Actually, it isn't. When Ian speaks of eating to his meter, he is referring specifically to carb content. He's not choosing to go without eating; rather, he is substituting foods with a lower-carb content.
There are going to be many reasons why a diabetic might be out-of-range. However, unless someone is really far higher than 'normal', the idea to skip meals is perhaps not ideal. In fact, on the contrary, many find that eating food actually stems the increase of blood sugars.
And this idea seems to 'miss the forest, for the trees'. Control of blood-sugar levels would ideally come from a multi-tiered approach, to include adequate sleep, rest, hydration, movement, exercise, getting a 'bit of sun', reduction of screen-time etc. In addition to this, reduction of stress is important, whether it be by spending more time-in-nature and/or cultivating a feeling of gratitude. Assuming a general shift to whole, or minimally-processed foods, getting as many of those non-dietary 'ducks' in a row as possible will provide the kind of (w)holistic support structure for a healthful life. And within such a healthful framework (and given the 'appropriate' amount of time), such conditions as overweight, obesity and other metabolic dysfunction will disappear.
A huge part of the reason why most people get overweight in the first place, is due to the denying of hunger signals (Normally of feeling satiated). This might be a quick-fix, but I think it's much better to cultivate practices for a long-term solution.
Of course, I'm not suggesting that we blindly heed every call to eat. It'll take a certain amount of effort to cultivate the non-dietary healthful practices. But more than that, it'll take time and effort to chip away at all the deeply-ingrained habits, triggers and emotional foibles that drive 'us' to eat when we have no real need.
Learning to detect and appropriately respond to our body's signals and feedback systems (Of which hunger and satiation are just one) is our birth-right, imo. This plan is the antithesis of that.
This doesn't make sense to me. Binge-eating is a very distinct problem, and not to be confused with general over-eating.
People who are prone to bingeing are not going to be stopped by a reading on a meter. And even though binge-eating is not really driven by hunger, I can't think of a better way to set up a potential binge than to make ones self unnecessarily hungry.
Curious as to how.
Not eating when hungry will do that
If weight-loss is an immediate priority for someone, and this idea is the one that clicks, then good for them. But there is no magic bullet, here. As with all weight-loss or gain, there has to a manipulation of energy balance (Our evolutionary survival depended on it). Ultimately, and at the end of however many days, it comes down to each individual as to whether a plan will work for them. If this is the one that 'clicks' for certain people, then great.
Though I don't have any experience of this plan, there are evidently a lot of people following a predominantly whole-foods/minimally-processed diet (whether plant-based or keto), along with cultivating non-dietary health practises, who have taken control of their BG.
All my reservations as to whether it's ideal, aside, i've no doubt that those who stick to such a plan could (assuming an energy deficit) lose weight and reduce BG numbers.
_____________________________
Anyway....In case it wasn't clear: This is just my opinion, and not an attack on either you or they who came up with the plan.
Are you going to try it?
