It is interesting to note how long this debate has been going...I don't expect it will be settled soon...
Yes, that's the most important thing.@lindisfel from Dr Roy Taylor's Newcastle studies to Virta's program I would think that remission is likely for up to 50% of T2D, especially if they are newly diagnosed. That is significantly better than any current stats available. And those who don't try it, won't know if they are responders...
As they scale up their programs we will know if the statistics holds.
I want to say, I don't care about the research. I care only about finding what works for me.
But then I remember that every choice I've made over the last three years has been a long process of sorting through information...study results, expert opinions on how to practically apply them, listening to what's worked and not worked for fellow diabetics...then trusting my gut and committing to one choice at a time...the foods I'm eating, the supplements I take, how and when I measure my glucose, how to time my walks, what lab tests to have done...so I guess I really do care.
Interestingly, the diabetics I know who are successful in restoring and/or maintaining their health make a similar commitment. Taking charge of our health. It's a huge investment of time, but so worth it.
And of course I have my favorites. Robert Lustig, M.D. of University of California San Francisco is one - (he recently retired). And Jeffrey Bland, Ph.D., the father of functional medicine in the US and mentor to Mark Hyman are two more. (I'm listening to Dr. Hyman interview Dr. Brand on his "The Doctor's Farmacy" podcast right now. If you haven't listened to this new podcast yet, check it out. There's a new one on YouTube every Wednesday). I could list so many more...
Interesting quote kokhongw. I feel like we have enough information now to make reasonably informed choices at least. I like what diabetes author Jenny Ruhl says about diets: choose a diet, follow it exactly as described for three months, then decide to continue it, modify it, or start the process again with a different diet. Find the diet that works best for you.
It is interesting to note how long this debate has been going...I don't expect it will be settled soon...
Science can move slowly. Phlogiston was a generally accepted theory by chemists for around 100 years, until newer chemists challenged the consensus. The Ludwig paper has an interesting quote that a "calorie is a calorie", which is trivially true. But eating 1000 calories of sugar, or 1000 calories of grass would have very different results, even though they're both high carbs. One's easily digested and absorbed, the other isn't.
Hi Winnie,
Men have feet of clay, but I admire your faith and loyalty to your chosen gurus.
D.
@lindisfel from Dr Roy Taylor's Newcastle studies to Virta's program I would think that remission is likely for up to 50% of T2D, especially if they are newly diagnosed. That is significantly better than any current stats available. And those who don't try it, won't know if they are responders...
As they scale up their programs we will know if the statistics holds.
Translation please. That went right over my head. [giggle]
If you don't "get" functional medicine, I understand, it's still an American thing, but you have Michael Ash DO, ND, BSc (Hons) RNT in the UK. He's another favorite of mine. Oops, not sure. Are you in the UK or elsewhere?
Jeffrey Bland, Ph.D. is one of my heros because I had swollen feet and ankles for 10+ years. Nothing I did helped. The doctors did what they do, including lab work and an ultra sound to insure blood flow was adequate, but had no answers, though one prayed over my feet which was very sweet. I was reading Jeffrey Bland's book, and he just happened to mention the problem I was having...suggested trying 500 mg/day of vitamin B5. It worked, which I found interesting because I've taken a B-complex off and on for twenty years.
Written in her usual irreverant style*, It's The Wooo's takedown of the Hall/Guyenet rebuttal. Man, she hates Guyenet with a passion
http://itsthewooo.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-strawman-cih-is-not-supported-by.html
[*The style that prompted Guyenet to call her "One Extremely Disrespectful Zealot" for her trashing of his hyperpalatable theory of obesity.]
First argument presented is "postprandial hunger from carbz isn't real lol" which is one of Guyenet's FAVORITE sound bites. It only illustrates he has NEVER interacted with a real live obese person, the very subject he purports to be a master in studying, lol. Like, you can literally go to any rando blue collar job, talk to fat people who went on keto diets and they will affirm this is a thing. "Oh yea, i used to get hungry as HELL 1.5 hours after eating - cured that on atkins dude, no more shaking, sweating, irritability and ravenous eating shortly after a meal!" Like, this doesn't even warrant a real response. He is stating it is "controversial" that it is a thing people with insulin and glucose regulation disorders experience increased hunger and counter regulation to declining glucose 1-1.5 hrs after a simple carbohydrate load. Such an argument can only come from the wonders of obesity research: where a so called "expert" can exist who has NEVER, EVER personally interacted, examined, studied humans with the disease he claims to be proficient in understanding.
I even get it when I have carb like low carb things like keto bread.. still can't eat only one piece... have to finish it all.Thanks...this really resonate with me...since I have been experiencing for well over 30 years.
kokhongw, one of the things that frustrates me to no end is people not taking charge of their health, so while I agree with what you're saying, I still want to believe that 100% of type 2 diabetics can put their diabetes in remission. I will continue to believe this until proven otherwise. I even heard Canadian nephrologist Jason Fung say something along those lines yesterday. Perhaps not 100%, but close.
But surely, first, they would give off the same amount of phlogiston if burnt!
I too would like to believe that 100% can find remission. But the unfortunate reality is such that many won't. As it is, less than 1% T2D achieve and maintain remission in a study to justify Bariatric Surgery. So we find ADA embracing and touting Bariatric surgery for T2D remission, but not dietary intervention that works. Low carb effectiveness is grudgingly being acknowledged with all its purported risks and dangers with the qualifier that one size does not fit all. Fasting in any form is still considered unsustainable...although there's probably all can find one form that fits them...
If it works I wouldn't knock it.
Yes I am in the UK.
Was in the States a bit in the 90s, Florida, Texas and California.
Got the impression it was a bad country to be poor in! Very nice people.
D.
Thanks...this really resonate with me...since I have been experiencing it for well over 30 years.
Part 2 of Wooo's takedown of Hall/Guyenet's 'debunking':
http://itsthewooo.blogspot.com/2018/07/postprandial-hyperinsulinemia-and-risk.html
Thx for the followup post...Gardner's study simply highlight the fact that if people are given vague dietary guidelines, they end up "thinking" they are on a low carb diet when they are likely not low enough to address their metabolic condition...to achieve/maintain regular ketosis etc.This study in question references another Gardner work, where patients are eating almost exactly the same diet, and we are drawing conclusions about VLC diets for some reason. In this case, the "low fat" diet is eating 212 carbs / 48%, and the low carb group is eating 132/ 29.8%. Again, Gardener uses his design where pts are basically told to eat as they please, and so patients and up picking restrictive diets that are not particularly restrictive. The diets end up looking the same, so no appreciable metabolic shift can even be observed - in spite of a core belief of most insulin hypothesis proponents involving a necessary shift to fat metaboism. As with his other study, there is a small bias in favor of greater weight loss for low carb even in this context (-5.3kg vs -6kg) , but it is deemed not"statistically significant". As in the first case, the fact that there is ANY difference when the diets were very similar, IS statistically significant. A difference of just 18% carbs, resulted in almost 1/6th more weight loss than the conventional lower fat diet. The problem with Gardner studies is they test only slightly reduced carb diets, then attribute the very slight improvement in weight loss as "insignificant". What on earth are you expecting when your entire study design is not powered to even test a low carbohydrate diet. Are they to lose more weight by magic? Somehow they are going to lose substantially more weight, eating barely differently from the competing lower fat diet?
.
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?