Keto diet not for me

[Goonergal]

There are lots of research papers if you search in an academic database .

For example look at this one :

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=fat+and+insulin+resistance&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=#p=y1p2g8sgX68J


There is lots on mice ( fat induced insulin resistance) and also humans . Look at a more recent one :

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2018&q=high+fat+insulin+resistance&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=#p=n6qVzn6YuRIJ


I suggest you to look at meta analysis. They are more statistically reliable .


Also look at the papers cited at the end of this article ( it itself not peer reviewed but the citations are )

http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/insulin-resistance-a-vicious-circle-of-excess-fat/

Thanks, I’ll have a read later.

 

[Brunneria]

I would discard any studies on mice, even if they seem to support a theory. (Also any study on humans using liquid standardised keto meals, and any keto ‘diet’ rich in veg oils)

poor mice. They get trotted out as examples of why all sorts of things are bad for humans, yet the diets and conditions used on the mice are appallingly wrong for any comparison with any human.

for a start, they are fed standardised ‘lab mouse chow’ containing highly processed ingredients and vegetable oils, added sugars, and so on. Even the ‘keto’ versions bear no relation to the actual food, made with real un-messed-about-with ingredients, that humans (usually) eat when they choose keto. Vegetable oils usually provide the fat content in lab mouse ‘chow’, with highly processed coconut oil providing all the sat fat. I don’t eat that way. Do you?

the mice are also highly bred laboratory strains selectively chosen for hereditary weight gain, and/or insulin resistance, and/or other genetic tendencies. Or whatever traits the researchers are looking for.

if I am going to be compared to a mouse, it would need to be one with a family history of gluten intolerance, arthritis, and gut problems, plus a generations long history of v late onset T2 (mice are culled at the end of every experiment so researchers never see the old ages of their charges), and that mouse should have a lifelong carb intolerance AND a lifelong history of responding extremely well to very low carb eating. They should have great cholesterol ratios (do mice even have comparable cholesterol ratios?), a zero CAC score, and an insulin resistance level that FALLS on keto, not rises. Because that would reflect me and my body.

once we’ve found about 50 mice like that, we can wait til they hit middle age, and then start the experiment. But we will need to feed them proper food both before and during the experiment. I’m not accepting a comparison unless they are eating human grade food, prepped in a kitchen, with no processed long shelf life ingredients.

oh, and I will need plenty of room for them to move around and exercise to their comfort level, too.

and a spacious comfortable retirement home (my spare bedroom would do, I think) for their old ages, and continued healthy diet.

however, even that experiment would convince me of nothing, unless someone provides me with research demonstrating that mice can naturally eat keto or low carb in their natural habitats. Because humans can. Without that as a starter for 10 on the research, everything would be an utter waste of research money and poor mouse lives.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....n/inside-a-lab-mouses-high-fat-diet-34465/amp

there is an interesting reference in the link above which shows why comparing human and mouse reactions to high fat diets is misleading due to their very different physical reactions (incl weight gain).

ed. For clarity.

 

[Goonergal]

@Winnie-the-Pooh thanks again for referencing these articles. I’ve taken some time to review and very much agree with Brunneria’s views relating to studies on mice and their lack of relevance to humans eating real food in the real world, so I won’t repeat all of that.

I was interested in the last piece you referenced (http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/insulin-resistance-a-vicious-circle-of-excess-fat/) which refers to the links between insulin resistance and fatty liver disease. My reading of this is not that saturated fat, or more specifically the consumption of saturated fat, leads to insulin resistance, rather that insulin resistance is very much associated with fatty liver and high triglycerides.

In my own case, both of these have been reduced on a diet extremely low in carbohydrates and high in red meat and other saturated fat containing animal products.

