Another nail in the carb coffin

CherryAA said:

In non-diabetic men that were followed for 5 yr,

Click to expand...

CherryAA said:

I think you comment is pretty much the crux of the problem at present. Those guys understand the issue, they know that carbs do this and that its measurable. They set up an RCT to prove it alongside some researchers and hey presto it does and the world says " you are biased " - they are the only people who will test it because no -one else wants to know. That study was done in 2014 got no traction and is being dusted off again in the light of PURE .

PURE is a study that shows the exact same thing for 130,000 participants and its immediately - that's not an RCT so the call goes up for an RCT - there already was one back in 2014 - now lost in dusty papers.

Meanwhile individuals all over the planet - me included do N=1 studies which show exactly the same thing - but our data doesn't count because we are not professionals

Prof Noakes takes data from 29 of us - it says the same thing - but that doesn't count because that's 29 individuals all of whom are lumpen proletariat not doctors . So he will set up an RCT and when he gets the result people will say
" that doesn't count " you are biased.

Meanwhile people get fatter, the world gets sicker and we continue to have governments bury their head in the sand and try to pretend that somehow this data is consistent with the current dietary guidelines. Somewhere this has to stop - but god alone knows when

Click to expand...

Oldvatr said:

I appreciate the sentiment expressed in your reply. Personally I have an inbuilt warning system for detecting the dangers of Guru Worship that sometimes occurs on this site. I just like to make sure we understand that a single report does not a swallow make by itelf, but carries weight when others repeat the same or similar studies. We all suffer from the after effects of Ancel Keys I think.

Actually I find this study opens up a dilemma I have in my own mind over the storage of fat during LCHF diet. Where this study and Newcastle Counterpoint studies agree in common is that a VLC diet seems to strip adipose fat from liver (and pancreas?) but I assume ND is relatively low fat, and their 6 month maintenance diet was also low to medium fat intake. But with LCHF we probably consume higher fat levels. I cannot say SFA since there are many who prefer vegetable oils instead of animal or dairy fat. So if I increase my fat intake but keep carbs highish (say 50-80g/day) and don't go keto then presumably I am getting an insulin response which will push the fat into storage rather than burning it off. So LCHF looks like it Mandates that it is always run in keto mode, otherwise we are creating NAFLD again.

Click to expand...

CherryAA said:

I am not surprised to see those ratios - precisely because they mimic our dietary guidelines and continue with the story that somehow we need a lot of calories from carbs and the lower the fat the better.

I think that if you have bought into the story that carbs are essentially useless of themselves, which it seems many of us do, then the idea that somehow we would eat more than 3x as many carbs ( 43% translated to 67g) precisely so we can go on a very low calorie diet in preference to an LCHF diet because somehow this will help us to lose fat is just bizarre.

I don't dispute for a second the reasoning behind why they did this and if you are coming at it from the traditional angle of a low fat diet it makes total sense. I just don't see it works when looked at from a starting point of LCHF.

I think that there is a complete misconception about what LCHF means in terms of the ability to eat more than you need.

I think the mechanism is that for ANY diet to work you have to eat less than you use .

If its an LCHF diet its easier to do this because you get satiated quicker - once you are fat adapted you don't get hunger pangs anymore thus it is easier to eat less. If you eat the ND for long enough you will also end up in the very same ketosis - I was actually in Nutritional ketosis at the point I was diagnosed for following my very high carb, but very low carb/ calorie diet.

I don't think you need to fast to get into ketosis - I've been in ketosis for the last 9 months I have also managed to bring my fasting insulin level down to 8 from 20 in the last 5 months and I've never actually managed a complete 24 hour fast yet or for that matter ever quite got down to 800 calories . I have managed to stick to a 1250 calorie a day diet for months and remain in ketosis and even when not losing weight - including the occasional protein/ fat binges ( and even a very small cumber of carb binges).

I have no doubt in my mind that IF I could find the willpower to use my LCHF diet at such a low consumption level that I keep my carbs down to 20g, and my proteins down to 60g WITHOUT adding in extra fats - which will end up about 40-45% protein, 15% carbs and 40-45% fats on about 800 calories then whatever benefits the Newcastle Diet delivers in terms of reversal that diet will also deliver.

In the end the reason I utterly applaud the ND is that it brings the emphasis on curing T2 diabetes to the correct place - food - instead of drugs. I just think that because its being run by doctors we are in danger of people reading into it that the formula is in itself the important factor - when in reality I don't believe it is. I believe its the individual's will power to see it through and for that LCHF is a much better contributor than 67 g of carbs per day!

Click to expand...

CherryAA said:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0113605

"In observational studies, the most consistent nonessential fatty acid that predicts metabolic syndrome [8], [9] and type-2 diabetes [10]–[14] is palmitoleic acid measured in erythrocytes, plasma cholesteryl ester (CE), or plasma phospholipid (PL). Palmitic and total SFA are usually significant predictors as well. In non-diabetic men that were followed for 5 yr, higher proportions of erythrocyte palmitoleic acid were significantly associated with worsening of hyperglycemia [15]. Higher proportions of palmitic acid and total SFA in blood lipids are associated with increased risk for heart disease [16]–[20] and more recently cancer [21]. Thus, a large body of evidence indicates that higher proportions of blood SFA and palmitoleic acid are associated with the pathophysiology of glucose intolerance and cardiovascular disease."

