If you control type 2 diabetes with diet do you lose weight on a low-carb diet (no medicine).

[LittleGreyCat]

Hi

That is why you lose weight. You put out insulin to process protein otherwise you have a build of ammonia and you die. The insulin doesn't know that it is only supposed to process protein it changes some of your blood sugar into fat. Then your body is not happy with the lower blood sugar and the liver changes fat into sugar. This process uses a lot of energy and you lose weight.

Do you have any scientific references for this?

It all sounds very made up.

Edit: I probably missed this, but have you had a genetic screening test to establish which genes you actually have? Have all the others who you claim have the same gene also had genetic testing?

 

[Resurgam]

As I have clever scales I can tell that one reason for my not losing much weight at the moment is that I am building muscle - I am dancing and playing a melodeon, which is quite a workout every day of the week.
As the weight I want to lose is the fat, I am perfectly happy to allow my body to change rather than insisting on weight reduction being the only option.

 

[LittleGreyCat]

I'm not sure where you're going with this? My understanding is insulin is produced in response to elevated glucose levels. Excessive carboyhdrate consumption obviously leads to higher blood glucose, and then insulin stimulates storage in lipocytes. The counterpart is glucagon, which stimulates conversion of fats and protein into glycogen and then glucose via gluconeogenesis.

So to lose weight, ideally we want to reduce carbohydrate intake to stimulate gluconeogenesis so the body uses up it's own fat reserves. So for T2's, that generally means cutting the carbs, and keeping an eye on fat & protein consumption depending on whether you're going for weight loss, or weight maintenance.

I'm not sure that fat is a major player in gluconeogenesis; I think it mainly features protein.
At one time it was claimed that glucose -> fat was a one way pathway but recently it has been claimed that there is a less favourable pathway where the glycerol part of triglycerides can be reprocessed into glucose when the triglycerides are broken down. Takes a lot of energy, though.

The most I can find about the role of insulin in gluconeogenesis is that it works with glucagon to control gluconeogenesis. Insulin and glucagon are the two hormones which are supposed to balance our blood glucose levels by stimulating or preventing the production of glucose from the liver. My guess is that glucose is released from the store in the liver, and if the body calls for more then gluconeogenesis is fired up in the liver to produce more.

I think "reduce carbohydrate intake to stimulate gluconeogenesis so the body uses up it's own fat reserves" is not really correct. My understanding is that when we go very low carbohydrate the body turns to burning fat directly for energy (so we lose weight) and have a very low need for glucose - some brain functions and blood cells mainly. Protein mainly is used to via gluconeogenesis to maintain the level of glucose in the blood, along with the few carbohydrates in the diet.

There is no requirement to convert fat to glucose; the body can burn fat directly. One of the main points of keto adaptation for athletes is that the body does not require glucose for energy so it in turn does not rely on the very limited glucose store in the body, but instead can use the virtually unlimited fat store. So no "wall" at 20 miles in a marathon.

One message from all this is if you are very low carbohydrate and running on fat, then any protein not needed directly for maintenance of muscles will be fed through gluconeogenesis and turned into glucose. This in turn means that if you eat a lot of protein you will produce a lot of glucose, which will be stored as fat.

This is why LCHF should be 80% fat, 15% protein and 5% carbohydrates. This is also probably one reason why I am not losing weight at the moment.

One reason why weight plateaus could be the reduction of Insulin Resistance as you lose weight. Once you are down to your fighting weight and have reduced IR to normal or near normal levels then any little indulgence, such as a few carbohydrates or a bit too much protein, will be easily stored as fat. Your body is running very efficiently and needs very little glucose because it is burning fat so any small excess gets tucked away back in the fat cells.

I think that we are training our bodies to be far more energy efficient which means that we need less and less food. So the main aim is to eat nutrient dense foods which provide all the essential vitamins and minerals and fat for fuel, plus a bit of protein to maintain muscles.

 

[Lamont D]

The op has reactive hypoglycaemia and his theory is tied into his hunter or thrifty gene theory, he is trying to find a reason why he has RH. He has tried many times on many threads for anyone with an example of someone with the same gene.

I have stopped losing weight because my body has adapted to a very low carb diet and I have found my balance.

I don't eat a lot and I use intermittent fasting regime, my body just doesn't need a lot of food.
I do not have this gene!
RH is not caused by genetics, otherwise why would you develop it in later life, you do get childhood hypoglycaemia but majority of children grow out of it, young adult especially males do not get RH!
There are symptoms of RH in gestational diabetes, and some women develop the condition after. But it is symptomatic with pregnancy, not the condition that I have developed.

If it was genetic, my relatives would develop it and RH would be widespread amongst the population, but none of my large family has it, a few have been checked. That is why it is a relatively rare condition especially in men.

Hope that helps

Best wishes

 

[first14808]

I'm not sure that fat is a major player in gluconeogenesis; I think it mainly features protein.