In turn my insulin sensitivity - measured privately as the test is not available on the NHS - has improved considerably. Full details in this thread: https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/insulin-sensitivity-improvement.167316/

 

[Oldvatr]

I would discard any studies on mice, even if they seem to support a theory. (Also any study on humans using liquid standardised keto meals, and any keto ‘diet’ rich in veg oils)

poor mice. They get trotted out as examples of why all sorts of things are bad for humans, yet the diets and conditions used on the mice are appallingly wrong for any comparison with any human.

for a start, they are fed standardised ‘lab mouse chow’ containing highly processed ingredients and vegetable oils, added sugars, and so on. Even the ‘keto’ versions bear no relation to the actual food, made with real un-messed-about-with ingredients, that humans (usually) eat when they choose keto. Vegetable oils usually provide the fat content in lab mouse ‘chow’, with highly processed coconut oil providing all the sat fat. I don’t eat that way. Do you?

the mice are also highly bred laboratory strains selectively chosen for hereditary weight gain, and/or insulin resistance, and/or other genetic tendencies. Or whatever traits the researchers are looking for.

if I am going to be compared to a mouse, it would need to be one with a family history of gluten intolerance, arthritis, and gut problems, plus a generations long history of v late onset T2 (mice are culled at the end of every experiment so researchers never see the old ages of their charges), and that mouse should have a lifelong carb intolerance AND a lifelong history of responding extremely well to very low carb eating. They should have great cholesterol ratios (do mice even have comparable cholesterol ratios?), a zero CAC score, and an insulin resistance level that FALLS on keto, not rises. Because that would reflect me and my body.

once we’ve found about 50 mice like that, we can wait til they hit middle age, and then start the experiment. But we will need to feed them proper food both before and during the experiment. I’m not accepting a comparison unless they are eating human grade food, prepped in a kitchen, with no processed long shelf life ingredients.

oh, and I will need plenty of room for them to move around and exercise to their comfort level, too.

and a spacious comfortable retirement home (my spare bedroom would do, I think) for their old ages, and continued healthy diet.

however, even that experiment would convince me of nothing, unless someone provides me with research demonstrating that mice can naturally eat keto or low carb in their natural habitats. Because humans can. Without that as a starter for 10 on the research, everything would be an utter waste of research money and poor mouse lives.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....n/inside-a-lab-mouses-high-fat-diet-34465/amp

there is an interesting reference in the link above which shows why comparing human and mouse reactions to high fat diets is misleading due to their very different physical reactions (incl weight gain).

ed. For clarity.

I totally agree with you on this one having drawn the same conclusions from other studies I also evaluated.

I would add that most of the academic papers are starting with the assumption that there seems to be a direct connection between body fat in humans, and insulin resistance. I do not dispute that since this is exactly what was proven by Prof Taylor in the Newcastle Diet study. Remove the adipose fat by weight loss, and the insulin resistance improves significantly. Evidence supported by specialist MRI scans and direct correlation esatablished.

What is the area of conention that we see in the academic world is whether the eating of fat especially saturated fat, has the causitive effect of inducing diabetes and insulin resistance. In other words, does fat make you FAT? There have been some good studies recently that have demonstrated that there is no correlation between eating fat and adding adipose fat cells, which debunks the old nutrition advice given to us by the HCP's and which upports the Low Fat theory behind the Eatwell guide.

The couple of studies that were in that impressive list that I did read all agreed that removing adipose fat has the correlation that it directly reduces IR, which we have also discussed in the forum in relation to the ND diet. So far their findings are consistent with a keto diet as a means of fat reduction. When using keto diet methods, the body is encouraged to burn adipose or lipid fat thus reducing IR and improving bgl control. We have many posters on the forum giving testament to this from their own experience. There are others using variants of the Newcastle Diet or Cambridge Plan, and others using fasting with low carb (non keto) diets. These all seem to be valid means of achieving the same successful outcome, so none of those dietary methods is at odds with the academics from what I can see. I will need to read and evaluate the papers in more detail to see if any support the fat => FAT causation, but I suspect I will find that we have the same problem with mice experiments being a poor vehicle to use as 'proof' that humans would react in the same way as pointed out by Brunneria

In conclusion, I find the meta analysis reserch done last year is based on human guinea pigs, and is more relevant to us here.

