Search Results

I am a scientist and I can tell you, you're wrong here. I deliberately didn't use the word 'prove' here as science doesn't tend to prove things. You gather evidence that supports your claim. This clearly can't be the case. Because then it would make every half-assed hypothesis true by default...

I've listened quickly again, and I can't find the exact quote so apologies there, but it doesn't change much. This is what he said word for word: "You have both resistance and supersensitivity. That's not really possible. And that's the central paradox if IR, and it doesn't really make any...

Er no. You start with a hypothesis and gather evidence that shows it is true. Now a proper hypothesis has to be falsifiable but this is not the same thing. We do not accept the truth of a hypothesis because it has not been disproved. So take this hypothesis: the center of Alpha Centauri is...

Not odd at all. Anecdote is not data - as scientists understand it. But it can be an important first step to gathering rigourous data. I'll dismiss it if it's all you've got, and you are saying that "it means treatment X is better". On the other hand, if you say, "it's all I've got, and it looks...

It may be a subset of the real world but it alone doesn't tell you much about what treatment should or shouldn't be recommended. It is why anecdote is indeed part of the scientific method. Scientists listen to anecdotes and then perform properly monitored studies to decide whether these...

That's what he said in the podcast. Feel free to correct me if I misheard. That's not how science works. A paper about the surface of the Pluto may not disprove that the center is made of cheese, but it doesn't mean we have to take the cheese hypothesis seriously. Dr. Fung needs to write a...

But anecdote doesn't reflect the real world, does it? If indeed most of the people who are failing at your method are not posting here their failure then in the real world it may be 90% failure. You cannot know. Well, you should. Because if one method only has a 10% chance of success, then it's...

Anecdote is not data. A forum gives you no idea of the percentage of success because you have no way of knowing how many people who have failed on a certain program and not reported their failure. If you're going to compare with the DiRECT study then you need to find a study that has the same...

Thanks for the considered response. I do, however, strongly (but respectfully) disagree with this. Pre-D's wouldn't add too much the NHS's budget. They would pre-D's with 5.7-.5.9% and thus need mainly advice, and monitoring. But by not dealing with the pre-D's now you are getting many more TD2s...

Acutely highlights the difference between actual researchers doing in-depth research in the field and those not. That paper references 98 other papers many of which are studying what's going on at the DNA and RNA level. The splitting of pathways is well-known and researched discovered by...

That may be so, but that doesn't mean that you haven't lost significant beta-cell function. 1) a normal person can produce significant amounts of insulin effortlessly. You may be producing normal amounts but your beta-cells may be working as hard as they can to do so. i.e. this effort is not...

That's interesting that the UK < 42mmol/mol (6.0%) for pre-diabetes. This is clearly too high isn't it? That's an average of 7mmol/L (126mg/dl). An average of 6.9 certainly isn't normal. And it wouldn't surprise me if the UK changes it to a lower level in the future. Getting a reading of just...

Which is why it may be a good protocol for newly-diagnosed but not for longer or medium term. Well, that's precisely what the study seeks to find out by doing long term follow-ups. This issue is true for most weight-loss programs. Hence the need for properly supervised studies. If the study...

Yeah, that's quite normal. In the past HbA1c wasn't used for diagnosis but as a way of measuring control of people already diagnosed as in the above image. For diagnostic purposes generally ~5.6% is considered normal, 5.7~6.4% prediabetic and 6.5% diabetic.

No, not at all. The problem with Dr. Fung's argument is that there are two pathways to how the cell responds to insulin. The FoxO1 pathway for glucose and the mTORC1 pathway for lipids. The FoxO1 becomes resistant causing the glucose rise, but the non-resistance mTORC1 responds to the...

I think an important point to add is that in the Direct Study: "Remission is closely linked to weight loss, 64% of participants who lost more than 10 kilos were in remission at two years". In other words, if you stayed with the protocol successfully, then you had a much higher chance of...

I think this is a pretty good way of looking at it. Insulin Resistance being the pathological condition causing cells (not just in the liver of course) to resist the insulin signal to correctly deal with glucose in our blood stream. In my case, I do a lot of exercise (riding 100km/60miles up...

Your example is actually a validation of the scientific method because presumably the new explanation itself is a result of scientific evidence, and if you accept this new explanation you do so on the basis of this scientific evidence. As well as showing that scientists themselves are...

Looking at the paper, it seemed to be about 0.7mmol higher (around 13mg/dL) for higher readings (10mM / 180mg/dL) but around 0.4mM(8) for readings around 5mM/90mg/dL so perhaps 3 or 4% too high..

There is a paper about this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5588599/ The SD Codefree tend to measure slightly high but was still very accurate. Bear in mind that measurements from the capillary can never fully replicate venous measurements. We conclude that the glucometer (SD...