Has anyone failed to reverse their T2 on Newcastle Diet?

[Bluetit1802]

Surely you could only eat the Newcastle diet if you are over weight.
Perhaps that would have been a better route for me when I was overweight. Certainly if the carbs didn't trigger R.H.
Now I have a BMI of 22.5, been on LCHF for two years seriously and I cannot get my hba1c down below 45. It was 50 on diagnosis. It would not have been worth it if I hadn't cured my RH and fatty liver!
Derek

i am similar to you. Diagnosed with HbA1c of 53 January 2014. By June I was 46, by November I had drpped my BMI from 31 to 21 but still HbA1c in Pre-diabetic range. New weight maintained ever since and lowest A1c was 42. Very low carb (up to 30g. often less, sometimes a bit more) No medication or other health issues. However, for last 2 weeks all my levels have suddenly notched downwards, significantly so. So much so I ended up thinking my meter was dying. I even resorted to re-testing low numbers and using the control solution. My conclusion is my meter is fine. It is me suddenly improving! The ONLY thing I can think of is I did a home OGTT the day it all started, and maybe that drink of 75g pure glucose kick started something. Or maybe it was just coincidence. Whichever, my averages both pre-meal and post meal, plus FBG and bedtimes have dropped considerably. I hope I am not tempting fate.

 

[Guzzler]

i am similar to you. Diagnosed with HbA1c of 53 January 2014. By June I was 46, by November I had drpped my BMI from 31 to 21 but still HbA1c in Pre-diabetic range. New weight maintained ever since and lowest A1c was 42. Very low carb (up to 30g. often less, sometimes a bit more) No medication or other health issues. However, for last 2 weeks all my levels have suddenly notched downwards, significantly so. So much so I ended up thinking my meter was dying. I even resorted to re-testing low numbers and using the control solution. My conclusion is my meter is fine. It is me suddenly improving! The ONLY thing I can think of is I did a home OGTT the day it all started, and maybe that drink of 75g pure glucose kick started something. Or maybe it was just coincidence. Whichever, my averages both pre-meal and post meal, plus FBG and bedtimes have dropped considerably. I hope I am not tempting fate.

Fingers crossed!

 

[bulkbiker]

i am similar to you. Diagnosed with HbA1c of 53 January 2014. By June I was 46, by November I had drpped my BMI from 31 to 21 but still HbA1c in Pre-diabetic range. New weight maintained ever since and lowest A1c was 42. Very low carb (up to 30g. often less, sometimes a bit more) No medication or other health issues. However, for last 2 weeks all my levels have suddenly notched downwards, significantly so. So much so I ended up thinking my meter was dying. I even resorted to re-testing low numbers and using the control solution. My conclusion is my meter is fine. It is me suddenly improving! The ONLY thing I can think of is I did a home OGTT the day it all started, and maybe that drink of 75g pure glucose kick started something. Or maybe it was just coincidence. Whichever, my averages both pre-meal and post meal, plus FBG and bedtimes have dropped considerably. I hope I am not tempting fate.

great news.. I can't really report the same.. my FBG's were a bit elevated after the test but have now gone back to normal with one sub 5 last week.

 

[Bluetit1802]

great news.. I can't really report the same.. my FBG's were a bit elevated after the test but have now gone back to normal with one sub 5 last week.

Half of mine have been sub 5, most pre lunches and nearly all pre evening meal. Last night my post evening meal was 4.8. That is the first time ever. I feel like it is a lovely dream and I will wake up!

 

[Fleegle]

But then shouldn't Counterbalance have had more success? I completely agree about the likelihood of NAFLD being significant in Type 2 but if most on the diet experienced benefits then surely most should have "reversed". I'm just a bit surprised that 2 studies with such small samples have been puffed up to be the great "cure" for Type 2.
Now back to the "Mail on Sunday" for some more health news updates..

I think you are being a bit harsh there @bulkbiker
Though both studies were small scale the success rate for those that completed it were higher than you say. If you eat a ton of carbs on a LCHF diet and it doesn't work - then it is not the LCHF diet that isn't working.
Moreover - what about all of the people who have written in and are now galleried by Prof T.

I think that the LCHF diet has less scientific studies that the ND diet? But no one could deny how successful that is.