Edit to add: the statistics from WHO show that as saturated fat consumtion has reduced since the 1960's. so the incidence of T2D has increased. The two trends are in juxtapostion to each other, and this is a pretty strong indication that the Fat => FAT theory is not supported in humans.

 

[Oldvatr]

I totally agree with you on this one having drawn the same conclusions from other studies I also evaluated.

I would add that most of the academic papers are starting with the assumption that there seems to be a direct connection between body fat in humans, and insulin resistance. I do not dispute that since this is exactly what was proven by Prof Taylor in the Newcastle Diet study. Remove the adipose fat by weight loss, and the insulin resistance improves significantly. Evidence supported by specialist MRI scans and direct correlation esatablished.

What is the area of conention that we see in the academic world is whether the eating of fat especially saturated fat, has the causitive effect of inducing diabetes and insulin resistance. In other words, does fat make you FAT? There have been some good studies recently that have demonstrated that there is no correlation between eating fat and adding adipose fat cells, which debunks the old nutrition advice given to us by the HCP's and which upports the Low Fat theory behind the Eatwell guide.

The couple of studies that were in that impressive list that I did read all agreed that removing adipose fat has the correlation that it directly reduces IR, which we have also discussed in the forum in relation to the ND diet. So far their findings are consistent with a keto diet as a means of fat reduction. When using keto diet methods, the body is encouraged to burn adipose or lipid fat thus reducing IR and improving bgl control. We have many posters on the forum giving testament to this from their own experience. There are others using variants of the Newcastle Diet or Cambridge Plan, and others using fasting with low carb (non keto) diets. These all seem to be valid means of achieving the same successful outcome, so none of those dietary methods is at odds with the academics from what I can see. I will need to read and evaluate the papers in more detail to see if any support the fat => FAT causation, but I suspect I will find that we have the same problem with mice experiments being a poor vehicle to use as 'proof' that humans would react in the same way as pointed out by Brunneria

In conclusion, I find the meta analysis reserch done last year is based on human guinea pigs, and is more relevant to us here.

Edit to add: the statistics from WHO show that as saturated fat consumtion has reduced since the 1960's. so the incidence of T2D has increased. The two trends are in juxtapostion to each other, and this is a pretty strong indication that the Fat => FAT theory is not supported in humans.

Looking at this study from the list provided by @Winnie-the-Pooh
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0197458005002770
The answer is clear in the opening paragraph of the Abstract. The title is stating high fat is to blame, but the abstract clearly states in at least 2 places that it is the ingestion of glucose that has correlation with impaired cognitive function in older people. So I think this study is irrelevant to this topic

 

[Lotties]

I would discard any studies on mice, even if they seem to support a theory. (Also any study on humans using liquid standardised keto meals, and any keto ‘diet’ rich in veg oils)

poor mice. They get trotted out as examples of why all sorts of things are bad for humans, yet the diets and conditions used on the mice are appallingly wrong for any comparison with any human.

for a start, they are fed standardised ‘lab mouse chow’ containing highly processed ingredients and vegetable oils, added sugars, and so on. Even the ‘keto’ versions bear no relation to the actual food, made with real un-messed-about-with ingredients, that humans (usually) eat when they choose keto. Vegetable oils usually provide the fat content in lab mouse ‘chow’, with highly processed coconut oil providing all the sat fat. I don’t eat that way. Do you?

the mice are also highly bred laboratory strains selectively chosen for hereditary weight gain, and/or insulin resistance, and/or other genetic tendencies. Or whatever traits the researchers are looking for.