I know it's wiki, but:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis

So can be fat or protein.

Takes a lot of energy, though.

That can be a good thing, if the objective is fat loss

The most I can find about the role of insulin in gluconeogenesis is that it works with glucagon to control gluconeogenesis. Insulin and glucagon are the two hormones which are supposed to balance our blood glucose levels by stimulating or preventing the production of glucose from the liver. My guess is that glucose is released from the store in the liver, and if the body calls for more then gluconeogenesis is fired up in the liver to produce more.

Yup, the way I look at it is they're opposing processes, so insulin when glucose levels are high, glucagon when low with the liver/pancreas trying to keep an optimal level.. Which in our case isn't working properly. When it is, we're an awesome chemical refinery that can convert different resources into things the body needs, or save them for later.

So immediate stuff is circulating glucose, then if there's excess, conversion and storage to short-term glycogen in liver & muscles, and long-term in lipocytes.. Which is the bit insulin encourages, and we resist. Then if we need energy, glycogenolysis converts the glycogen in muscles & liver to glucose. And if we need more, then glucagon stimulates gluconeogenesis

I think "reduce carbohydrate intake to stimulate gluconeogenesis so the body uses up it's own fat reserves" is not really correct. My understanding is that when we go very low carbohydrate the body turns to burning fat directly for energy (so we lose weight) and have a very low need for glucose - some brain functions and blood cells mainly. Protein mainly is used to via gluconeogenesis to maintain the level of glucose in the blood, along with the few carbohydrates in the diet.

It's how the body burns fat directly, and something we want to do in preference, after all lipocytes are our long-term energy stores. There's debate around what/how lipocytes are triggered to release lipids, and personally I'm not convinced it's adrenaline because that process would seem a bit slow in a 'fight or flight' situation. Makes more sense to me to be part of the insulin/glucagon routine.

One message from all this is if you are very low carbohydrate and running on fat, then any protein not needed directly for maintenance of muscles will be fed through gluconeogenesis and turned into glucose. This in turn means that if you eat a lot of protein you will produce a lot of glucose, which will be stored as fat.

And it all gets very complicated, ie keto's a whole different set of pathways. Plus there's the difference between how we digest what we eat, and what our bodies then do with it.

This is why LCHF should be 80% fat, 15% protein and 5% carbohydrates. This is also probably one reason why I am not losing weight at the moment.

Have you tried adjusting it so you have more protein and less fat? I've been doing that mainly to slow muscle loss. Seems to be working for me, and as it's the Friday weigh in tomorrow, can add some graphs showing how that's been going if you're interested.

One reason why weight plateaus could be the reduction of Insulin Resistance as you lose weight. Once you are down to your fighting weight and have reduced IR to normal or near normal levels then any little indulgence, such as a few carbohydrates or a bit too much protein, will be easily stored as fat. Your body is running very efficiently and needs very little glucose because it is burning fat so any small excess gets tucked away back in the fat cells.

Yup. Insulin resistance is something I don't really understand.. But from past training experiences, it's certainly the two phased approach, ie what we need to do to lose weight, then to maintain it. And I'm kinda hoping insulin resistance sorts itself out along the way

 

[bulkbiker]

One message from all this is if you are very low carbohydrate and running on fat, then any protein not needed directly for maintenance of muscles will be fed through gluconeogenesis and turned into glucose. This in turn means that if you eat a lot of protein you will produce a lot of glucose, which will be stored as fat.

I'm not sure that this is entirely correct. I have recently been reading that GNG is more demand driven so that if your body needs the glucose it will create it from protein otherwise excess protein gets excreted. This certainly seems to be the case with me as I am a protein guzzler but it doesn't seem to boost my sugars and I am the same weight as I have been for the past 6 months. At the moment it seems to be a bit up in the air.

 

[LittleGreyCat]

I know it's wiki, but:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis

So can be fat or protein.
<snip>

"In humans the main gluconeogenic precursors are lactate, glycerol (which is a part of the triacylglycerol molecule), alanine and glutamine. Altogether, they account for over 90% of the overall gluconeogenesis."

So the only component from fat is the glycerol from triglycerides for 90% of gluconeogenesis.

A while since I read up about this, but in the diagram I think the fats go in at the bottom which is a longer pathway requiring more energy and so is not the preferred pathway.

I may be reading it wrong, but I think it is saying that nearly all gluconeogenesis uses protein.

 

[deb1960]

My head is spinning with all this conflicting information. I'm not sure what is the best way to lower bs and lower weight.

 

[kokhongw]

My head is spinning with all this conflicting information. I'm not sure what is the best way to lower bs and lower weight.

Generally lowering BS is relatively simple. Reduce carbs. 100g/day is a good start. Adjust up or down accordingly with your post meal glucose reading.

Haven't had significant weight loss over the 2yrs plus. So can't share much on that.

