"enthusiasm of some people with Type 2 diabetes to take major steps to escape from diabetes became clear in the very large-scale email feedback [5]. The email feedback from those who lost weight and returned to normal glucose tolerance, showed that duration of normal glucose control in some now approaches 3 years [18]. Provided that weight loss is maintained, diabetes does not return, at least over several years."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.
100% participants have now passed the 1 year line
I have a different view of the effects of the Eatwell plate and similar. I think the number of people who have blood sugar issues since the guidelines have been implemented have a significant correlation. For me the graphs since 1977 are too coincidental to not conclusively show the high carb low fat diet is a root cause of the current health crisis across all continents. When a non diabetic eats a typical processed meal, they can spike past guidelines - this causes minute damage without discrimination. I am not sure that portion size is adhered to, with the really tasty stuff such as pizza, chips, crisps, milk chocolate etc. The other day I looked at the nutritional detail on the back of the trendy just add hot water latte packets, from memory the carbs were around 67 of which were sugars 50 (in my view garbage).Surely 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
Just as an aside, my local supermarket has just started stocking Paleo snack bars for the health conscious, I looked at the nutrition label and one bar was 54% carbs, of which sugars were 37% The other bars were worse. Highest one was a fruit bar at 72% carb and the sugar was still around 35% so it seems to be added sugar.I have a different view of the effects of the Eatwell plate and similar. I think the number of people who have blood sugar issues since the guidelines have been implemented have a significant correlation. For me the graphs since 1977 are too coincidental to not conclusively show the high carb low fat diet is a root cause of the current health crisis across all continents. When a non diabetic eats a typical processed meal, they can spike past guidelines - this causes minute damage without discrimination. I am not sure that portion size is adhered to, with the really tasty stuff such as pizza, chips, crisps, milk chocolate etc. The other day I looked at the nutritional detail on the back of the trendy just add hot water latte packets, from memory the carbs were around 67 of which were sugars 50 (in my view garbage).
If low carb is considered circa < 130 g then the Eatwell guide is obviously higher, so surely this is a recipe in an average person to have challenges with fat retention.
NoIsn't the Newcastle diet a little like a smoker going on to vaping? One wonders if a large number yoyo like many other non long term eating regimes? D.
Isn't the Newcastle diet a little like a smoker going on to vaping? One wonders if a large number yoyo like many other non long term eating regimes? D.
I agreeWeight regain and yoyoing is a huge risk after any weight loss regime.
I would like to think that the loomimg spectre of un-reversal on the horizon would help to discourage weight regain for type 2s who have committed so much time and effort to their ND.
One question I have in my my mind is this: For many, many years now people have been using meal replacement shakes and ultra low calorie diets to attack weight issues. Many will be T2, since obesity and adipose fat seems strongly linked to the condition. Now many of these T2 will be taking large doses of medication. I am surprised that there has not been an outbreak of T2's having hypos that are directly related to going on the diet and have either had to reduce medication or come off the diet. Slimfast / Optifast are not new formulations, so how come it needs an MRI scan to detect so called remission? And if this is actually a new phenomenon due to the Protocol, what is different about ND that does not occur in a regular VLC diet?
I am also unclear about what exactly causes the 'remission/reversal'.
From what I've read, Prof Taylor says that theres nothing special about using the shakes to lose weight. So long as you lose enough weight to clear first the liver fat and then the pancreatic fat that should do the trick. Then you must stay below your own 'Personal Fat Threshold' so that you don't build up fat in liver and pancreas again.
So what exactly is the key to it:
Is it effective if you lose the same weight (15% of weight at diagnosis) over a much longer period of time (eg 6 months) ?
What if you don't have so much weight to lose. Will 10% be effective ?
Is the secret that the calorie restriction is so severe that it 'shocks' your body and is like fasting ?
Doing the math: 800cal - 200cal (vegetables) = 600cals
600cals / 3 = 200cals per meal
200cals split evenly btwn Carb Prot Fat = 12 gm C, 12gm P, 12gm F = 48cal + 48cal + 108cal = 204cal / meal
It would be hard to find a nutritious food (dextrose maybe) that would be 50gms of straight carbs (200cals)
Anyway, I think an 800 cal a day diet would be hard pressed to spike at anytime. It might be adequate to replenish used glycogen, but body fat would be supplying a lot of the energy during the eight weeks.
Thank you - it is all an education for me. Appreciate everyone's advice.Exception noted. On second thought, we're all different and I didn't look at the shake ingredients to get an idea of the GI of the carbs. So, as you've noted there are more variables involved than my math takes into consideration. Thanks.
One more thing: Congrats on the great job you're doing and appreciate all the questions you're bringing up.
I don't think you have answered the question, Take your worked example, but halve the carb and protein but up the fat, then you can still get the 200 cals. Likewise if you treble the carbs but halve the protein and keep the fat you still get 200 cals. I bet the latter example I give will have greater effect on bgl than the low carb variant I gave. So Composition is important to a person with metabolic disorder.Doing the math: 800cal - 200cal (vegetables) = 600cals
600cals / 3 = 200cals per meal
200cals split evenly btwn Carb Prot Fat = 12 gm C, 12gm P, 12gm F = 48cal + 48cal + 108cal = 204cal / meal
It would be hard to find a nutritious food (dextrose maybe) that would be 50gms of straight carbs (200cals)
Anyway, I think an 800 cal a day diet would be hard pressed to spike at anytime. It might be adequate to replenish used glycogen, but body fat would be supplying a lot of the energy during the eight weeks.
I don't think you have answered the question, Take your worked example, but halve the carb and protein but up the fat, then you can still get the 200 cals. Likewise if you treble the carbs but halve the protein and keep the fat you still get 200 cals. I bet the latter example I give will have greater effect on bgl than the low carb variant I gave. So Composition is important to a person with metabolic disorder.
The question boils down to whether any 200 cal meal will force a keto response so that burning adipose (i.e. lipid based fat) occurs, since replenishing glucogen stores in the liver will prevent ketosis from happening and thus the liver and pancreas would retain their fat due to the carb and protein content of the meal. Looking at the Optifast nutrition details it seems the use of 3 shakes a day will actually keep most participants out of ketosis, so it appears that the ND is using a different mechanism to remove the liver and pancreas fat.
I complete agree with you on the shakes and their make up.
However, it now seems to be not so important because there are loads of examples now of Prof T telling people the make up of the diet doesn't matter. It is VLCD, circa 600-800 a day eating normal food and the shakes were indeed just a way of controlling portion size and standardizing the experiment where it could be.
Being a bit of a stickler in my first attempt - I am, quite painfully, sticking to shakes and veg as prescribed. Not fun though at all and if I hadn't made the full investment in all the shakes needed to do the 8 weeks I would have, long ago, moved to proper food whilst trying to maintain the macros to some degree.
Ketosis or not, weight is falling off me so far - having already lost over 3 stone another stone came off in less than 4weeks.
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?