if I am going to be compared to a mouse, it would need to be one with a family history of gluten intolerance, arthritis, and gut problems, plus a generations long history of v late onset T2 (mice are culled at the end of every experiment so researchers never see the old ages of their charges), and that mouse should have a lifelong carb intolerance AND a lifelong history of responding extremely well to very low carb eating. They should have great cholesterol ratios (do mice even have comparable cholesterol ratios?), a zero CAC score, and an insulin resistance level that FALLS on keto, not rises. Because that would reflect me and my body.

once we’ve found about 50 mice like that, we can wait til they hit middle age, and then start the experiment. But we will need to feed them proper food both before and during the experiment. I’m not accepting a comparison unless they are eating human grade food, prepped in a kitchen, with no processed long shelf life ingredients.

oh, and I will need plenty of room for them to move around and exercise to their comfort level, too.

and a spacious comfortable retirement home (my spare bedroom would do, I think) for their old ages, and continued healthy diet.

however, even that experiment would convince me of nothing, unless someone provides me with research demonstrating that mice can naturally eat keto or low carb in their natural habitats. Because humans can. Without that as a starter for 10 on the research, everything would be an utter waste of research money and poor mouse lives.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....n/inside-a-lab-mouses-high-fat-diet-34465/amp

there is an interesting reference in the link above which shows why comparing human and mouse reactions to high fat diets is misleading due to their very different physical reactions (incl weight gain).

ed. For clarity.

Years ago (and can't find it now) I found a paper detailing a enzyme deficiency (totally missing) in the biochemical chain required in the insulin receptor chain to send the GLUT4 transporter to the cell wall in white adipose tissue in a very popular mouse strain, the John Hopkins Mouse. Pictures of this mouse's liver were published in the popular press to evidence the bad effects of triglycerides in the blood. Bad science but still cited without re-evaluation... apparently.

 

[Winnie-the-Pooh]

Well I just picked a few random papers out of an ocean of papers.

I just did a quick search on Google Scholar. I have not read the papers, and don’t plan to. I don’t doubt that fat can cause insulin resistance.

So don’t need to examine the papers . If I had doubts, I would be reading every paper on it . So I appreciate you might be skeptical.

I think as humans most people like to think they have made right choices in everything ( as simple as their choice of mobile phones , to real estate investments , diets etc ) . So they can get very defensive or emotional about it . But I don’t have any attachment to any diet , I just follow my doctor advice if it makes sense to me .

In this case , it does . Since two endocrinologists , one nephrologist and one dietitian have told me that fat can cause insulin resistance .

Also I have seen various studies about the link between belly fat and DT2. I know liver can turn fat to glucose and I know that fat can cause metabolic disorder . I also know that fat increases the risk of diabetes and many people with diabetes are overweight and also losing weight can help with diabetes . Also fat can lead to cardiovascular issues . So all of this is good enough to avoid too much fat .

I’m not saying keto diet is good or bad. I don’t know. As for me, I know it’s not for me and the hype about it does not come with enough scientific evidence so I care about it enough to research it further .

Weblogs , you tube videos , books , and lectures are NOT evidence because they are not peer double blind reviewed .

So while I read books , I don’t believe what is written in them unless the person who has written them is a professor in the same area in a prestigious university , and does active research publications in that area and parts of her book is also published in her papers and it is well cited .

I know good science when I see it , being a trained scientist myself. Most of the books on diets , are commercial and are there for commercial reasons ( to sell products , get fame , sell books , get paid invited lectures etc).

Anyway , be alert about books you read. I see ppl with a phd in chemistry , write a book on diet . That is not how science works . I have a phd in some sort of statistical inference . I can only have opinions in that sub area of statistics and nothing else. I stay clear of other areas I don’t have a phd in.

But with diet , it is a money maker so there are lots of ideas that are not fully tested and their side effects on different organs are not yet fully known. It’s scary how many people get their science from media . So please think twice if you commit to a diet that is not supported by your specialists and get several opinions ( from people who at least have a phd or MD in a relevant area ).

 

[HSSS]

I just did a quick search on Google Scholar. I have not read the papers, and don’t plan to.

