marr had a stroke after being sat on a rower with untreated hypertension!
In fact HIIt doesn't imply that you need to do any particular form of exercise though rowing/cycling hard are the easiest way to achieve maximal effort but they can be done safely with a warm up beforehand and sufficient recovery time after each 20-30 second burst. For example if I have a very de conditioned person with joint issues I won't get them to sprint or do jumping jacks when they can get their heart rate high by power walking or biking with 1-2 minutes recovery. If its a fitter and younger person they may need to do fast sprints or squat jumps with much less recovery.
All I know is that its a very efficient way to get people fitter faster and get the muscles using glucose up without chronic stress if done correctly.
If you can walk you can do this by walking as fast as possible for 40 seconds then recovering over the next 40 seconds. Will be trying this with my walking group once they've done 10 minutes ambling pace!

I did make it clear that it was not viable for ME personally. I know my CV history, my current health status, and the probability of causing further harm to myself by doing major exercise. As I say, it is personal.

 

[Oldvatr]

We have managed to get a sticky to this thread as #733 in the Low Carb Success stories subthread which is in itself a sticky.

 

[pdmjoker]

From here https://www.freedieting.com/newcastle-diet the Newcastle Diet comprises 600 calories daily from a liquid meal replacement formula and 200 calories daily from "non-starchy vegetables". The liquid meal replacement formula is "46.4 percent carbohydrate" which means 278.4 calories from carbs which equates to about 69.6g carbs daily.

Dr Unwin used to (initially) advise his patients going low carb to get down to 100g daily. I know this has been mentioned elsewhere, but the ND looks rather like a low carb diet being smuggled under the radar, which might be a wise approach.

 

[Mr_Pot]

Was that really the Daily Mail? I hope they don't spoil it by publishing a completely contradictory article next week.

I don't know if my prophecy has come true as I don't have the paper, only the headlines from BBC news website. Today's DM has an "Eat to Beat Diabetes" recipe section apparently. Maybe someone has seen the actual copy.

 

[Oldvatr]

I don't know if my prophecy has come true as I don't have the paper, only the headlines from BBC news website. Today's DM has an "Eat to Beat Diabetes" recipe section apparently. Maybe someone has seen the actual copy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9331939/Tastiest-way-beat-diabetes-too.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rse-Type-2-diabetes-NHS-backed-seven-day.html

 

[Mr_Pot]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9331939/Tastiest-way-beat-diabetes-too.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rse-Type-2-diabetes-NHS-backed-seven-day.html

The first article is very good. The recipes look to be low calorie as well as low carb which might deter some people. In both cases don't read the comments section.

 

[Oldvatr]

The first article is very good. The recipes look to be low calorie as well as low carb which might deter some people. In both cases don't read the comments section.

Dr Unwin was originally a Low Calorie advocate, and his first experiment with his practice was LoCal, He was also a member of this Forum, and we had many debates a while ago about LCHF. I remember one particular thread which I originated that we both questioned LCHF, and suddenly he and I both decided to accept it as a valid and viable diet plan.. The rest is history. So I am not surprised if there is a hint of LoCal in his current work.

 

[pdmjoker]

The first article is very good. The recipes look to be low calorie as well as low carb which might deter some people. In both cases don't read the comments section.

I take it the comments don't give a great deal of information or insight and are possibly just unscientific/unhelpful opinion?