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

Fats and Insulin Resistance

From my perspective this post is in a different tone to previous ones. To me it felt previously you denied our lived experience because there wasn’t a study that proved to you how we did it. Many have fought long and hard against many in the medical profession we have come across, rubbishing and denying what we sought to do and refused to accept what we have done. Many in the health, science or policy worlds have refused to do the studies to give the evidence to prove what we have achieved in order to get it widely accepted as a viable treatment protocol despite enormous anecdotal evidence and other studies done that don’t meet their standards but nonetheless do support us. This is why you sense hostility I believe.
 
To me, the OP seems to be both knowledgeable, open-minded and polite. He's not denying people's personal experiences of low-carbing and is accepting of its use in the treatment of diabetes. He has made it clear from the outset that he is interested in increasing his understanding of what's going on at a physiological/biochemical level and has produced plenty of references to illustrate his current understanding. It's fine for people not to care why low-carbing works for them and not want to delve into it. However, it's also fine for those of us who want to increase our understanding of the underlying mechanisms to discuss them. Doing so is not an attack on any person and doesn't warrant hostility.
 

Hi @Sean_Raymond - very curious and interesting that after reading about the low carb approach to type two diabetes, you take on the idea that it works so well because - it allows us to eat less. (That old tired - and wrong - idea about weight loss by simply eating less.)

As someone that practices basically every method out there to keep body-fat - particularly around my waist - to a healthier/protective state (apparently which is less than half one's height) (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20819243/) the idea that I would spend the rest of my life being hungry all the time in order to do this is beyond comprehension. I am not alone - I am pretty sure that this is the reason that 'simply eating less' (ie calorie deficit) to be a healthy weight (ie have healthy fat cells) has not worked for soooo many.

Hunger is a normal physical response to not eating enough in order to get the nutrients and energy in order to keep you alive, let alone think clearly, and do things and lift things and move. Hunger is a good thing, not a bad thing and is natural and healthy. It is how we eat enough, after all.

Many with type two understand that their systems have been mucked up, and how their hunger and satiation hormones are not working well is part of the dysruption of the blood glucose regulation system. I agree with Gary Taubes, and Phinney and Volek (https://www.amazon.com/Art-Science-Low-Carbohydrate-Living/dp/0983490708), and et al ,that excessive carbohydrates, especially in the form of sugar, as yummy as they are, are the culprit for this, and that mammals like us have not evolved to eat carbs in the amounts that has become mandated from above and as normal, as we are seeing in our societies in the last 40 or so years. Also, the new fats that were introduced to our diets in order to lower the amount of saturated fats in our diets that became the dietary demon around the same time, uncoincidentally.

The amazingly complex diagrams about blood glucose regulation, called the Randle cycle, I have seen and refer to jokingly from time to time, absolutely involve dietary fat. But in those diagrams the raised glucose levels which bring about the raised insulin levels which tip the system way into chaos, seem obviously to be the point where chaos begins. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/randle-cycle)

This is not a personal individual dietary/regulatory phenomenon - this is us being an omniverous mammal. I don't think this is particularly controversial! The degree to which folks can take high carbs with high fat - and I would say - these new fats which we cannot digest properly or well - before their bodies break down is what is individual and different - not that it can break down big time. That is part of us being human and having human bodies which have evolved on certain dietary parameters. This is why type two diabetes is spiralling out of control into being a - dare I say it? - a global big health problem. (And especially in the wake of our big enemy - a very nasty virus - currently being a global health problem.)

Anyway - to go low carb, and when one has type two - to go as low sugar and carb as one can (and oh yes, that level can differ enormously between individuals, due, imho, to how sick your fat cells are) is not about not having enough nutrition and energy, ie to not have enough food and going hungry. It is about lowering the very foods (for me - anything with sugar added, and made from milk, and wheat, and I would add - with the new wheat strain,as with the new potatoes, maize and rice - https://croplife.org/news/the-evolutionary-story-of-four-vital-crops/ ) that have caused the hugely raised blood glucose levels which caused the insulin cascade and inflammed and sickened my ever expanding fat cells into the state they are in today. (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2020.00022/full).

As part of the low-fat eating folk since the late 1970s when it was governmentally mandated in the countries I have lived in, it was not the saturated fat and cholesterol-high food (eggs! for instance, and fatty cuts of meat) I unfortunately was not eating (I believed these governments - one of my greatest regrets), but the sugar and carb-heavy food I substituted, that got me here in this forum discussing this with you all today.
 