I just follow my doctor advice if it makes sense to me .

As for me, I know it’s not for me and the hype about it does not come with enough scientific evidence so I care about it enough to research it further .

these statement are entirely at odds with the one below

I know good science when I see it , being a trained scientist myself.

fat can cause insulin resistance.

two endocrinologists , one nephrologist and one dietitian have told me that fat can cause insulin resistance .

So all of this is good enough to avoid too much fat .

add the word body or belly and that’s correct. Not dietary fat. Unfortunately
same word different thing entirely

the link between belly fat and DT2

. Ah now you have it

I know liver can turn fat to glucose

by what process is that please?

 

[lucylocket61]

Fat on our bodies, and the fats we eat, are two entirely different things.

The fats we eat do not necessarily turn into body fat.

 

[bulkbiker]

t the link between belly fat and DT2

Belly fat caused by de novo lipogenesis from an over consumption of carbohydrate. That allied with visceral fat probably down to over consumption of fructose is what leads to T2.

Consumption of dietary fat doesn't make you fat.

The keto diet works by stopping overproduction of belly and visceral fat by limiting carbs and by allowing the body to burn fat for energy. That s why we get lower blood sugars and sometimes dramatic weight loss.

 

[Oldvatr]

Well I just picked a few random papers out of an ocean of papers.

I just did a quick search on Google Scholar. I have not read the papers, and don’t plan to. I don’t doubt that fat can cause insulin resistance.

So don’t need to examine the papers . If I had doubts, I would be reading every paper on it . So I appreciate you might be skeptical.

I think as humans most people like to think they have made right choices in everything ( as simple as their choice of mobile phones , to real estate investments , diets etc ) . So they can get very defensive or emotional about it . But I don’t have any attachment to any diet , I just follow my doctor advice if it makes sense to me .

In this case , it does . Since two endocrinologists , one nephrologist and one dietitian have told me that fat can cause insulin resistance .

Also I have seen various studies about the link between belly fat and DT2. I know liver can turn fat to glucose and I know that fat can cause metabolic disorder . I also know that fat increases the risk of diabetes and many people with diabetes are overweight and also losing weight can help with diabetes . Also fat can lead to cardiovascular issues . So all of this is good enough to avoid too much fat .

I’m not saying keto diet is good or bad. I don’t know. As for me, I know it’s not for me and the hype about it does not come with enough scientific evidence so I care about it enough to research it further .

Weblogs , you tube videos , books , and lectures are NOT evidence because they are not peer double blind reviewed .

So while I read books , I don’t believe what is written in them unless the person who has written them is a professor in the same area in a prestigious university , and does active research publications in that area and parts of her book is also published in her papers and it is well cited .

I know good science when I see it , being a trained scientist myself. Most of the books on diets , are commercial and are there for commercial reasons ( to sell products , get fame , sell books , get paid invited lectures etc).

Anyway , be alert about books you read. I see ppl with a phd in chemistry , write a book on diet . That is not how science works . I have a phd in some sort of statistical inference . I can only have opinions in that sub area of statistics and nothing else. I stay clear of other areas I don’t have a phd in.

But with diet , it is a money maker so there are lots of ideas that are not fully tested and their side effects on different organs are not yet fully known. It’s scary how many people get their science from media . So please think twice if you commit to a diet that is not supported by your specialists and get several opinions ( from people who at least have a phd or MD in a relevant area ).

As a fellow scientist and engineer, I try to make sure that when I post a link to scientific research that I have read the article and made sure that the paper is from a valid source, is reputable, and is relevant to the points being made. I think we owe this to those forum members who are seeking information, and will possibly propagate the information to others assuming it to be valid. Just because it is listed in google scholar does not provide that assurance. Many online sources make money by being open source, where anyone can publish for a price. The Lancet used to be a reputable source, but now sadly has gone open source, and is no longer one that I feel comfortable citing. Most of the ones you found in your Google search are also from open source media outlets, and so are to be viewed in that light.