Six step wise increase in carbs from 47g to 346g per day C1=> C6

From C1 to C6, carbohydrate increased from 47 to 346 g/day corresponding to 7% and 55% of total energy, respectively.


CONCLUSION

In summary, high intakes of saturated fat (including regular consumption of whole eggs, full-fat dairy, high-fat beef and other meats) does not contribute to accumulation of plasma SFA in the context of a low carbohydrate intake. A progressive decrease in saturated fat and commensurate increase in carbohydrate intake, on the other hand, is associated with incremental increases in the proportion of plasma palmitoleic acid, which may be signaling impaired metabolism of carbohydrate, even under conditions of negative energy balance and significant weight loss. These findings contradict the perspective that dietary saturated fat per se is harmful, and underscore the importance of considering the level of dietary carbohydrate that accompanies saturated fat consumption.

Click to expand...

CherryAA said:

I'm completely sure that most doctors are doing their damnedest to make sense of all the conflicting info they are given just like we are. They deal daily with both pressure from drug companies and pricing pressure from their employers whoever they are .

There was an interesting quote on twitter yesterday - " take your dog to the vet with a illness and the first question will be " what is he eating" - when was the last time you actually discussed your own diet with your doctor ? "

That is not because doctors are stupid, its because they have been trained to believe that dietetics as a whole different thing from what they do. The fact that Gary Fettke, a trained doctor can be banned from giving his patients dietary advice is almost kafkaesque in its surreality .

The NHS is currently considering offering bariatric surgery to those with a BMI of around 30 .- that is ludicrous but doctors once again will be fed with the news that this is the cure.

If nothing else the guys in Newcastle are proving in a way that CAN fit the current dietary guidelines that diet alone can reverse diabetes. There will be people all over the planet who if they hear that this works, will also conclude that so will any other severe calorie restriction and some of those will incorporate that their diabetes friendly food plan and some will probably succeed. We are fortunate in that we don't need RCT's to make sensible decisions, we just need a few people to lead the way and report back and if it works others will follow - which is precisely what happens here.

I have a friend who is a recently trained dietician in Australia - I concluded it would be easier for me to disseminate dietary principles as a complete amateur than she could because of the rules she must abide by which assume that the current starting point for advice is correct.

I think doctors, nutritionists nurses etc are generally good people operating under difficult circumstances and many of them are going to be personally devastated to find that the advice they have been offering with the best of intention was just plain wrong. My encounter on a date last week with a doctor specialising in precisely these issues where his mind simply refused to accept the possibility that what he had been taught to do might be a little flawed, demonstrated all too clearly the devastating consequences on the morale of the average doctor, any material change in the guidelines will be.

Like it or not, the internet is gradually changing the game as individuals with their n=1 experiments, disseminate the results and others pick them up .I KNOW my data is as good as a gold standard RCT for me as an individual. If others choose not to believe me or not to combine that with other n=1 results because / we are not qualified to write down what I / we eat and what our blood results are accurately and honestly enough, then that is their problem not mine !

Click to expand...

Guzzler said:

For me, it seems a case of more luck than management. By that I mean that over the years I did not lower my consumption of animal fats but I did add in some olive oil. Throughout the whole Edwina Curry/cholesterol era I did not lower my consumption of eggs. I always had a healthy attitude to fizzy pop and fast food and I limited the amounts that my children had. To me it just made sense but I also made mistakes, there were the baking days using (scarily) high quantities of white flour and sugars of every description which are still in my store cupboard - the northern in me won't allow the binning of comparatively expensive foodstuffs so the sugars will be used up eventually when I bake for the family and the flours will go musty and be thrown out (or given away). I must say that cakes and pies were a treat so I may have baked five or six times a year.
And yet here I am recently diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes. Weight on dx was healthy and with none of the classic symptoms the dx was a little surreal tbh. I learned that there may be a genetic predisposition toward T2 but that doesn't make me feel any better. What risks have I exposed my children and my grandchildren to?
The case is clear, carbohydrates are killing us and we have been instilled with a fear of fat by big pharma and big food. Until that changes we will continue to (as a species) become sicker and sicker. These reports and studies are to a great extent beyond my comprehension but I can see that the trend toward the truth is gaining ground. Roll on.

Click to expand...

Pinkorchid said:

I do not believe that carbs are going to kill normal healthy people or that we caused our diabetes by what we ate or put our children and grandchildren at risk if that was the case every body would have diabetes. I am 78 and have no plans to pop off any time soon. I ate my fair share of carbs over those years was never overweight and apart from T2 I do not have any other medical or mobility problems

Click to expand...