Mastering Diabetes by Cyrus Khambatta and Robby Barbaro

[HSSS]

I understand the premise of their regime is that the cause of t2 diabetes and insulin resistance is fat and that it gets taken up by the cells and blocks glucose receptors in those cells and to eat the “goods” carbs.

What experience does anyone have, what are the “good or bad” points? Where is the argument strong and well evidenced? Where does it fall down?

For clarity I haven’t yet read or much about it, I’m just exploring the concept. Much as I did low carb before ploughing deeper into the science etc.

 

[bulkbiker]

I understand the premise of their regime is that the cause of t2 diabetes and insulin resistance is fat and that it gets taken up by the cells and blocks glucose receptors in those cells and to eat the “goods” carbs.

What experience does anyone have, what are the “good or bad” points? Where is the argument strong and well evidenced? Where does it fall down?

For clarity I haven’t yet read or much about it, I’m just exploring the concept. Much as I did low carb before ploughing deeper into the science etc.

Vegan propaganda pure and simple.. and fairly ineffective for T2 unless you fancy no remission and worsening HbA1c over time.

 

[HSSS]

Which was my immediate reaction I’ll be honest. But I wanted to understand the theory a little better rather than make assumptions that simply confirm my own position.

I was reading on another forum about someone following this and achieving non diabetic bgl with barely any rise post prandial and normal hba1c eating 100+ carbs a meal.

For me the clue was in weight loss on adoption of this method and possibly the visceral fat loss allowing better function (back to professor Taylor of all people). There are definitely a group of type 2 that respond extremely well bgl wise to weight loss alone regardless of method. There are a number in this forum. Then there are others that do not respond to the weight loss in the same dramatic way (me for one).

Another explanatory the success could be in the previous diet being absolutely chock full of carbs and processed foods and any regime would be a vast improvement.

Now it’s easy for me to write the method and this individual’s experience off for one of these reasons but was interested if there were other legitimate explanations.

 

[Oldvatr]

Which was my immediate reaction I’ll be honest. But I wanted to understand the theory a little better rather than make assumptions that simply confirm my own position.

I was reading on another forum about someone following this and achieving non diabetic bgl with barely any rise post prandial and normal hba1c eating 100+ carbs a meal.

For me the clue was in weight loss on adoption of this method and possibly the visceral fat loss allowing better function (back to professor Taylor of all people). There are definitely a group of type 2 that respond extremely well bgl wise to weight loss alone regardless of method. There are a number in this forum. Then there are others that do not respond to the weight loss in the same dramatic way (me for one).

Another explanatory the success could be in the previous diet being absolutely chock full of carbs and processed foods and any regime would be a vast improvement.

Now it’s easy for me to write the method and this individual’s experience off for one of these reasons but was interested if there were other legitimate explanations.

As I pointed out in another thread for this Plan, check the Success and Testimonials subthread here on the Forum. If it was such a gane changer it would eventually appear there, but I found that thread very lacking in postings in support of their WOE.

 

[Mbaker]

A few weeks ago a gent in his 30's posted some below his original diagnosis numbers and some meals (https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/mastering-diabetes.181654/#post-2398633). The numbers posted were "ok" for a start, however they were seriously confounded by the fasting, hour exercising and portion size. The non food aspects of the program should not be overlooked, because if the meals were replaced with Mac D's / KFC, I am sure the same numbers would have been achieved. I am interested in the diet only numbers (like some of the reversed Keto'ers), even at such low calories (looks like circa 1200 - 1500).

I asked the gentleman to post some before and 15 minute interval numbers for this type of meal (no response):

(I believe this sends non-diabetics past 8 mmol/L)

I think the Mastering Diabetes protocol "works" by caloric restriction, so "weight" loss. If the posted meals in the links are indicative, they are side dishes, especially the first 2 in the link. By "work", I mean better than a SAD diet.

It is accepted that an adhered to low calorie diet can also improve insulin resistance, but my personal research shows other methods have an edge in overall metabolic health.

I will stick my neck out and say this protocol at least uses whole-ish foods, but it has a long way to go for satiety:

Seriously, the above looks pretty on the plate and would leave me cranky hungry.

 

[jjraak]

Cheers for the link @Mbaker .

A congratulations to the gent, newly DX and tackling the issue.

Can't take that away from him.
(Could have been me, I was in such despair after DX)

Have to agree, the food limits, exercise & fasting do throw a little shade on the actual diet.

For my money, the age is the bigger confounder.