You state as a fact that fat can cause metabolic disorder. I put it to you that this is an opinion you hold, but are you so sure that the adipose fat does not follow as a consequence of T2D? is the horse being put before the cart? As a statistician, you should also have some opinion of the statistical method used by Ancel Keys in his treatise on the benefits of low fat diets on heart health, and how that compares to the modern studies that Dr Aseem Malhotra (who ia an eminent cardiologist) is using when he supports LC diets. The ADA who use evidence based science are now also supporting those diets for diabetic control in the USA.

I have no problem with you saying keto is not for you. It is not for me either. But I can support those that want to do it, and I have updated my science knowledge accordingly.

 

[Winnie-the-Pooh]

As a fellow scientist and engineer, I try to make sure that when I post a link to scientific research that I have read the article and made sure that the paper is from a valid source, is reputable, and is relevant to the points being made. I think we owe this to those forum members who are seeking information, and will possibly propagate the information to others assuming it to be valid. Just because it is listed in google scholar does not provide that assurance. Many online sources make money by being open source, where anyone can publish for a price. The Lancet used to be a reputable source, but now sadly has gone open source, and is no longer one that I feel comfortable citing. Most of the ones you found in your Google search are also from open source media outlets, and so are to be viewed in that light.

You state as a fact that fat can cause metabolic disorder. I put it to you that this is an opinion you hold, but are you so sure that the adipose fat does not follow as a consequence of T2D? is the horse being put before the cart? As a statistician, you should also have some opinion of the statistical method used by Ancel Keys in his treatise on the benefits of low fat diets on heart health, and how that compares to the modern studies that Dr Aseem Malhotra (who ia an eminent cardiologist) is using when he supports LC diets. The ADA who use evidence based science are now also supporting those diets for diabetic control in the USA.

I have no problem with you saying keto is not for you. It is not for me either. But I can support those that want to do it, and I have updated my science knowledge accordingly.

If you or me don’t have a phd or MD in relevant science , our opinion about medical papers is not to be trusted . So neither me nor you can or should judge a scientific paper in an area outside our field .

If you have a phd ( it is a must), you “might” be able judge if the whole experiment “seems” scientifically sound in general but still you won’t know all of the parameters and factors and data dependencies that are left out . If you are good at statistics , you will get a general idea if it’s a good science or not. That is all.

So my advice is , let people read papers for themselves , make conclusions for themselves and be accountable for their decisions if they choose to ignore expert advice .

Meantime , no I don’t want to waste my time researching something several trusted experts were in agreement about . If anyone has doubt , they can read papers . I provided paper samples as I was asked. Reading medical papers is very easy compared to many fields so everyone can try it as long as they have some pointers on where to search for them . There is an ocean of papers .

You are more than welcome to do your search and come up with your conclusion but pls be careful about suggesting that an engineer knows medicine better than general public. You don’t and I don’t.

Either you have a phd in this area or you don’t . Academic authority is binary not fuzzy . That is why people need to get a license . There is no such a thing as half a license or half an authority in science . A phd is a license to have opinion .

I have written papers with many hundreds of citations , still I don’t feel comfortable with judging a paper that is not in my own area .

But as a general observation, medical papers are extremely poor in their statistical analysis . Very poor . It does not mean that the conclusions are right or wrong . It simply means , for a statistically informed outsider, it is very hard to be convinced in either way . Experts however , have education, meta data and experience and can rely on their gut feeling to judge . We don’t . You don’t and I don’t .

So my short answer is several specialists ( with Phd or above ) that I trust from reputable universities whose job is to take care of diabetic patients told me that fat causes insulin resistance.
That is good enough evidence for me to avoid fat . I spend my time researching things I have doubt about . Not this one. I understand there are lots of papers in this area if I ever decide to research it . But keto diet is not mentally stimulating for me to waste my time on.