I believe in his latest video's Prof T reports a 64% success rate and this is by far the most interesting development in T2 reversal ever. Have you seen the video of the chap who had neuropathy and a heart attack and reversed it - his quote several years later was he posted his BG at 4.2 Not that impressive until you find out that it was 1 hour after a blueberry muffin. Now I am not advocating that way of eating seems to me like a route back to square 1 but impressive.

Time you have diabetes and your personal fat threshold mean it is not a guarantee unfortunately but for 8-12 or even 20 weeks surely worth a go.

 

[Member34835]

Can you spot early NAFLD via liver function test? Jadin Fung aims to reverse rype 2s with the same therapeutic aims via fasting Response depends on how long you have had T2 . It seems we all have a personal fat threshold (liver/panceeatuc fat that is) which we must get back under to normalise insulin levels.

 

[Pipp]

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. Some people have posted on here in the past who were actually underweight, and thinking ND was the answer for them. Others have started out with good intentions, but not been able to keep up the food restriction. Unfortunately, not many report the reason why they gave up.

Eating and drinking has a social element, too. It can be difficult to refuse to join in social eating. Sometimes it is lack of support from loved ones, colleagues, HCPs and so called friends.
ND will not work for everyone, but neither will any other method. There will always be the exceptions. What is useful, though is to have as many different methodologies tested, and tried, to enable personal choice. It has to be accompanied by information and support, in order for each to make an informed choice.

 

[bulkbiker]

I think you are being a bit harsh there @bulkbiker
Though both studies were small scale the success rate for those that completed it were higher than you say. If you eat a ton of carbs on a LCHF diet and it doesn't work - then it is not the LCHF diet that isn't working.
Moreover - what about all of the people who have written in and are now galleried by Prof T.

I think that the LCHF diet has less scientific studies that the ND diet? But no one could deny how successful that is.

I believe in his latest video's Prof T reports a 64% success rate and this is by far the most interesting development in T2 reversal ever. Have you seen the video of the chap who had neuropathy and a heart attack and reversed it - his quote several years later was he posted his BG at 4.2 Not that impressive until you find out that it was 1 hour after a blueberry muffin. Now I am not advocating that way of eating seems to me like a route back to square 1 but impressive.

Time you have diabetes and your personal fat threshold mean it is not a guarantee unfortunately but for 8-12 or even 20 weeks surely worth a go.

Hi Fleegle
I'm certainly not saying that its not worth a go BUT and its a big but.. what I wrote is from the publication of the 2 studies themselves. That is Prof Taylor's own research. As you can see from the title of this thread there are a lot of people who think that the ND is a "cure" for Type 2 for everyone which is simply not true. I am sceptical because if we read a study that said that of 30 people 13 had reversed their Type 2 by eating cow dung we would treat it with some degree of concern.. we would not go around saying that we should get cow dung on the NHS... Ok the methodology seems to be more sensible than my rather extreme example but the studies that all the news stories and euphoria concerning the ND are what I have read and used the figures from. I even e-mailed Prof Taylor himself when I was having a disagreement with another forum member about exactly how many trials there had been so this is from the "horse's mouth" so to speak.
I think it's great that you are trying this but don't be hard on yourself if it doesn't have the effect you hope. It may be the science and not you. There have been a lot of people trying the ND recently (myself included for a week-although my keto version) I would hate for them to be highly expectant of success when it may not happen.
I quote from the trial protocol for DiRECT that you linked to
" Power calculations have assumed diabetes remission in 22 % of intervention participants at one year compared with 5 % in the control group. " So even Prof Taylor is not expecting too much from the new trial.

 

[Oldvatr]

I still wonder if a well formulated full fat low carb diet with intermittent fasting wouldn't be a better protocol. "Eating" four times a day on the ND can only be stimulating insulin production unnecessarily.. especially with the high carbs that are in the shakes.

Whilst I personally think you may be right on this, the ND protocol probably suits more people who (a) are used to things like slimfast shakes, and lo cal diets, and (b) not comfortable with having high(er) fat diet to what the Government tells us in their TV ads. Yes, those that accept an LCHF style diet and accept full fat, may extend into fasting, but at the moment I believe this represents a minority in the diabetes audience. The ND stands a better chance of acceptance by the nutritionists lobby too.