It's akin to tinkering with a F1 engine V a well used, poorly serviced 50 yr old family car, and thinking the same set of standards can be applied to both.

Assuming for many, T2D creeps up as we age ( in the main)

I'd say the chances of such a regime being as effective for the majority, seems slim.

Always happy to see there ARE alternative avenues to explore.

Personally not in need at the moment, but we all know it's not a one size fits sll.

I'd go out on a limb here, and agree fully with yourself, and particularly @Oldvatr opinion .

IF this diet was THAT effective, then THIS forum is where I'd expect it to explode first.

With the greatest respect to all
Being a tad more ' senior' to 30 myself, then I'd really wish, like many I suspect,

the exercise regime might be a little beyond me for every single day, laudable as it would be.

And having become comfortable eating an agreeable amount of food at any meal, the idea of such low calories wouldn't appeal to me either.

While I do hope it has a real possibility of working for others, for the reasons stated
As they say in the Dragons Den .I'm out.

@HSSS , I like that inquisitiveness.

I hope you manage to find some proof of it's efficacy for all age groups

It's always good to keep an eye open for other ways of meeting the same Goal.

 

[Andydragon]

Cheers for the link @Mbaker .

A congratulations to the gent, newly DX and tackling the issue.

Can't take that away from him.
(Could have been me, I was in such despair after DX)

Have to agree, the food limits, exercise & fasting do throw a little shade on the actual diet.

For my money, the age is the bigger confounder.

It's akin to tinkering with a F1 engine V a well used, poorly serviced 50 yr old family car, and thinking the same set of standards can be applied to both.

Assuming for many, T2D creeps up as we age ( in the main)

I'd say the chances of such a regime being as effective for the majority, seems slim.

Always happy to see there ARE alternative avenues to explore.

Personally not in need at the moment, but we all know it's not a one size fits sll.

I'd go out on a limb here, and agree fully with yourself, and particularly @Oldvatr opinion .

IF this diet was THAT effective, then THIS forum is where I'd expect it to explode first.

With the greatest respect to all
Being a tad more ' senior' to 30 myself, then I'd really wish, like many I suspect,

the exercise regime might be a little beyond me for every single day, laudable as it would be.

And having become comfortable eating an agreeable amount of food at any meal, the idea of such low calories wouldn't appeal to me either.

While I do hope it has a real possibility of working for others, for the reasons stated
As they say in the Dragons Den .I'm out.

@HSSS , I like that inquisitiveness.

I hope you manage to find some proof of it's efficacy for all age groups

It's always good to keep an eye open for other ways of meeting the same Goal.

I personally believe there are many different ways the human body and diabetes type 2 interact. For some weight loss plays a significant part. I tend to think I am more in that camp purely because I can cope with more carbs than some. For others it does seem very linked to carb intake. others have good reaction to exercise. And many other combinations I am sure

but if it was as simple as saying lower carbs directly improves then everyone who goes onto that path would see the improvements but for some people, for reasons we cannot say, do not get the same and that’s a shame but not their fault.

but maybe for others still it is complex interactions of all of the above. Without very specific medical studies to control the interactions we cannot say in every instance

I am always ready to say that for me exercise, lower carb, and lower calories I used and so I cannot hand on heart say any particular worked for me, maybe one had a bigger impact but that would be a guess

but as long as debate stays healthy, and people are not putting themselves in danger then hopefully everyone can find a path through to an improvement

 

[jjraak]

Have to agree @Andydragon , as said not a one size fits all.

Two main routes do stand out though.

Less food
Or
Fewer carbs.

Sure others have had success with various others routes.

And always the alternative of doing nothing.

And as you say, we may have different methods, but the Goal is still the same.

Hence why I found @HSSS post of interest.

 

[HSSS]

@jjraak for clarity I am not doing or proposing to do this diet. I have been reading of others doing and and simply wished to know a little more about it. Options always welcome. I do not think this is one for me at this point in time. Particularly as carbs spike me obviously and I am a lot closer to carnivore than vegan presently

 

[lucylocket61]

I personally believe there are many different ways the human body and diabetes type 2 interact. For some weight loss plays a significant part. I tend to think I am more in that camp purely because I can cope with more carbs than some. For others it does seem very linked to carb intake. others have good reaction to exercise. And many other combinations I am sure

but if it was as simple as saying lower carbs directly improves then everyone who goes onto that path would see the improvements but for some people, for reasons we cannot say, do not get the same and that’s a shame but not their fault.

but maybe for others still it is complex interactions of all of the above. Without very specific medical studies to control the interactions we cannot say in every instance

I am always ready to say that for me exercise, lower carb, and lower calories I used and so I cannot hand on heart say any particular worked for me, maybe one had a bigger impact but that would be a guess

but as long as debate stays healthy, and people are not putting themselves in danger then hopefully everyone can find a path through to an improvement

In my many years on here I haven't seen many type 2 diabetics for whom low carbing does not improve blood sugar levels, except those who turn out to be lada or misdiagnosed.