 

[bulkbiker]

So my short answer is several specialists ( with Phd or above ) that I trust from reputable universities whose job is to take care of diabetic patients told me that fat causes insulin resistance.

They are wrong but...
However you have your diabetes they probably don't so if you want to put it into remission I'd suggest that some research could be time very well spent. Maybe also taking the advice of those who have been there and done it?
It is after all your health not that of the authorities you defer to.

 

[Oldvatr]

If you or me don’t have a phd or MD in relevant science , our opinion about medical papers is not to be trusted . So neither me nor you can or should judge a scientific paper in an area outside our field .

If you have a phd ( it is a must), you “might” be able judge if the whole experiment “seems” scientifically sound in general but still you won’t know all of the parameters and factors and data dependencies that are left out . If you are good at statistics , you will get a general idea if it’s a good science or not. That is all.

So my advice is , let people read papers for themselves , make conclusions for themselves and be accountable for their decisions if they choose to ignore expert advice .

Meantime , no I don’t want to waste my time researching something several trusted experts were in agreement about . If anyone has doubt , they can read papers . I provided paper samples as I was asked. Reading medical papers is very easy compared to many fields so everyone can try it as long as they have some pointers on where to search for them . There is an ocean of papers .

You are more than welcome to do your search and come up with your conclusion but pls be careful about suggesting that an engineer knows medicine better than general public. You don’t and I don’t.

Either you have a phd in this area or you don’t . Academic authority is binary not fuzzy . That is why people need to get a license . There is no such a thing as half a license or half an authority in science . A phd is a license to have opinion .

I have written papers with many hundreds of citations , still I don’t feel comfortable with judging a paper that is not in my own area .

But as a general observation, medical papers are extremely poor in their statistical analysis . Very poor . It does not mean that the conclusions are right or wrong . It simply means , for a statistically informed outsider, it is very hard to be convinced in either way . Experts however , have education, meta data and experience and can rely on their gut feeling to judge . We don’t . You don’t and I don’t .

So my short answer is several specialists ( with Phd or above ) that I trust from reputable universities whose job is to take care of diabetic patients told me that fat causes insulin resistance.
That is good enough evidence for me to avoid fat . I spend my time researching things I have doubt about . Not this one. I understand there are lots of papers in this area if I ever decide to research it . But keto diet is not mentally stimulating for me to waste my time on.

But you are posting in and commenting on a subthread that is specific about keto diet. You have tried to blind us with science, and that I question, and I do not need a PhD to say "What????"

You say you have not read these reports so do not actually know what they say, merely that they have PhD after their name. Sorry that does not float my boat. At least I have read most of those reports. They do not in my opinion support the argument you were presenting to us.

 

[WackyJacky64]

Hi, I too cannot do keto after 11 months made me feel nauseous all the time , I felt weak and had pain in my joints. I don't have the health problems you do with your kidneys, but I do know that when i stopped keto I felt instantly well and the nausea went. I cannot slate keto though because it dropped my A1c from 106 down to 59 in 11 weeks, I am grateful for it and for the help from this forum .

I now have between 80 and 130 g of carbs daily and blood sugars are normal , apart from when I am sick with a cold .

How long have you been changed from keto to 90 g carbs a day and do you feel any better ?

 

[Resurgam]

I was told that the high carb low fat diet was responsible for my normal blood glucose and reduced cholesterol levels, despite my having changed to low carb some months earlier - delayed reaction, I was told.
I ate the normal fat associated with the meat and fish, plus cream and olive oil in moderation. I was 'a very bad diabetic' on the low fat diet - now I am at the top end of normal.
My response to carbs now seems normal - I stash them away as fat - which is usual for me.
Surely that is all contrary to the concept of fat causing insulin resistance?

 

[Winnie-the-Pooh]

But you are posting in and commenting on a subthread that is specific about keto diet. You have tried to blind us with science, and that I question, and I do not need a PhD to say "What????"

