Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Low-carb Diet Forum
Fats and Insulin Resistance
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sean_Raymond" data-source="post: 2355021" data-attributes="member: 403497"><p>I have previously watched a few lectures by Dr Bikman, the author of the book a poster previously recommended, and I revisited a random one yesterday. I find him very professional and he puts together some very plausible and interesting ideas. However I have seen a potential issue with part of his hypothesis and I'll share it for information and potential discussion purposes rather than as a sort of 'take down' of him. He is clearly very learned and so I will be contacting him directly with a few questions for more details</p><p></p><p>The lecture is titled Insulin v Glucagon: the relevance of protein. Dr Bikman puts forward the idea that in the fasted state, when blood sugars are euglycaemic due to a low insulin to glucagon ratio, if we give protein we do not see an insulin response. Essentially he is saying proteins insulinaemic properties should not be feared by those on low carb diets as the response is not relevant in certain glycaemic conditions. He says this happens because the body cannot shut down gluconeogenesis in the fasted state as a hypo will occur. This is true.</p><p></p><p>The issue is numerous studies clearly demonstrate that if a fasted person consumes protein we will see a rise in insulin. We do see a rise in glucagon (which is already raised due to the fasted state) so essentially we see a hyperinsulinaemic hyperglucagonaemic state to maintain the blood sugar/euglycaemic state. I accept that he describes just one study in humans in the video and perhaps he has more in his book. But these potential sticking points are what I find difficult to move past because if he can put forward an idea that, from the literature appears to be incorrect, then the whole hypothesis crumbles even if the actual end point is correct. </p><p></p><p>I am aware I am going around in circles - I see something working but just can't get to it with the paths science or explanations offer. I put this out there to see if I have interpreted this incorrectly. I will also try to view the study Dr Bikman used in that video,</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sean_Raymond, post: 2355021, member: 403497"] I have previously watched a few lectures by Dr Bikman, the author of the book a poster previously recommended, and I revisited a random one yesterday. I find him very professional and he puts together some very plausible and interesting ideas. However I have seen a potential issue with part of his hypothesis and I'll share it for information and potential discussion purposes rather than as a sort of 'take down' of him. He is clearly very learned and so I will be contacting him directly with a few questions for more details The lecture is titled Insulin v Glucagon: the relevance of protein. Dr Bikman puts forward the idea that in the fasted state, when blood sugars are euglycaemic due to a low insulin to glucagon ratio, if we give protein we do not see an insulin response. Essentially he is saying proteins insulinaemic properties should not be feared by those on low carb diets as the response is not relevant in certain glycaemic conditions. He says this happens because the body cannot shut down gluconeogenesis in the fasted state as a hypo will occur. This is true. The issue is numerous studies clearly demonstrate that if a fasted person consumes protein we will see a rise in insulin. We do see a rise in glucagon (which is already raised due to the fasted state) so essentially we see a hyperinsulinaemic hyperglucagonaemic state to maintain the blood sugar/euglycaemic state. I accept that he describes just one study in humans in the video and perhaps he has more in his book. But these potential sticking points are what I find difficult to move past because if he can put forward an idea that, from the literature appears to be incorrect, then the whole hypothesis crumbles even if the actual end point is correct. I am aware I am going around in circles - I see something working but just can't get to it with the paths science or explanations offer. I put this out there to see if I have interpreted this incorrectly. I will also try to view the study Dr Bikman used in that video, [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Food and Nutrition
Low-carb Diet Forum
Fats and Insulin Resistance
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…