There are some, including me, who lose little or no weight, but that is not the same as no improvement in diabetes.

 

[Andydragon]

In my many years on here I haven't seen many type 2 diabetics for whom low carbing does not improve blood sugar levels, except those who turn out to be lada or misdiagnosed.

There are some, including me, who lose little or no weight, but that is not the same as no improvement in diabetes.

being aware we are drifting off topic, so need to take this elsewhere if we are not careful. There is a different approach to the original diet and the view seems to be lower carb is from observation a better approach

I do indicate low carb as a way for people to improve. However, I also am someone who doesn’t like setting expectations or stating something as a cast iron guarantee as I am wary it sets expectations that when not achieved can be at the least frustrating

Your example is a good one, it can be easy to say that counting carbs leads to weight loss. It can, and for some it does but not all. Therefore it doesn’t always work. I also think that lower carbs works for many and is a good option but stating as a fact is where I disagree

this diet as indicated in the original post may work for some, it may not. The relative merits can and should be discussed.

 

[lucylocket61]

Therefore it doesn’t always work.

the specific advice and encouragement to count and restrict carbs is for blood sugar control. Any weight loss is incidental. Perhaps you didnt realise the focus of the low carb advice. Counting and restricting carbs works. It is the element of carb restriction found in any low calorie diet which is making the difference in blood sugar levels, irrespective of any affect on weight loss. The two issues - weight loss and blood sugar levels - are separate ones.

 

[Andydragon]

the specific advice and encouragement to count and restrict carbs is for blood sugar control. Any weight loss is incidental. Perhaps you didnt realise the focus of the low carb advice. Counting and restricting carbs works. It is the element of carb restriction found in any low calorie diet which is making the difference in blood sugar levels, irrespective of any affect on weight loss. The two issues - weight loss and blood sugar levels - are separate ones.

It’s a good discussion and one I am more than happy to be questioned on and adapt my views where I am wrong…

however we are moving away from the topic at hand so need to keep it with respect to the discussion on the diet as mentioned in the original post

 

[Oldvatr]

As a corollary, the NHS offers bariatric surgery as the only permanent route to remission that they support. In fact, it is only successful in a small percentage of patients who get the operation and is similarly diet dependant post op. Nothing is gold plated it seems.

There are similar claims being made for ultra low calorie diets like ND it seems. This too seems to be diet dependant long term.

I have seen WFPB being offered as a cure for T2D, which IMO it is not. Maybe insulin users can use it as an alternative to Eatwell/SAD, but for most of us on orals or lifestyle, it is not workable.

 

[lucylocket61]

however we are moving away from the topic at hand so need to keep it with respect to the discussion on the diet as mentioned in the original post

I am discussing the diet, its purpose, that it works by reducing calories, which has the effect of reducing carb intake, which then leads to lower blood glucose levels in some, making it appear that the diet itself works. The reality is that any low calorie diet will work, because they all reduce carb intake somewhat.

Its not the diet, this diet, any special diet, its the carb reduction inherent in that diet, particularly a diet such as this. @HSSS am I derailing? If so, I apologise.

 

[Andydragon]

I am discussing the diet, its purpose, that it works by reducing calories, which has the effect of reducing carb intake, which then leads to lower blood glucose levels in some, making it appear that the diet itself works. The reality is that any low calorie diet will work, because they all reduce carb intake somewhat.

Its not the diet, this diet, any special diet, its the carb reduction inherent in that diet, particularly a diet such as this. @HSSS am I derailing? If so, I apologise.

Hi,
Our discussions on low carb impact and it generally working (or not) has the potential of veering off topic compared to the original diet discussions. It’s a slight tangent.

your discussions are relevant as to how the original diet may be working and that’s good discussion

hopefully that makes sense

 

[VashtiB]

I'd just like to put something else in the mix. I agree that one size doesn't fit all. But I also think there are other factors which are important to acknowledge.