Last edited:
AloeSvea said:
the idea that I would spend the rest of my life being hungry all the time in order to do this is beyond comprehension.
Click to expand...
Some people suggest that LCHF is more satiating than a low-fat diet so that people 'automatically' consume fewer calories without feeling hungry.
 

Unless you are one of the researchers in question (which I can assure you you aren't) I fail to see how I have accused you of anything?
I pointed you at one of the newest and most up to date books on the subject in question yet you claim that is not producing evidence? If you can't be bothered to read it it's hardly my problem.
 
.
Sean_Raymond said:
I have seen a few interviews with him. I still do not believe insulin is the reason people get fat. Do you have any studies supporting this idea? We might go off topic here so I am happy to start a new thread if the mods would prefer this.
Click to expand...


Hi @Sean_Raymond,

Just wondering, if insulin does not promote fat storage, why do T1s get puffy zones around their injection sites?
 
Dark Horse said:
Some people suggest that LCHF is more satiating than a low-fat diet so that people 'automatically' consume fewer calories without feeling hungry.
Click to expand...
I certainly find a lchf diet satiating, but I also think I consume a lot of calories. The difference is where they come from. Pre lchf I would need to eat every 3 or so hours, often pigging out in whole big bars of chocolate or whole packets of biscuits, not every day . Now I have none of those driven sugar cravings and I can say no to food quite often. But when I do eat it is filling, calorific food, cheese, cream and nuts in particular. On my old way of eating I would have small "healthy" low fat, low calories foods but would then be binging every few days. I think overall and over time I'm consuming similar amounts of calories but in bigger fewer meals and no binging or snacks.
 
I was never a calorie counter, or a dieter, or anything re nutrition and ways of eating pre diabetes. But I certainly notice a lot of that stuff now, unfortunately, in my attempt to get better.

@Dark Horse - I don't know how many calories I normally consumed in the old High Carb-Low-Healthy-Fat days. But I was a hearty eater then and am a hearty eater now - I fill up my plate as high and as often at a buffet lunch now as I did then. But whatever the calories - the food I eat now keeps me normal-weighted. The old days it did not.

And please - I hope you notice how healthy and normal I think being hungry is! I do not see being hungry as a bad thing. As I have noted many times in this forum - we would be a very sorry species indeed if we did not experience hunger, and seek to satisfy that need for nutrition and energy by seeking and eating food. Hunger, from my p.o.v. is not the problem!

I personally did not eat excess carbs, especially in the context of fats, because of hunger for food necessarily, but because it tasted wonderful and made me feel happy whilst eating it. Commonly called emotional eating, or eating comfort food. I call it - our modern food environment. (ditto high-carb drinks.) We are 'hard-wired' to eat higher carb fruit and honey if available (and of course - fermented fruit!) when we came across it, as it was so rare. And healthy fats - of course. Healthy fat in relation to protein is not rare - it is the norm in the real-food world, is my understanding.
 
I agree in the most part, but the sticking point is that the OP insists that low carb works because we consume fewer calories. This is simply not true. I kept a good record of my calorie intake when I dieted using a low cal diet, before I discovered low carb and also during low carb,. Now the normal reply to this from HCPs is that people constantly forget to log everything they eat during a day. So presumably whilst calorie counting we forget things and when following LCHF we don't. Please HCPs listen to us. LCHF works when we consume more calories than before . It really does. When you can get your heads round that we might be getting somewhere. Now to me the most logical reason for this is that during low carb there is less circulating insulin and insulin is a fat promoting hormone, To some HCPs the most logical reason is that fat people are stupid and forgetful and can't count calories.
If the OP was really interested in learning about the subject he would buy and read the book that @bulkbiker mentioned. He would then have those 30 pages of references to hand and could take the matter up with all those learned people.
 
Last edited:
Dark Horse said:
Some people suggest that LCHF is more satiating than a low-fat diet so that people 'automatically' consume fewer calories without feeling hungry.
Click to expand...
It is satiating because we consume more calories through increased fat intake . More calories and less hunger.
I was constantly hungry on a low cal diet. On LCHF as soon as I get hungry I consume something as I am not limited as to quantity of food. This has to be a healthier way to be.
 