 

[LittleGreyCat]

My head is spinning with all this conflicting information. I'm not sure what is the best way to lower bs and lower weight.

Prioritise lowering BG.
One good way is to reduce carbohydrates which turn to glucose.
Once you have stable BG in the pre-diabetic or non-diabetic range, then fine tune to lose weight.
You may well find that lowering your BG will also take some weight off.

The hard part is when you have lowered your BG and brought your weight down to within "normal" BMI (or whatever your cruising weight happens to be).
Then sometimes extreme measures are required to get more weight off.
Usually a water fast where you drink water and don't eat anything will get some more weight off.
Some people, however, seem to have a metabolism which shuts right down under fasting conditions so that you feel really ill.

 

[first14808]

My head is spinning with all this conflicting information. I'm not sure what is the best way to lower bs and lower weight.

I.. don't think it's conflicting, it's just we're complicated creatures when you dig down into the metabolic detail. Especially as some of it isn't understood completely. For fun, look up 'metabolic syndrome', which is a thing.. but docs aren't entirelly sure what thing, or why it's a thing.

For me, the TL;DR version is go LCHF. Carbs easily convert to blood glucose and you can see that happening if you eat to your meter. Once you get the glucose down, then experiment with how much fat & protein you eat. That takes a bit of time for your body to adjust, but most people here have a lot of success with LCHF.

 

[first14808]

A while since I read up about this, but in the diagram I think the fats go in at the bottom which is a longer pathway requiring more energy and so is not the preferred pathway.

I may be reading it wrong, but I think it is saying that nearly all gluconeogenesis uses protein.

Heh, the way I look at it is I want to be taking the long pathway, ie wasted energy is weight loss. But it's also why I'm sceptical of a 'hunter's gene', especially if it appears to act in a counter-evolutionary way, ie what's the evolutionary advantage of that kind of adaptation? Which I think also applies to general food & fuel strategies, ie when there's a surplus, we lay down fat, when there's a shortage, we use that in preference to proteins. That's also why I think we prefer fats to proteins, ie after a famine, we want to be able to go hunt again, so need to preserve muscle as long as possible.

But we're multi-fuel, so can run off whatever's passed from gut to bloodstream. Or cells to bloodstream, where this is critical:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_oxidation

Which is how our cells get most of their energy, brain excepted because that loves glucose. So LCHF supplies fats and proteins instead of simple carbs, which should give the pancreas an easier time because it's not frantically sending out insulin to try and deal with high BG. Then when there's a glucose deficit, fatty acids feed into gluconeogenesis to convert fats to glucose. So trick is to feed ourselves so we're promoting the use of our own fat reserves.

And I guess the good thing is thinking requires energy, which means the brain's using more glucose, which means thinking about losing weight might actually work. Slightly..

 

[Lamont D]

I.. don't think it's conflicting, it's just we're complicated creatures when you dig down into the metabolic detail. Especially as some of it isn't understood completely. For fun, look up 'metabolic syndrome', which is a thing.. but docs aren't entirelly sure what thing, or why it's a thing.

For me, the TL;DR version is go LCHF. Carbs easily convert to blood glucose and you can see that happening if you eat to your meter. Once you get the glucose down, then experiment with how much fat & protein you eat. That takes a bit of time for your body to adjust, but most people here have a lot of success with LCHF.

I was led to believe that metabolic syndrome was a number of endocrine conditions that could not simply be put in one definitive diagnosis.

And the eventuality diagnosis of T2 (probably!)

 

[Shahnaz2357]

Basically weight loss or specifically fat loss is inversely proportional to the level of circulating insulin. The more insulin we have circulating in our system, the less fat loss.

Given that T2D have elevated insulin response and are typically highly insulin resistant, it takes very little carbs to raise the level of circulating insulin. Hence fats metabolism is inhibited.

The difficulty South Asian/Asian face may be more cultural than genetics. We live in a predominantly high carbs and previously agricultural society that requires hard labour. Now we are urbanized, yet continue with the high carbs diet. It is natural then that we see the growing epidemic that is the result of high insulin levels.

Hello! how did you manage to bring down your HbAic so quickly and every month? I am Asian was diagnosed at HbAic at 7% four months ago am on Glucophage 1000 mg x day which is not helping much.

 

[kokhongw]

Hello! how did you manage to bring down your HbAic so quickly and every month? I am Asian was diagnosed at HbAic at 7% four months ago am on Glucophage 1000 mg x day which is not helping much.

Instead of having a "balanced, healthy eat well plate", simply do the unthinkable...initially remove carbs (rice, noodles, pasta, bread, pizza, cookies, cakes, fruits etc)...eat more proteins and fats...(roast pork belly, cheese, nuts...braised pork belly, avocado, eggs), skip dinners...

Essential rebalance the body by steering it into a more frequent, efficient fasted, fats fueled state rather than a sputtering carbo fueled one.

The blood glucose starts improving within a week...without medication, exercise or will power...