% of reversals?

[Barry Holt]

low carb to high carb complaining is itchy eyes after meals for a couple of days (as I hit 8.5 ish)
high to low is muscle screaming with micro cramps (best way to explain it)

I know why do it then? Easy really, life is about changes so like to keep my body guessing.

Good morning Andrew,read your post and that about itchy eyes,could I ask you to elaborate more about this ,sometimes my eyes itch but never heard about carbs maybe doing this thank you in advance

 

[andcol]

yes pretty easy really - the first symptom I get with raised BG levels which starts at 8.5mmol/l is my eyes become itchy around the tear ducts. Actually that is the only symptom nowadays because if I absolutely over indulge then I only go up to 10 and I get no other symptoms at this level. I suffered itchy eyes for 2 years prior to diagnosis so I expect I had been D since then.

 

[Barry Holt]

yes pretty easy really - the first symptom I get with raised BG levels which starts at 8.5mmol/l is my eyes become itchy around the tear ducts. Actually that is the only symptom nowadays because if I absolutely over indulge then I only go up to 10 and I get no other symptoms at this level. I suffered itchy eyes for 2 years prior to diagnosis so I expect I had been D since then.

Thanks for the info

 

[AndBreathe]

When it comes down to brass tacks, Foxy, it doesn't matter what percentage of individuals manage to "reverse" their diabetes, because the only one that really matters to me (or you) is me (or you). Like so many things in this life, there are few guarantees; never mind lifetime guarantees.

My take is to do the best I can. So far, that's gone pretty well, but quite clearly, tomorrow is a new day and my situation could change.

My medical notes now state my diabetes to be "Resolved".

I don't like labels much. They tend to facilitate people being put into (metaphorical) boxes. The diabetes label did that. For the resolved label, they're trying to find a small but comfortable box to put me in.

 

[mikej1973]

I don't like labels much. They tend to facilitate people being put into (metaphorical) boxes. The diabetes label did that. For the resolved label, they're trying to find a small but comfortable box to put me in.

Sometimes you end up in an actual box!

 

[Daphne917]

By setting myself a target of 50g carbs per day, I should have been able to eat three meals per day and have leftover carbs for snacks. But my body doesn't accept that. It reacts to the 9.3g of carbs in a 15g bag of organic corn and herb puffs for toddlers, the 2.5g of carbs in a tablespoon of piccalilli - even 2 teaspoons of piccalilli.

Effectively, my way of eating is completely added sugar-free. The only carbs I have now come from vegetables, dairy and the occasional nibble on fruit eg a very few grapes or cherries. I eat under 30g carbs a day like this, in fact probably under 25g. Most of the time I have normal BG.

I don't regard myself as having reversed T2 diabetes, or put myself into remission, not if 2 tsps of piccalilli can bump me out of ketosis and give me higher BG, brain fog and dehydration.

I do take the view, reading the fora on this website, that very many people happily consume carbs and there seems to be an attitude of smugness sometimes, about that. But I always wonder whether consuming carbs is wise for T2s. I'd rather have good vision than toast.

I seem to eat more carbs than many on this forum and still manage to maintain a FBS that is mostly between 4.8 and 5.2 and my last hba1c in July was 36 - down from 41 last August. However as far as I know I am still classed a diabetic. I hope that I do not come across as being smug when I sometimes post what i can eat with little, or no, effect on my BS. I realise how lucky I am but i still eat fewer carbs than I did after realising that the 'healthy' plate advised by the NHS is not as healthy as it seems. In addition when I do post what I eat I always caveat it and explain that I have tested this food on at least 3 occasions - I also hope that it encourages newly diagnosed diabetics to test and see what they can/cannot eat particularly as the automatic response to them asking 'can I eat this' is a rather emphatic 'no' from many posters when, in actual fact, they may still be able to eat that food.

 

[Brunneria]

Sometimes you end up in an actual box!

We ALL get there eventually

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

I seem to eat more carbs than many on this forum and still manage to maintain a FBS that is mostly between 4.8 and 5.2 and my last hba1c in July was 36 - down from 41 last August. However as far as I know I am still classed a diabetic. I hope that I do not come across as being smug when I sometimes post what i can eat with little, or no, effect on my BS. I realise how lucky I am but i still eat fewer carbs than I did after realising that the 'healthy' plate advised by the NHS is not as healthy as it seems. In addition when I do post what I eat I always caveat it and explain that I have tested this food on at least 3 occasions - I also hope that it encourages newly diagnosed diabetics to test and see what they can/cannot eat particularly as the automatic response to them asking 'can I eat this' is a rather emphatic 'no' from many posters when, in actual fact, they may still be able to eat that food.

The problem with this approach, as I see it, is that while your blood glucose may be fine, you have no idea how high your insulin levels get. For a type 2 diabetic, long before their blood glucose levels went up, their insulin levels were too high, which caused the insulin resistance. Which isn't to say that in your case the carbs you eat cause high insulin levels, just that you don't know if they do or not.

 

[SunnyExpat]

I seem to eat more carbs than many on this forum and still manage to maintain a FBS that is mostly between 4.8 and 5.2 and my last hba1c in July was 36 - down from 41 last August. However as far as I know I am still classed a diabetic. I hope that I do not come across as being smug when I sometimes post what i can eat with little, or no, effect on my BS. I realise how lucky I am but i still eat fewer carbs than I did after realising that the 'healthy' plate advised by the NHS is not as healthy as it seems. In addition when I do post what I eat I always caveat it and explain that I have tested this food on at least 3 occasions - I also hope that it encourages newly diagnosed diabetics to test and see what they can/cannot eat particularly as the automatic response to them asking 'can I eat this' is a rather emphatic 'no' from many posters when, in actual fact, they may still be able to eat that food.