For example- I'm an all or nothing person. I find it easier mentally to have very very low carb. As my levels are now in the 5s and 4s I suspect I could increase my carb intake BUT I fin d it easier not to. No decision about whether I could eat say a potato or some porridge or a biscuit or anything like that- on less than 10 grams a day I don't even think it. At say 80 grams a day I would be constantly checking my intake, maybe weighing food etc.I just find it easier. Other people are different which allows different choices.

Another factor is finding something you can maintain. I'll be honest and admit that as a person who didn't eat red meat because I didn't like it I had my doubts but now almost 2 years in I can maintain it. I use artificial sweeteners as that is what makes it work for me. I also live in Australia and can afford the diet that works. I don't have to compromise on the food I buy as I can afford to buy it (not boasting just an awareness that this is not possible for some). I can also afford the strips to test regularly. Not everyone has that option.

Another factor is stress. My job (until recently- I changed jobs) was very very stressful- I mean waking up at midnight- checking and answering emails before getting out of bed, being constantly stressed- working on weekends etc. That had a huge impact on my blood sugar levels. This made me even more keen to keep low carb to keep my levels as low as possible.

There are of course other factors- illness sleep etc. So there is no way that one size fits all- we all do our best with what we have. My biggest reason for being involved in this forum is to give information and support. This site was lifesaving g for me and I am sure many others.

While I know low carb worked for me I don't believe my choices are right or even possible for everyone.

I want everyone to make a choice that they are okay or happy with after being given all the information that can help them. I don't have to agree with their choice to support it.

 

[Geordie_P]

To be honest, everyone involved in the 'forks over knives' routine seems like either an animal rights activist masquerading as someone concerned about health, or a Seventh day Adventist zealot masquerading as someone concerned about health. I suppose the kindest thing you can say about Cyrus Khambata and Robby Barbaro is that they are T1, and it is perfectly plausible that their diets work for them, provided they inject enough insulin to not die from the huge influx of sugars their recommended diets cause.
For me as a T2 not on insulin, their advice is deeply injurious to my health on every level.

 

[Oldvatr]

I would be wary about using this plant-based diet long-term because of the inherent nutrient deficiencies in this approach. The presentations are very glossy and spend a lot of time extolling the natural goodness and the taste, and the look of their meals, but have little or no information on what supplementation you should consider adding in to supply your essential nutrients. Sometimes it is possible to tweak the plant mix to give better coverage or to use fortified products such as bread flour and milk. But if these are all plant-based sources, then they too will be insufficient to supply our needs long term.

The usual suspects, are Vitamin A, B6, B12, D3, K2. The odd chain amino acids and constituents such as L Carnitine, Choline, and R-ALA are also missing in plant-based sources. The plant diet usually has a deficiency of Omega-3 fats and overdoses on Omega-6 ones which is inflammatory.

Heme Iron is similarly missing from the diet, and we do not absorb non-heme iron very well. This is why one Impossible Burger contains at least 10x the RDA of iron simply to sledgehammer some nonheme iron in,

There is an imbalance in RHA/DHA variants of D3 with the same problem. Also without vitamin K2 present the plant-based vit D supplement used to fortify milk is similarly impotent. K2 is only available from animal products, but D3 can be synthesised in a vat from microbes.

 

[HSSS]

I am discussing the diet, its purpose, that it works by reducing calories, which has the effect of reducing carb intake, which then leads to lower blood glucose levels in some, making it appear that the diet itself works. The reality is that any low calorie diet will work, because they all reduce carb intake somewhat.

Its not the diet, this diet, any special diet, its the carb reduction inherent in that diet, particularly a diet such as this. @HSSS am I derailing? If so, I apologise.

I am fine with wider discussion but it is this low fat;high carb approach that I wanted to discuss specifically which also happens to be vegan from what I can gather rather than the process and cons of low carb which most of us broadly agree on already. (I’m kind of with you on that point that almost everyone who low carbs sees some bgl benefit. Mileage does vary though. So long as promises aren’t made and words like “most, many, often” qualify statements then I’m not seeing the issues @Andydragon initially mentioned.)

I too thought low calorie is what’s causing the weight loss and in turn allows internal organs to function properly and incidentally being low carb which also drops bgl (as is professor Taylor’s Newcastle diet)

I’m not sure this one is low carb though as it is limiting fat and to some degree protein not carbs. The example I’ve seen lists 100 carbs a meal. To be fair so far I’ve seen nothing actually saying it is low calorie I’ve half made that assumption on the basis of low fat. Maybe someone who have explored it further can correct me.