Last edited:
@MrsA2 @AloeSvea @zand and anyone else I have missed. Thank you all for your replies and for sharing your lived experiences. Everybody's story is both interesting and inspiring and I can see that it frustrating when you feel that perhaps people do not believe you. One problem is that people on the forum are mostly anonymous and, while you know that you are reliable and accurate, we can't assume that everybody is. For a scientist to evaluate a claim, it's important that all the data are available - they need to see the numbers, the methods and the statistical analysis, not just the conclusions. To fully understand what's going on they would also be trying to answer questions like:- How do I prove this is true? Is it true for everybody or just a sub-set of people? Is there a difference between men and women? Is there a difference between old and young? What's happening with the physiology? What's happening at a biochemical level? etc etc etc.

Personal testimonies are great for inspiring the individual who can try something out to see if it works for them. They are also great for inspiring further research. However, they cannot be used as 'evidence' (for the reasons given above) so people shouldn't be upset if someone who is interested in what's going on at a detailed level looks for something more than a personal story. It's not an insult or a statement of disbelief. It's a bit like if you tell me what somebody else said - I may believe you but I also know that it counts as 'hearsay' and would not be admissible in court.

Perhaps those who have done the necessary calculations might consider writing up their personal results and sending them to appropriate research departments with a message such as, 'I found these results interesting and, although I know that people are typically inaccurate when measuring their intake, I feel confident that I was accurate. Have you ever considered doing research in this area to establish what's going on?' They might be ignored or dismissed out of hand, but every year there are people scrabbling around to find a suitable research topic for their PhD study - they might just inspire someone to take the challenge on.
 
Seems to be the reason this forum exists. Mainstream science is so far behind. The interesting thing is, I declined to see a nutritionist and give what the members here were finding worked for them a shot, glad I did.
 

Perhaps you have not read how dismissive mainstream health care providers have been and still is for the last couple of decades with regards to low carbs/keto and genuinely believe that this is a new discovery... Go thru the success thread...
https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/category/success-stories-and-testimonials.43/page-48
to have some idea how long this debate has been ongoing... and perhaps read about Dr Unwin... his experience with N=1...

If HCP had been less dismissive on how to leverage and apply appropriate carbs reduction, frankly this forum would have been unnecessary...
 

Before scientists can evaluate a claim they need to listen to us, and start the correct research. Then we can get involved.

I don't like the inference that people are not trying to get the message and experience out.

Logically, if claims of inaccuracies are being used then that applies to carbs and calories in food intake.

It seems, regardless of what information we provide, we are dismissed as inaccurate and proper studies are not being done in the mainstream.
 
 
Hi @Sean_Raymond
I have a metabolic condition called ' Late Reactive Hypoglycaemia.'
Could you please advise me on a dietary approach to my condition?

The problem with some metabolic conditions is the circulating insulin, that can develop into insulin resistance. Insulin resistance leads to a poor insulin response to the glucose derived from foods and drinks.

Many T2s have insulin resistance, this is behind the increase in Hba1c levels and why calorie diets don't work for those with T2.
To control many conditions is to lower insulin production and help with insulin resistance and insulin response.
Where does the excess insulin go?

Keep safe.

P.S. can you understand my condition?
 
Hi again, I use intermittent fasting, but I have fasted for five days and four days a couple of times.
Why can I fast for so long and feel better than eating three meals a day?
 
The idea of low carbohydrate diets as a dietary option to lose weight/manage blood sugars is a solid one. They work, the only difference between myself and other members on this thread is the reason.

You have lost weight on a low carbohydrate diet, my explanation for this obviously seems to fail to explain it if you matched your calorie intake to your energy requirements (I do not believe it is all just about calories). However the theory that it is because insulin has been reduced, in my opinion, doesn't explain it either based on everything I have looked at. And early in my career I started out really trying to prove the insulin hypothesis is true. It sounded plausible and I felt it neatly explained for me things I couldn't (why some didn't lose weight when I reduced calories for example).

I can only speak from my experiences and discuss with the people here my opinion. I accept that I cannot speak to your personal experience, findings and results and whilst I may sound contradictory I only offer my opinion. I hope I haven't implied that people such as yourself are wrong. A better way of framing it would be that I do not understand how reduction in insulin could explain your weight loss if you match a low carbohydrate diet to your energy needs. Studies do not show this.
 
@Dark Horse a few years ago I did give my details to a researcher who used my before and after LCHF blood tests and weight 'as evidence' as you put it, in the appendix of her book Eat Fat. The author was Trudi Deakin.
 
Last edited:
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.…