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

GP uses low carb diet with 13 patients -amazed!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gezzathorpe said...

Just got my results ...

HbA1C 5.6% (previously 6.2%)
Triglyceride 0.7 mmol/L
HDL 1.4 mmol/L
Chol:HDL Ratio 2.9
LDL 2.4 mmol/L
Cholesterol 4.1mmol/L

I would be very happy to have those results - well done


Diagnosed Type II 1998 1 x 80 mg Gliclazide, 4 x 500mg Metformin and 1 x 100mg Sitagliptin - HbA1c - 48 mmol/mol
 


Thanks Neil. Now I have to keep it up!
 
My story is very similar to your patients'. I was picked up as diabetic with a finger prickly test in an ambulance at 2am in the morning 5 hours after my last meal. BG was 16 mmol/l. Followed a few days later with a fasting test at 14mmol/l.

Diabetic Nurse tried to discourage testing, but I went to Boots and bought one with 25 strips. I kept a food diary and tested before breakfast, before bedtime, before and 2 hours after lunch. I started to work out the effect carbs were having on my BG, what I could tolerate, and what I could not.

Back to the GP and explained how I was using the data, and he was really happy with my approach. He started prescribing test strips. 10 weeks later my HbA1c was 46. My fasting BG is down to 6.0-7.0. Weight was 113.8kg, is now 96.6kg. BMI 27.9.

Back in April a single white bread roll would send my BG up to 13 or more.

Last night I tried a bread roll again and BG went from 6.8 to a peak of 8.4 and back to 7.4 2 hours later.

My cholesterol also dropped from 8.2 to 6.1.

I had a moderate fat intake, eating an egg on average once a day.

All of this makes me think low carbing for weight loss breaks some cycle in the diabetes mechanism.

My aim is to get to a BMI around 24 or 85kg. I'm guessing I will be able to tolerate a normal diet with moderate carb intake and moderate GI foods.

Time will tell.






Type 2 diagnosed March 2013, diet controlled
 
I don't understand the numbers but, great job well done gezza!
 
Gezza, your results are excellent - but suggest you may not be not diabetic. Achieving those results without medication or carb restriction is unlikely for T2 patients.

What were your results on diagnosis - have you had a major weight loss, or radical diet change?
 

Apparently I failed the glucose tolerance test with a vengeance 5 years ago... don't have the figures I'm afraid. I was 18.5st then and a heavy drinker. I stopped the drink and started to eat 3-5 times per day instead of just in the evening (with snacking during the day). My diet has been quite good for many years and so I didn't really need to do much except to reduce portions, eat more often and eat as much fresh stuff as possible. I got down to 13.5st in about 8 months and held it for 2 years with ease. Then I started on the wine again and went up to 16st and a year ago my HbA1C was 6.2. I stopped the drink again 4 months ago and since then have got down to 14st and still going (ideal 13.5st) with the same diet. I do have bad bGs sometimes but only after the evening meal, and I don't make any adjustments as aresult. I just live with the glitches.

I didn't ask my GP today if I was still diabetic and she didn't volunteer an answer. Maybe I should try a DIY glucose tolerance test.
 
Gezzathorpe, I think those results are excellent. Rather than saying that you were/are not a diabetic, I think it goes to show how the condition can be turned around with good results if action is taken early enough. Obviously the timing of the diagnosis is crucial, the earlier the better, and also whether any of the factors that were contributing to your diabetic readings were reversible.

I'm only a 'beginner' when it comes to these matters so I don't know to what extent your activity levels allow for a certain intake of carbs, or whether or not you got your BGs low enough consistently enough to allow your pancreas to recover some of it's lost functionality. Perhaps a combination of both.

The results of the Newcastle Diet were encouraging, although we all know it was a small sample and we don't know what the long term outlook is for those people who followed it, i.e how permanent their changes have been. The study did seem to indicate that there was at least some recovery of the first phase insulin, presumably because the pancreas was not being so overworked. Weight loss was a big factor in the programme's success from what I can tell, but also permanent changes to the diet had to implemented to keep the weight down and presumably to keep the demand on the pancreas down to the point where it can function better.

My GP insisted I was not diabetic because my FPG is within 'normal' range but I know for a fact that my BGs are too high to be considered normal, particularly after my evening meal. I'm working on keeping my numbers sensible but I need to resort to low carbing to make it happen. Keep up the good work!
 
I have problems with my kidneys and liver (not diabetes related) Low carbing makes them considerably worse. It really is not for everyone sadly and people need to check with their GPs that they are not doing themselves harm.

As has been asked will you continue to offer follow ups and blood tests to ensure kidneys and liver are not suffering?
 

