Reply to Thread

Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the Diabetes Forum Survey 2025 »

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chrisjohnh" data-source="post: 2572902" data-attributes="member: 538614"><p>I absolutely agree that 48 is a poor choice of threshold. And of course I acknowledge that reducing carbs can play a major role in weight loss, although I think that in most cases that is mainly because it encourages an overall cals deficit but I recognise that is not the whole story. Yes, the shakes are indeed low carb, in fact low everything. But the suggestion sometimes seen that the shakes reduce weight not by their low cals but by their low carbs was described to me by Taylor and Lean as “mistaken and facile”. Yes, I did do a lot of counting at first but am weaning myself off that as I get better intuition. The absolute priority for me was rapid and substantial weight loss followed by two years of ruthless weight stability, plus a great deal of finger pricking. I truly do not know whether the weight loss was actually necessary for me. Do we see many cases where people have pulled A1c down from, say, 75 to 35 wholly by low carb but with no weight loss? (so, keeping their weight unaltered by eating tons of fat and protein along with their low carbs) If so, that would be game-changing proof that the Newcastle strategy had been entirely misguided from the start. It’s all very unsettled at present, but I do think that newcomers should at least be alerted that there has been some science done on trying to achieve true normalisation, albeit we may pick holes in it, so that they can get an idea of the options.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to Thread