 

[lindisfel]

I see he doesn't work with the elderly 'customer'! . D.

 

[Tannith]

The answer to your question is yes.. Most of the 41 people who did the original 2 studies failed to reverse their Type 2 diabetes.
The main problem I find with the ND is that so far the actual studies Counterpoint 2011 and Counterbalance 2016 have involved about 41 people in total. Counterpoint was 11 to do proof of concept and Counterbalance was 30.
Counterpoint only did it for 8 weeks and so far as I know the participants were never followed up. At least I have never found any reference to it.
Counterbalance was followed up after 6 months and of the original 30 participants 13 were still "non diabetic" after this period. So a success rate of 43%.
From the two studies a whole plethora of people have tried to replicate the success of these experiments. To make claims based on such small studies seems a bit dangerous to me. Once the new study has been complete there will still be fewer than 200 people (of the current study half are in a control group) who have completed the ND "proper".

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Researc...t/Research-spotlight-low-calorie-liquid-diet/
This describes the success of the 11 out of 40 who completed the first diet and the success of 100% 0f the people in the second study done in 2016. (30 people)
"After the eight-week diet, volunteers had reduced the amount of fat in their liver and pancreas. This helped to restore their insulin production and put their Type 2 diabetes into remission. Three months later, some had put weight back on, but most still had normal blood glucose control.

An MRI scan of the liver shows high levels of fat in green (left) and a sharp decrease in liver fat achieved using a low-calorie diet (right)
Another study, published in 2016, confirmed these findings and showed (in 30 people) that Type 2 diabetes could be kept in remission six months after the low-calorie diet was completed. It also suggested that the diet was effective in people that had had Type 2 diabetes for up to 10 years."

 

[Biggles2]

In my case, I had been doing LCHF since 2013 with reasonable weight loss - 3 stone, 1 pound (43 pounds) over an 18 month period. My HBA1c's were in the 30's/5's on 2gms Metformin/day.

Fast forward to early 2015 when I was hospitalized for one week with flu/pneumonia/sepsis. Over the course of a week, I lost 1stone 4lbs (19 lbs) due to the hypercatabolic state of acute illness. That rapid weight loss seemed to trigger a much more sensitive metabolic response which I attribute (rightly or wrongly) to a rapid decrease in pancreatic and liver fat while rapidly losing weight. Over the course of the next six months I lost an average of 2 pounds per week continuing the same LCHF diet I had been on previously.

My weight eventually stabilized at 9 stone 0 lbs in September 2016 and has remained stable since then, all the while continuing the exact same LCHF diet that I had been on previously. I am in remission, off all meds since March 2016, and continue on LCHF (approx. 30 grams CHO/day). I think of my one week of rapid weight loss as my ND equivalent. However, I also know that I have not reversed my condition; I only have it well controlled.

 

[Oldvatr]

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Researc...t/Research-spotlight-low-calorie-liquid-diet/
This describes the success of the 11 out of 40 who completed the first diet and the success of 100% 0f the people in the second study done in 2016. (30 people)
"After the eight-week diet, volunteers had reduced the amount of fat in their liver and pancreas. This helped to restore their insulin production and put their Type 2 diabetes into remission. Three months later, some had put weight back on, but most still had normal blood glucose control.

An MRI scan of the liver shows high levels of fat in green (left) and a sharp decrease in liver fat achieved using a low-calorie diet (right)
Another study, published in 2016, confirmed these findings and showed (in 30 people) that Type 2 diabetes could be kept in remission six months after the low-calorie diet was completed. It also suggested that the diet was effective in people that had had Type 2 diabetes for up to 10 years."