I like to see posts from those that do eat carbs, it reminds us that it is possible to beat diabetes in many ways, and I believe it also encourages new posters to take time to test, and find a diet that suits how they manage their condition.
They can make up their own minds then, with all the different forum viewpoints to consider.

 

[dannyw]

I would guess that 99.9% of all posts on this entire forum are from those who eat carbs so you are very accommodating Mr Pat. I agree though, testing is key to discovering the amount of carbs an individual will tolerate. The vast majority will benefit from a reduction in carbs, the amount will always vary.

 

[Daphne917]

The problem with this approach, as I see it, is that while your blood glucose may be fine, you have no idea how high your insulin levels get. For a type 2 diabetic, long before their blood glucose levels went up, their insulin levels were too high, which caused the insulin resistance. Which isn't to say that in your case the carbs you eat cause high insulin levels, just that you don't know if they do or not.

Surely if my insulin levels were high my meter readings would indicate this and my hba1c would be higher. It could be that I can tolerate more carbs because my hba1c on diagnosis was 48 - just on the cusp of being diabetic. It did go up to 54 but that was after I started taking statins and it quickly came down again once I stopped taking them. However I'm not complacent and still periodically test foods that I know I'm OK with and always test foods that I haven't eaten for a while or am thinking of re-introducing - although I used to love dates but I've not had the courage to try them yet!

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

Surely if my insulin levels were high my meter readings would indicate this and my hba1c would be higher. It could be that I can tolerate more carbs because my hba1c on diagnosis was 48 - just on the cusp of being diabetic. It did go up to 54 but that was after I started taking statins and it quickly came down again once I stopped taking them. However I'm not complacent and still periodically test foods that I know I'm OK with and always test foods that I haven't eaten for a while or am thinking of re-introducing - although I used to love dates but I've not had the courage to try them yet!

Your meter only measures blood glucose, not insulin. In type 2 diabetes progression, blood glucose levels only go up to diabetic levels after the pancreas can't produce enough insulin to overcome insulin resistance. You can have normal blood glucose levels with very high insulin levels. There are some researchers that believe type 2 should be diagnosed base on the insulin response to carbs, not the blood glucose response.

 

[SunnyExpat]

I would guess that 99.9% of all posts on this entire forum are from those who eat carbs so you are very accommodating Mr Pat. I agree though, testing is key to discovering the amount of carbs an individual will tolerate. The vast majority will benefit from a reduction in carbs, the amount will always vary.

I try to be accommodating, Mr W.
Tolerance of other people is something to be encouraged, I'm glad you agree with me.
I hope more opinions like @Daphne917 are encouraged in this way.

 

[Celeriac]

If you look at the FII (Insulin Index), most foods which raise glucose BG also raise insulin but there are notable anomalies, for example, milk and rice (those aren't all of them).

To lose weight, it is necessary to lower insulin levels as insulin controls fat.

Before the discovery that injecting T1s with insulin kept them alive, they all died, unable to keep fat on, no matter how much they ate.

I quit drinking milk, because it tasted thin, in comparison to the fattier dairy products that I eat. The insulinogenic milk protein is in the liquid along with the lactose, not in the cream. When I quit drinking milk, the side benefit was, that I lost weight, as my insulin levels fell.

I work out how insulinogenic the non veg foods that I eat are. It's how I hit on eating creme fraiche last thing to stop my liver dumping at 6am. Low carb, low protein, high fat, easily digestible, great mouthfeel and 89p per pot.

Dr Andreas Eenfeldt always says that LCHF is low carb, high fat - and moderate protein. Not only can protein be converted into glucose by neoglucogenesis, insulin is needed to push the amino acids from proteins into cells.

 

[SunnyExpat]

But if you are in the percentage that has actually reversed diabetes, that all becomes academic, and no special diet is required.

 

[AloeSvea]

I liked the remission definition in the study NoCarbs cited for us (In ADA Diabetes Care journal - http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/37/12/3188.long) : "Remission required the absence of ongoing drug therapy and was defined as follows: 1) partial: at least 1 year of subdiabetic hyperglycemia (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] level 5.7–6.4% [39–46 mmol/mol]); 2) complete: at least 1 year of normoglycemia (HbA1c level <5.7% [<39 mmol/mol]); and 3) prolonged: complete remission for at least 5 years."

And the study goes on to say:

"Although remission of type 2 diabetes is uncommon, it does occur... Moreover, we found evidence of remission, albeit rare, even in individuals previously requiring oral antiglycemic medication or insulin therapy. It is important to consider that these findings were based on a conservative sampling frame... and using a more stringent definition of remission than typically used in the literature. These findings challenge widespread assumptions that type 2 diabetes is uniformly irreversible and progressive."

This is ultimately positive. And a huge advance, considering the journal it is in (ie conservative, if I can say this). And the first study of its kind, apparently. This means more studies to come? More than likely. And goodie.

I am not so happy with the observation that those diabetics with high baseline HBA1c's are way less likely to have "prolonged remission", particularly when they presented with dyslipidemia (ie there were "higher rates of remission among individuals without dyslipidemia") - but it makes sense, unfortunately, from my BG-perspective. And perhaps them's the breaks!

At the same time, there is being so much fabulous experimentation and success with the likes of the Newcastle Diet and Fung's work, and the power of low-carbing - maybe we are at the cusp of a diabetes remission revolution?

And I continue to live in hope that something revolutionary will happen with our standard food environment.