Sorry Bulkbiker. Yes the DIRECT protocol did mention the Eatwell plate. It wasn't mentioned in the lectures so I forgot.From the DiRECT study protocol
"Food reintroduction phase (weeks 12–18)
The FR phase includes a stepped transition to a food- based diet based on the “Eatwell” guidelines "
Sorry Bulkbiker. Yes the DIRECT protocol did mention the Eatwell plate. It wasn't mentioned in the lectures so I forgot.
I still think that doing ND is a no brainer. It is the only (potential) cure other than bariatric surgery. I have nothing whatsoever to lose. If it doesn't work for me I am no worse off. Even if it doesn't result in complete reversal there is a good chance I shall save some of my remaining beta cells even if not all. And there is a good chance I shall be among the 70% or so lucky ones as I don't think I have had T2 for much more than 4 years.
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Researc...t/Research-spotlight-low-calorie-liquid-diet/
Prof Taylor wrote the foreword to Michael Mosleys book (the eight week blood sugar diet). This is effectively a lowish carb (about 50g per day) Mediterranean style diet aimed at doing same as Newcastle diet but using real food. Prof Taylor doesn't care how you achieve the weight loss.Why is the ND diet always pitted against LCHF? Why not do both? I have heard many say "LCHF isn't a diet, it is a way of life". So an 8 week break to try a VLCD style, low sugar diet - would that really do harm? Why not adapt the ND diet to being a LCHF diet with reduced calories? Then everyone is happy.
I just do not understand why there is so much resistance to something - I really don't. I would like to see the evidence that it is a load of rubbish. It would be terribly sad if the DCUK team decided to invest all of that money so they could finally stick two fingers up to LCHF? For me, it just doesn't make any sense.
I am giving it a go - what harm, my ability to tolerate even 10g of carbs is absolutely insane so even if the ND means I can tolerate a few more for a short period that would be great. I am certainly not knocking the LCHF diet - brilliant; did me a load of good it really did and I intend, after my ND, to chose this as a way of life. And if it has nothing to do with the ND way but is something else - I don't care as long as I see an improvement.
You seem to be missing the point. ND is aimed at T2 diabetics, so yes, Eatwell is a ****** diet for us compared to others available. This thread is not about Normal People and their needs. It may well be adapted for fixing normal obesity and or NAFLD issues, but the research so far has used T2D as their test subjects, and monitored for diabetic responsesSurely the Eatwell Plate is only a '****** diet' in the sense that for diabetics it's full of carbs? I would imagine a person with normal blood sugar response would be fine on that diet so long as they kept portions reasonable. Most people eat that way, after all, with relatively few ill effects. Obviously if you're a diabetic it's terrible, but the point of the ND is to make the participants non-diabetic. For a diet that seeks to restore pancreatic function to non-diabetic normal then it makes sense that they'd want to see what happens when you start eating carbs again. You wouldn't lose weight, but as long as you weren't throwing in tons of excess carbs I don't see that it would cause an issue - provided that your insulin response was back to normal.
Though again we're circling round to what constitutes remission, reversal and non-diabetic within the parameters of the study
You seem to be missing the point. ND is aimed at T2 diabetics, so yes, Eatwell is a ****** diet for us compared to others available. This thread is not about Normal People and their needs. It may well be adapted for fixing normal obesity and or NAFLD issues, but the research so far has used T2D as their test subjects, and monitored for diabetic responses
"A total of 87% of the short-duration group and 50% of the long-duration group achieved nondiabetic fasting plasma glucose levels at week 8. Clinically significant improvements in blood pressure and lipid profile were seen regardless of diabetes duration." Results of Roy Taylor's second study with the 30 people.
www.ncl.ac.uk/media/wwwnclacuk/.../files/long-versus-short-term-reversal-article.pdf
Research: Treatment Restoring normoglycaemia by use of a very low calorie diet in long- and short-duration Type 2 diabetes
If you have no visceral fat to get rid of, then your T2 is probably not going to be improved by Very Low Calorie Diets.
i've never had a fatty liver (no blood tests have ever shown the slightest hint)
I think a diet should only be judged by the initial success (or otherwise). If the diet shrinks the liver and pancreas and removes their fat, and this results in normal BG levels then I think the diet should be called successful. Obviously it is important for people to keep the fat off , but whether or not they do has nothing whatsoever to do with the original diet by which they lost the weight. It only has to do with the quality of the maintenance diet and adherence to it.
You can have a lot of fat in your liver without the blood tests showing it up, the Newcastle group were the first to programme an MNR scanner so as to allow a good measurement of fat inside of liver cells. You can have fat inside liver cells without having fat around the liver, a normal scan only shows fat around the liver.
I paid for an ultrasound privately in early 2016. £149 for a comprehensive report and pics. I was hoping to see a fatty liver etc, but was disappointed to find there was none! I had hoped that if I was carry viseral fat, I had an 'easy' solution
I still think that doing ND is a no brainer. It is the only (potential) cure other than bariatric surgery. I have nothing whatsoever to lose. If it doesn't work for me I am no worse off.
Just like bariatric surgery results on longterm diagnnosed. ND was first set up as the alternative to surgery... maybe.Interesting about length of being diabetic.. I went back and re-read Counterbalance.. on that one length of time was from 6 months to 23 years. Now on the DirRECT study it is 6 years or less.. which would imply to me it didn't work very well for those diagnosed for longer.
It may be hard for them to keep the weight off but if they got it off they can keep it off. Keeping it off allows more calories than they could have while getting it off. And they never have to be hungry keeping it off as they are allowed to eat exactly as many calories as their body needs at that moment,whether their body has slowed down or not.What if the diet results in someone's body slowing down, so it is very hard from them to keep the weight off? This is clearly an issue with the standard NHS diets, I don't know if it is with ND.
Eh? Where is this from? Who says?If you have no visceral fat (confirmed with the Newcastle NMR machine with their special software) and have had diabetes for only a few years, then you don't have Type2!
Unfortunately many of us can testify that getting the right off, and keeping it off are not always possible. Our bodies are not machines, and do odd things sometimes.It may be hard for them to keep the weight off but if they got it off they can keep it off. Keeping it off allows more calories than they could have while getting it off. And they never have to be hungry keeping it off as they are allowed to eat exactly as many calories as their body needs at that moment,whether their body has slowed down or not.
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?