Peerless67
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 206
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
My thoughts are the 15% weight loss is arbitrary and must depend on other factors we don't know about. I lost more than twice that amount (over 33%) and have maintained it for nearly 3 years but am only well controlled, not in remission. I do believe you are correct to think he said the time scale of weight loss doesn't matter.
You can buy bathroom scales that measure visceral fat. This is one. There are cheaper ones.
https://tanita.eu/products/body-composition-monitors/bc-718
I have never understood the 15% thing.
It gets mentioned a great deal, but I don't see the logic.
We are all different shapes and sizes and weights when we start dieting, whether it is by the ND or something else. But predicting that 15% reduction is a magic charm doesn't seem likely. We certainly don't become T2 and then gain exactly 15% extra weight and sit waiting to lose that weight to reverse...
I suspect it is far more likely that, in Professor Taylor's study subjects, the average loss or the typical loss, or even the min/max loss that achieved his criteria for 'reversal' was 15% but that within those subjects, they saw a personal variation.
Are you familiar with his idea of a Personal Fat Threshold? He posits that this PFT is different for everyone. In which case, it won't necessarily be at the 15% loss marker, it may come sooner or later.
Hopefully in your case, it will be sooner!
Understood but 33% would take me down into the high 50s in KGs that would in my opinion be too much.
Dammit I just bought some digital scales, had no idea you could buy scales that measure internal fat.
I think it is a 15% lose from the weight you were when you first had Type2, not the weight you are now. It is based on removing fat from the beta cells. But Taylor is just guessing based on a small smaple size.
Without access to his over powered (3T) NMR scanner and its custom software there is no way to measure the fat in your beta cells.
From what ive read, the 8 weeks is to do with the panreas shedding fat a lot more slowly / later than the liver and both are involved in the effects on blood sugar. Not sure how / ir that relates to the 15% figure tho'
The 15% was the point at which he found the average trialist started to respond with a normal insulin/BG response. Some where a little before this and other were after but most clustered around this.
THis isn't the version I read but same author pretty much the same re the importance and time course of loss of pancreatic fat (apparantly 1g loss in that area is whats needed)Thanks that is what I am after some logic behind the 8 weeks / 15% argument. I need to find what you read.
Yes I have the full report in a PDF and can see where he got the 15% but I am trying to determine if the 15% is the crucial factor or the 8 weeks, and I have to say @badcat provides a very good reasoning. It could be that this longer spell is what allows the pancreas to shed the fat. I will continue to dig around in the search for an answer.
Firstly it is fat that must be lost so if you lose muscle mass it does not count, but the body can't lose much muscle in 8 weeks. Then it must be the correct sort of fat, so just sucking out the fat from under your skin does not work.
Professor Taylor feels (unless he has changed since I last read his work), that we each have a personal fat threshold. As @andcol suggests the 15% related to averages from his early study subjects.
One very well documented exception was Richard Doughty, a journalist who achieved his reversal/remission/cure/whichever descriptor you choose, within something like 11 days.
As of last year, he was still successful: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/apr/23/diabetes-can-you-really-eat-to-beat-it
A classic example of how we're all different.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?