• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Dr Mosley and the diet that reverses type 2 diabetes.


Big ty for that. I had just posted my last entry when I saw yours.

"The diabetic range" - but I would love to know if he means and HBA1c of 41, or an HBA1c of 48!

I have my suspicions, due to the wording (and Mosley is a wordsmith after all), "diabetic range" means 41. But whose mincing numbers? . I should be nicer, I am sure.

As someone who was diagnosed with an HBA1c of 93, and I met someone at that proverbial pub who said they were diabetic and deeply shocked in the HBA1c of the 40s, I would say - "great! It will be MUCH easier for you to get your HBA1c down. "

Which is what happened? But that doesn't sound so good for marketing, does it?

I started doing 'HIT's after seeing Mosley on the tele telling me all about it. I still think it's wonderful. But as I said - I am very interested in truth mongering!
 

Well this was what I thought! But when does someone in the prediabetes range identify as a diabetic? Unless... unless... they stand to gain something from it. Like money. Just saying.
 
So he definately isnt cured if he has to fast extra days if he wants to control his sugars again. If he was actually cured he wouldnt need to do that because cured means it is gone for good. I just find it to be very contradictory and while I think it could be very beneficial for most who try it and stick to it the fact that you might have to throw in a few more fasting days if your BS isnt behaving is ridiculous especially since he was only just in the diabetic range to begin with.
 
No should have claried excactly what he said. As every diabetic has this individual fat threshold they cannot cross over without getting to high sugars, Michael Mosley has to control his weight. If his weight goes up, his sugars are not as good as they should be, then he is extra careful with what he eats, and he controls his weight downwards with fasting.

So yeah, Michael Mosley is not cured in the sense that he can eat anything he wants and just pile on loads of extra kgs of fat, and not exspect his sugars to go bad, but he is cured if he manages to keep his weight where it is at.
 

Hear hear @4ratbags ! (I like that you saying it passionately!) OK, so Mosley needs to be interviewed by a diabetic English person/journalist? We need to talk to Kurt Wood about who would best do it?

I personally love the DCUK line - which most reflects my diabetic reality "... it's a difficult condition which takes a lot of time, persistence and care to manage" - but that isn't a snappy tagline for a book title promising reversal is it?! No indeed.

It's right for us to be suspicious (hence the direction of this thread?), and it's right for us to question Mosley and his words, and his motives. We need to know his HBA1c on diagnosis as a 'T2 diabetic' for one!
 
An alcoholic is cured if they manage to avoid drinking alcohol.

Strangely, most alcoholics are not dumb enough to buy that argument and realise they will always be an alcoholic, whether they ever take another alcoholic drink or not.
 
AloeSvea said:
Well this was what I thought! But when does someone in the prediabetes range identify as a diabetic? Unless... unless... they stand to gain something from it. Like money. Just saying.
Click to expand...
AloeSvea said:
Well this was what I thought! But when does someone in the prediabetes range identify as a diabetic? Unless... unless... they stand to gain something from it. Like money. Just saying.
Click to expand...
The shows are taped over several different timespans, and, and the fasting documentary is shown before the exercise documentary which is wrong in realtilme as far as I can see, and they band about terminology in not to a strict manner in my opinion, but the defintion of diabetes vary wildly as well. For instance, the american diabetes assosiaction state that diabetes type-2 is a chronic lifelong illness, for which there is no cure, and you will have it until death does you apart with it. So they will say that Michael Mosley is a diabetic for life, and he is now just wellmanaged, not cured, just a wellmanaged diabetic. And I have loads of others say that as well, they pass an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting and A1C us under the diabetic limit, but they still call themselves diabetics. So in my opinion Michael Mosley had numbers that could classify him as a diabetic, and if he put on weight again he would become diabetic again. In my mind he is a cured diabetic,and I would say his diabetes is removed, but it could come back again. Others would disagree and say he is still diabetic, not cured, and so on.

This debate will proberly not be solved on this forum anyhow xD, but it is semantics in my mind, rather than really fruitful.
 

Hmmm. I thought we were discussing the integrity and veracity of Michael Mosley? A very worthy discussion, and I for one am very appreciative of it, as I had some reservations about him, along with other posters in this thread. (At the same time as very much having appreciated his efforts on behalf of good health! I hope that has come across.)

But you start saying "It is [merely] semantics" when discussing the truth - and my truth-seeking hackles are raised! Words have meanings. And you can muck around with words to give meaning that does not exactly fit the truth. Sometimes folk call this lying! Some call it 'half truths' or 'bending the truth'. Some call it public relations. (and this IS medical journalism we are talking about.) But folk should, always, be answerable to the truth of the matter. Especially to diabetics! When the subject is diabetes, and getting better with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"And I have loads of others... pass an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting and A1C us under the diabetic limit, but they still call themselves diabetics."

Really? Wow. OK. Interesting.
 
It makes it sound a bit like a circus and not at all straight forward though. I really need to get my hands on the book and have a read for myself even though I know for a fact I wont be following the advice in it.
 
4ratbags said:
It makes it sound a bit like a circus and not at all straight forward though. I really need to get my hands on the book and have a read for myself even though I know for a fact I wont be following the advice in it.
Click to expand...

The website is pretty good!

https://thebloodsugardiet.com

Very easy to use. As one would expect from a media person. (And this is good! It's about communication after all.) And much much much more careful in what it promises than the PR material we have been discussing? That being other journalists' (and publishers) interpretation of his material perhaps? As well?

And we can refer to it a 'BSD' from now on! . Just like 'ND' and 'PFT'!

Struth.
 
Just followed your link @AloeSvea

Skipped around a few pages (and to be honest, i am not very motivated to dig deeper - i need another overhyped Media Diet rattling around my head about as much as much as i need a hole in it!)

