Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Ask A Question' started by Hooty, May 24, 2019.
Thank you very much, I will take a look at that thread.
Once again thank you for the responses, I have seen that the low carb regime is very successful for many people, but just want to educate myself as much as possible about all options! I have drastically cut down on carbs and started testing my glucose levels but only have 3 days of results so far.
I am mystified as to why (in general) the NHS advice is to eat a broad range of foods including carbs (the nurse I saw advised me to eat whole grain carbs but recommended scones and tea cakes!)... have they actually shown this to be of benefit?
I am even more mystified!
As to why the NHS recommends a diet that is completely at odds with carbohydrate intolerance.. me too..they are slowly showing signs of change but not fast enough for those poor souls already going blind or having limbs amputated due to T2 diabetes.
So glad I found this forum just before diagnosis so I could ignore all the rubbish the nurses told me and put t2 into remission.
As has been reported in the media, there are some diets based on severe calorie restriction such as Newcastle, or the 8 week blood sugar diet from Michael Mosley and others based on slimfast shakes such as the Cambridge Diet. These are not low carb, but do have a good level of scientific / medical success in reducing Insulin Resistance to the point where there are valid claims for remission.
I personally try to follow the Pioppi diet from Dr Aseem Malhotra who is a reknowned cardiologist in the UK - his diet is based on the Mediterranean Diet but with an LC slant, and it works well for me, The Med diet has also been associated with good bgl control, but is not particularly noted for remission success per se.
First thing I learned was that the medical experts were not experts at all.The diet experts are all right here.Listen to them,they are diabetics actually controlling and often putting their diabetes into remission.This forum has changed my life.
The mainstream diet advice comes from 50 years ago with the misguided war on fat.They replaced fats with carbs and sugar.Now we are fat diabetics.
This forum is up to date,filled with open minded people without agendas and folks showing their actual diets (whichever that may be) and actual successful results.
Sorry its offtrack but Hooty asked a very important question that needs answering.
I haven’t heard of the Pioppi diet, something else I’ll read up on, thank you.
These very low calorie diets are low in everything, including carbs. They are bound to be because of the severe calorie restriction.
The carb content of the shakes is designed to be such that ketosis is avoided for most people. It is LC in the strict essence of the definition as being less than 150g per day, but the proponents of these diets are careful to not claim LC status since that would prevent them from being used or recommended by the NHS. So for them LC means strictly Low Calorie.
Edit: The Cambridge Diet has never been marketed as a carb orientated diet, It was very careful not to be shown to be similar to Atkins#1 diet which was out at the same time and collected such a storm of negative connotations. Atkins has since been revamped as an LC diet, but again it is not marketed as such since Low Carb has such a reputation amongst nutritionists - even today,
Not sure it is.. they tested for ketones during the last DiRECT trial...I'm guessing to ensure compliance..?
I have used meal replacement products on a very low calorie diet which have given under 50g of carbs a day, (therefore defined low carb) which is why I haven’t felt like derailing the thread by mentioning it before now.
Certainly in the first one that used Optifast shakes then the Optifast website had a lot on it about it not being a keto diet plan. The Cambridge Diet website had similar statements when I last looked, and it is their shakes being used for Direct#2
Not sure why ND measured ketones, since their report does not seem to mention any conclusions from what I remember of it, I may be wrong, but it did not seem to be important enough to affect the results.
Edit to add: those of us in the know would recognise any of these diets as being essentially LC, but it is the calorie aspects that are being claimed as to why they work,
It was definitely mentioned in one of the tables that they looked at ketone levels but damned if I can find it now..
I have a horrible feeling that these things get edited regularly..
Looking at the DIRECT results pdf it has zero mentions of ketones and only once mentions carb where Taylor states that LC diets are no more effective than HC diets for diabetes control. Their press releases also have zero mentions of either terms and always refer to ND as being Low Calorie.
https://www.directclinicaltrial.org.uk/Pubfiles/Cell Metabolism 2018.pdf
Knew it was there somewhere...
Like I said, non ketogenic diets. In regards to OP, then these plans are being marketed as strictly low calorie, even though we know them to meet the LC definition. The main thing is that they appear to work effectively, and are a viable alternative to LCHF. They are also available through the NHS on prescription, which LCHF is not.
All registering ketones though..? So they were to some extent in ketosis even if starvation.. ?
No. Dietary ketones for ketosis I believe fall in the range 0.5 to 3 mmol/l. The report shows marginal increase in levels from baseline which do not at any time fall into the ketosis range.