Thanks janeecee. I think your first paragraph says it all. I will be seeing my diabetic nurse on 3rd July and I will have the opportunity to discuss the whole situation, ask questions etc. then and report back. I have said this before, but I opted to work 'top-down' rather than 'bottom up'. In other words, I decided that, from my starting point of about 350g per day, I would reduce portions, alcohol, stop eating rubbish etc., and avoid hunger pangs & the resulting temptation by eating when hungry (even just an apple) so long as my bGs were acceptable and my weight reducing. I do have experience of 'low-carb' diets from many moons ago (Herbalife in my case) and I prefer to eat what has kept me going and healthy for the past 62 years with minimum interference.

It has turned out that about 250g carbs per day seems to be OK for me. I could have decided to drop my carbs to, say, 80g per day, and, as we all know, my results would have been even more surprising. And, I could then say "low-carbing works for me". However, I would need some persuading that 68% (170g) of my current carb intake is nutrition surplus to requirements, in spite of the lack of long-term evidence one way or the other.

To me, dropping from 350g per day to 250g is the same principle as dropping from 350g to 80g per day. That's why I keep asking and have never got an answer on this site to the question "what is the definition of low-carbing". Would anyone care to put me out of my misery? Many people seem to be of the opinion that low-carb diets are defined by a specific maximum intake of carbs rather than a personal 'reduction' to a level that works. I am struggling to work out the real difference. I know that some 'low-carbers' are thinking of or planning to re-introduce more carbs at some point. I just found it more efficient to adjust what I was already eating rather than spending a lot of time trying this and that out in this or that combination etc.

My weight loss is very slow and I can understand the "I've lost 6lb this week" attitude. I've been on a plateau for 2 months now but I know from past experience that by about September (a realistic timetable for me) I will be about 13.5st again and hold it, provided I don't go back to my old habits. I am very strong-willed (just ask 'er indoors) and this helps.
 
What is this to do with the original posting? The GP concerned undertook a trial albeit with a limited sample. But it was a sample of more than one. The thread now is about a sample of one who has a miraculous body that can keep non-DB numbers on a high carb diet. How many others who are DBs can claim that with no meds and 250g of carbs?
My concern is that new DBs will read this and think they can do the same.
This low carver has no intention of introducing more carbs than the current 30 - 40 g consumed per day. Why would I when that gives me non-DB numbers? That is my definition of low carb.
Cd
 

+100 couldn't agree more! I'm on 30-40gs and have never been better and my insulin dose is low and I don't suffer with hypos...plus I love the low carb grub!
 
The stage of diabetes on diagnosis will make a difference as hands-on management of reversible factors early on will have a better outcome than later diagnosis when the pancreas is much less efficient and where there are irreversible factors like genetics. There isn't a one size fits all strategy for everyone. People can and do reverse or delay the progression by employing various means. For some it's meds, for others it's low carbing, and for others it's exercise and/or weight loss, and for some it's all of those strategies. If someone is fortunate enough to have an early diagnosis AND they are helped by lifestyle intervention alone, it's no reason to discredit them. Just saying…


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 
Re: Famous for 15 minutes at last!!

Eddie is right, of course. A diabetic who achieves excellent control without medication, on a diet that provides about 50% of his energy from carbs (250g per day) is not diabetic. It may be you were "pre-diabetic" and your massive change from a very bad diet, and resultant weight loss (of 5 st) has resulted in the disease not progressing.

As far as the forum is concerned, your experience indicates that an early change in diet & lifestyle can only be beneficial.

Do you ever discuss your condition with a consultant?

 
Re: Famous for 15 minutes at last!!


I will reply from the blog "Am I still diabetic" from now on.
 
Andy12345 said:
I don't understand the numbers
Click to expand...

You're suitable qualified for a top job in banking then Andy. Even recognising this is worth a 6 figure bonus in itself!
 
How I wish my GP felt like this - I can get no NHS advice on a sensible low carb diet. In fact my diabetic nurse positively disapproves of my self-applied diet. But I feel good and I've lost weight! I get grief from my mum too because she thinks I should "do what the docter tells you". :silent:
 
So you run for the hills when challenged after leaving posts that will do the newly diagnosed no good at all. That is so unfair. But hey maybe best you are not here for the health of many.
Cd
 

It's a shame that we never tested before diagnosis, why would we? I think it would be nice to know how often we had spiky readings as non diabetics. This idea that BGs should return to normal after 2 hours is an average based on observation which probably means that, even in otherwise healthy individuals, some readings probably took longer to come down and also probably peaked at higher levels and at different times.
 
Tubsolard said:
I love the low carb grub!
Click to expand...

Overated in my opinion. Just an expensive way of eating garlic and butter.

 

That's very true. Diagnosis is based on blood sugar levels when that is really a symptom and not the cause. Insulin levels in blood plasma does not correlate well with beta cell mass and insulin sensitivity is a separate parameter. The exact physiology is not known. It wasn't that long ago that there was just 'diabetes' with no distinctions between types.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…