But one thing did strike me: nowhere in the blurbage i saw did he mention 'reversing diabetes'. There were, however, a number of references to 'reversing high blood sugar'. He dodges the subject of diabetes by directing the reader to an NHS page to assess risk.

But 'reversing high bg' is kind of a no brainer, isn't it?
I mean, cut carbs, cut food, introduce a little trendy fasting , package it up with pretty pics, and quelle surprise! - blood sugar drops (reverses) and the man laughs all the way to the bank.

Yup. i am cynical. And happy to be wrong.
But can anyone produce an actual verifiable quote where he makes concrete claims?
I just don't find myself motivated to look very hard...
 
AloeSvea said:
Well this was what I thought! But when does someone in the prediabetes range identify as a diabetic? Unless... unless... they stand to gain something from it. Like money. Just saying.
Click to expand...

In my mind if you are in the pre-diabetic range, you basically have to change your behaviours as if you were a diabetic.

But as you eluded too one point here and one point there and you are diabetic and you are not diabetic.

I don't think your body works that way. And any how what are his normal BS range - is he hooked to a CGM device?

Does he show a 4-hour 75g to 100g Glucose tolerance test? Is it high normal or low normal?

But anyways, Type 2 diabetes is not one disease, any more than the term dementia is one disease. It is way more complicated than that.

The truth is that with many forms of Type 2 diabetes you can manage keeping your blood sugars low or in the normal range - which many MDs including Dr. Bernstein believe are too high for optimal health and longevity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not a Michael Mosely fan, and never have been, BUT on UK television, he is currently “the chosen one” for presenting many medically focussed programmes. The other two current “favourites” are the van Tulleken twins - http://www.vantullekenbrothers.com/

Bottom line is, in UK we aree constantly being told we are suffering from a diabetes epidemic. The massive majority of T2s do not have the interest or conscious control (as opposed to managing control, based purely on NHS advice and meds). We, here, are the oddities.

We, meaning us who have taken control, feel the approach to T2, in particular must change in the UK. Until recently, few new members arriving here had heard of the ND, or any of it's stylised variants, which is how I would describe Mosely's version. We were crying out for someone to do something.

Well, it appears to be Moseley who has found a way to get this to mainstream. He is a known face, and established author and has some experience of diabetes in both his life and family circle.

When we moan about those advising us – usually badly, in our opinion – statements made usually focus on “would they do it that way, if they were diagnosed”? Well, he is applying the “me too” style of engagement.

Personally, I harp on about people knowing there could be a chance for a significant improvement/reversal/cure/remission ** (** use your adjective of choice), rather than what so many of us are told; “it's a chronic, progressive disease and you'll need insulin in the end”. Which of those two statements is more likely to galvanise positive action, in Joe Public? I know which one I believe would.

We all have opinions on improvement/reversal/cure/remission , and I'm sure those opinions are based upon our own experiences to a lesser or greater extent.

I have found the re-categorisation/labelling exercise recently implemented by @Administrator to be a fascinating people watching exercise. Watching how those who have re-crossed the diabetic diagnosis rubicons have approached their personal re-branding is fascinating. Some have gone for “I have reversed my diabetes”, others “I don't have diabetes” and some, as I have, haven't changed their category from T2. In my case, I have been removed from the diabetic register, so perhaps you also feel I am being disingenuous in my presentations in the forum?

So, in my view, I just think Moseley has presented his personal angle, one the contents of the book, in a positive way, but I would far, far rather the content of the book be out there IN MAINSTREAM, with a readership of 2.25 MILLION, than get bogged down in the minutiae of whether he hasn't been as fulsome in his explanation as those of us who understand it all might like.

What a dream for Prof Taylor, for something based on his years of work to be put out there and opening people's eyes!?? If it were my research, I'd probably think I'd died and gone to scientific heaven!

Let's just look on the positive. Messages of hope are getting out there. Many people must be challenging their HCPs.

I am going to a local DUK meeting this week, and I will be fascinated to see if this comes up in discussion from the 20-odd folks who generally go.

Interesting times.
 
I've just started reading this book. As I manage type 2 by diet and exercise only I'm finding the book encouraging and helpful. I agree with @AndBreathe 's post, anything that brings our "cause" to the public is to be welcomed and supported. I'm buying another copy of "the 8 week blood sugar diet" to give to my DS nurse
 
Ditto. Every descendant of my maternal grandfather who is my age or older has diabetes, regardless of weight or level of physical activity - so very definitely a strong genetic component in my family (and not strongly weight linked). Half of those hit are normal or underweight, all are physically active, none of those who are overweight have had any change with significant, sustained weight loss. I don't think my weight helped (I was obese at diagnosis, now merely overweight) - and I would not be surprised if it moved my diagnosis up a few years, but I think genetics played a far stronger role. I have always expected that what my family has is a different kind of diabetes. (My spouse's family also has a less strongly genetically linked version (it is hitting less than a quarter of her generation, and some in the next generation at a much younger age), but also likely has a different kind because most are normal to underweight.)

I'm still pretending that weight loss will at least lessen my insulin resistance - it is good motivation to lose the weight. But I don't really expect to see any change.

 

One of the questions has to become:

Which is easier to follow on a long-term basis: a lower carb or a lower calorie lifetstyle?

Think most people would be able to predict the answer
 
The book does seem to suggest that the low carb low calorie approach is only for a period of 8 wks @Administrator thereafter he advocates a Mediterranean lifestyle diet which is low carbohydrate. I have another medical condition which severely limits the amounts of vegetables and pulses I can eat but I'm still finding his food suggestions helpful. I currently eat lchf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…