I think this DUK take on the success of the diet does not tie up with the actual report findings, as published in another thread. I mean DUK was funding it, so no doubt want to bang their drum louder than anyone else, but it is a reported fact that the second study was only 29 not the 30 claimed by DUK since one participant was excluded due to problems with doing the diet properly in the first week. The second study only had 11 out of the 29 that were still in remission after 6 months which by my reckoning works out at 38% success rate. @bulkbiker was it you that shared that report? I do not have a copy since it is not something I intend to do at present and my current interest is academic only. However, the MRI scans were what I found to be exciting, Even 38% is a good improvement for sustained remission

 

[Daibell]

I've been following chat about the ND on this and other forums for a year or two now and I still can find no reason why it works as well as simply having low-carb/higher-fat diet. The ND has had a lot of publicity and air time and no doubt does help reduce stored fat and weight but I would expect a low-carb diet to achieve the same results and probably better and I'm not aware that Prof Taylor has carried out tests to directly compare the two diet approaches i.e. low-calorie versus low-carb. I also don't understand why the ND guys talk about it reducing liver fat/size. I'm sure it does that but visceral fat is stored around many organs so why this focus on the liver? Why not just say it reduces visceral fat? I'm uncomfortable that DUK are involved in this as they have always been anti a low-carb diet so I see this as a way of avoiding a direct turn-round on this stance.

 

[serenity648]

Logically, eating 800 cals a day would reduce our blood sugar levels anyway, wouldnt it? so maybe how its made up isnt critical.

 

[Fleegle]

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.

 

[Fleegle]

Logically, eating 800 cals a day would reduce our blood sugar levels anyway, wouldnt it? so maybe how its made up isnt critical.

I don't think so would it - what 800 calories of rice, or potatoes - or sweet things? No that would send your blood sugar up wouldn't it? It would mine.

 

[serenity648]

I don't think so would it - what 800 calories of rice, or potatoes - or sweet things? No that would send your blood sugar up wouldn't it? It would mine.

but the 800 cal ND diet is aimed at people who eat far more than 200g of carbs a day. And realistically, people wouldnt eat only plates of plain boiled rice or plain spud or bread with nothing on it, would they.

so the 800 cals a day diet, regardless of the proportion of macros, is going to work for most people. And while the focus is on the ND, the prospect of proper tests and trial of LC (I dont put HF as i dont think the term gets used in the way it is meant to) are being deflected.

 

[LittleGreyCat]

I've been following chat about the ND on this and other forums for a year or two now and I still can find no reason why it works as well as simply having low-carb/higher-fat diet. The ND has had a lot of publicity and air time and no doubt does help reduce stored fat and weight but I would expect a low-carb diet to achieve the same results and probably better and I'm not aware that Prof Taylor has carried out tests to directly compare the two diet approaches i.e. low-calorie versus low-carb. I also don't understand why the ND guys talk about it reducing liver fat/size. I'm sure it does that but visceral fat is stored around many organs so why this focus on the liver? Why not just say it reduces visceral fat? I'm uncomfortable that DUK are involved in this as they have always been anti a low-carb diet so I see this as a way of avoiding a direct turn-round on this stance.

The focus on the liver is because of the origins of the ND.

The diet was originally designed to significantly reduce the size of the liver to enable bariatric surgery. An oversize liver was making access to the stomach difficult or impossible.

The study was because the team noted that some diabetics showed signs of reversal prior to the surgery, instead of only after it as was expected.

So the ND is a liver shrinking diet that has unexpected side effects.

 

[Fleegle]

but the 800 cal ND diet is aimed at people who eat far more than 200g of carbs a day. And realistically, people wouldnt eat only plates of plain boiled rice or plain spud or bread with nothing on it, would they.

so the 800 cals a day diet, regardless of the proportion of macros, is going to work for most people. And while the focus is on the ND, the prospect of proper tests and trial of LC (I dont put HF as i dont think the term gets used in the way it is meant to) are being deflected.

I personally think that is a sweeping statement on those on the trial. It is a bit tabloid to say what everyone on the ND is or isn't. And your post asked the question wouldn't 800 calories lower your BG and I was simply pointing out it depends what you eat. I myself am on the ND diet and I can assure you that I do not eat any of those things you list above. And in any case, even if it were true shouldn't we embrace something you say would work?

Why is it you think that LCHF is being missed or as you say deflected. There are plenty of research grants out there - plenty of new DRs keen to make their name. I ask myself the question all of the time - why is it not a single research fellow in the entire world has done a proper control based research into LCHF (MF, LF) diet? I don't think it is a conspiracy.

Do you think it is a conspiracy?