Thats just the old rubbish graphic from Phinney.. If you are registering ketones you have to be in ketosis.. its the very definition of the state?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.
I still believe some will enter ketosis at a higher level of carbs than others. If that is true there would be a band of low carb levels over which some would and some would not go into ketosis.Why have ketones been mentioned at all in relation to very low calorie diets? It matters not, in my opinion. People on around 50g of carbs are not usually in dietary ketosis. The carbs need to be lower than that. But 50g carbs is low carb. I still maintain that the ND and similar are low carb by the very nature of the very low calories. If the carbs are high on a daily basis, the protein and fat content must be far too low nutritionally speaking.
http://www.fitbit.com/foods/Optifast+Shake/444987Why have ketones been mentioned at all in relation to very low calorie diets? It matters not, in my opinion. People on around 50g of carbs are not usually in dietary ketosis. The carbs need to be lower than that. But 50g carbs is low carb. I still maintain that the ND and similar are low carb by the very nature of the very low calories. If the carbs are high on a daily basis, the protein and fat content must be far too low nutritionally speaking.
Why have ketones been mentioned at all in relation to very low calorie diets? It matters not, in my opinion. People on around 50g of carbs are not usually in dietary ketosis. The carbs need to be lower than that. But 50g carbs is low carb. I still maintain that the ND and similar are low carb by the very nature of the very low calories. If the carbs are high on a daily basis, the protein and fat content must be far too low nutritionally speaking.
By your reckoning all participants were already in ketosis at baseline, i.e. before they started the diet. This does not make sense to me. but there is likelyhood that many participants had been following a weight loss plan before they started ND. and so would show the evidence as Jim Lahey points out. The main thing is that the diet hardly touched the levels even after 2 years, and show no evidence of diet induced ketosis. Anyway, these diets are NOT being marketed as LC, and no claims for that or ketosis are being made. Thus the OP has an answer that may help them. There are other alternatives too that could be used for bgl control which we have not discussed,Thats just the old rubbish graphic from Phinney.. If you are registering ketones you have to be in ketosis.. its the very definition of the state?
Sounds like you're back to normal...welcome home... xBy your reckoning all participants were already in ketosis at baseline, i.e. before they started the diet. This does not make sense to me. but there is likelyhood that many participants had been following a weight loss plan before they started ND. and so would show the evidence as Jim Lahey points out. The main thing is that the diet hardly touched the levels even after 2 years, and show no evidence of diet induced ketosis. Anyway, these diets are NOT being marketed as LC, and no claims for that or ketosis are being made. Thus the OP has an answer that may help them. There are other alternatives too that could be used for bgl control which we have not discussed,
I still believe some will enter ketosis at a higher level of carbs than others. If that is true there would be a band of low carb levels over which some would and some would not go into ketosis.
3 sachets = 480 calories. Bit low for ND,So, that is 20g carbs per serving. 3 servings a day = 60g (Assuming 3 servings is the recommended amount.)
I agree that some will, but most don't according to reports on this forum. From what I have read up to around 30g is the band, but some will be able to go above that. As with everything else, one size does not fit all. I cannot speak from experience because I have never felt the need to check my ketones and have no idea whether I am in or out, but I did lose all my weight on carbs ranging from about 100g at the start to around 60g by the time I reached my target weight, and my visceral fat measurement was 6. I then dropped to about 30g carbs, maintained my weight, and after 4 and a half years my visceral fat remains at 6. (very occasionally it has been 5). Sadly, I don't know what it was before diagnosis but I did have a large spare tyre!
Don't forget the stir fry veg though...3 sachets = 480 calories. Bit low for ND,
So, that is 20g carbs per serving. 3 servings a day = 60g (Assuming 3 servings is the recommended amount.)
I agree that some will, but most don't according to reports on this forum. From what I have read up to around 30g is the band, but some will be able to go above that. As with everything else, one size does not fit all.
Yes and low carb for some is higher than for others. So to talk in terms of fixed bands isn’t really appropriate.
I had been developing a spare tyre but it is almost gone now. Amazing.
With reference to the opening post, low carbing is not a fixed number. So 130 might be the designated number by those that set the “classes” or dividing lines, but 130 for some would be a lot lower than for others.Low carb is defined at up to 130g, so there is a fixed band. Within that fixed band are very low carb and moderate low carb.
Have you considered some bathroom scales that also measure visceral fat, body fat and other things in addition to weight?
Sorry folks, derailing again.
On the advice (incessent nagging) of my then DN, I tried the Eatwell low fat diet for 6 months and it did not have a beneficial effect on my diabetes, so it was of no benefit to me. I went back on the lowish carb (around 100g a day) medium fat diet and got back to normal levels again within weeks. I was not as confident then and got swayed by the 'experts'Hello,
I’m curious to know if anyone has decided to follow a different diet from the low/reduced carb one, and whether it has had a beneficial effect on pre-diabetes or T2 diabetes. Just intrigued really!
That reminds me. That is what I first tried, for the same reason. It worked but only up to a certain point. After that it stopped. I had to find a way to bring my blood glucose down further and Eatwell did not do that.On the advice (incessent nagging) of my then DN, I tried the Eatwell low fat diet for 6 months and it did not have a beneficial effect on my diabetes, so it was of no benefit to me. I went back on the lowish carb (around 100g a day) medium fat diet and got back to normal levels again within weeks. I was not as confident then and got swayed by the 'experts'
I hope that, as the OP, you have found information that can help you answer your question. There is a very good section on diets on the Forum that can supply detail, but from what I have read here, most of the main contenders for supporting T2D have been discussed here. LC is actually an easy way to go, so do not fear it. It works well for many, me included, and I am so glad I found this website and joined in. In the words of the Commons parlance I commend this statement to the House.Great discussion,learning,THANK YOU!
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?