You say you have not read these reports so do not actually know what they say, merely that they have PhD after their name. Sorry that does not float my boat. At least I have read most of those reports. They do not in my opinion support the argument you were presenting to us.

I did not know science can blind ppl ( it used to be a thing if middle ages) or you are not capable of reading and deciding for yourself so having some links upsets you . I just sent you some links to scientific papers. Read or don’t . I don’t care .

So here is my suggestion , eat your fat , practice your keto diet religion. But don’t preach your keto religion to others without license . You can hurt other people . You can only report your observation and self experience. Not more .

It is not ethical if a person (having no expertise) , continue giving medical advice against experts or undermine and deny what others have experienced or heard from their medical team.

And yes you need a phd to prove your expertise . If your boat does not float with the foundation of academic institution, then maybe you need to repair it . If you had a phd , you knew phd was more than a title. Clearly you don’t .

And yes I continue to post my personal on keto diet so ppl know my experience and they can help me and I can help them , so you MUST learn to cope with it . We are here to help each other not to be fanatic about a diet and get to petty religious wars about it.

Giving medical advice without a license in some countries is a crime and that is why I don’t fall into trap of supporting or rejecting any diet .

That is exactly why I posted published papers and let ppl to read it. That is exactly why I did not reject or support keto diet and instated I don’t know. That is exactly why I only reported back what my medical team told me. And nothing more.

Because I am intelligent enough not to cross that line. Don’t cross your line . People here are to get help and share their experience, not to be preached and pushed into worshiping fat !


Edit : as for you question about “what” ?

You need a relevant phd to 1- assess papers or properly understand them , 2- question expert advise ( several experts ) and 3- decide if a diet is good or bad .
I hope your boat starts to float and if it does not, you are an engineer, you should be able to fix it and leave medicine to scientists .
If me just doing a quick search and send some links and general search tips to a stranger so they take it from there and look into it for themselves without wanting to get involved with the conclusion , hurts you so much , maybe you should think before posting ( put it mildly ).

 

[Winnie-the-Pooh]

They are wrong but...
However you have your diabetes they probably don't so if you want to put it into remission I'd suggest that some research could be time very well spent. Maybe also taking the advice of those who have been there and done it?
It is after all your health not that of the authorities you defer to.

That is not how science works . Telling me my medical team is wrong and suggesting to ignore my whole medical team is way out of the line.

Do you think reading a few blogs and papers and popular science books give ppl the right to say experts are wrong ?

A sub specialist has gone to school and university for 26 years ( I have one in my family ), plus seeing thousands of patients and spending hundreds of hours talking to other experts, attending conferences , workshops and seminars . Think about it. It’s a life work . Now they are all wrong and you are right and we are supposed to take medical advice from strangers on internet ? Or push strangers to give us medical advice ?

The goal of diabetic treatment is not just to reduce blood sugar . It is to protect all of the body , kidney , liver , other organs , cardiovascular system, help the general wellbeing of a patient and reduce the risk of long term damage . It’s critical .

We should do what our medical team asks us to . However , we can exchange our personal experience and support each other to learn how to live with diabetes . That is all we can and should do . We are not here for medical advice . That is not our job.

Scientific authority is not institutional authority you can revolt against . It is earned and rightly so. It is the core of human civilization.

 

[Winnie-the-Pooh]

Hi, I too cannot do keto after 11 months made me feel nauseous all the time , I felt weak and had pain in my joints. I don't have the health problems you do with your kidneys, but I do know that when i stopped keto I felt instantly well and the nausea went. I cannot slate keto though because it dropped my A1c from 106 down to 59 in 11 weeks, I am grateful for it and for the help from this forum .

I now have between 80 and 130 g of carbs daily and blood sugars are normal , apart from when I am sick with a cold .

How long have you been changed from keto to 90 g carbs a day and do you feel any better ?

I’m sorry you had so much pain.

Yes , I had pain in my joints too and my doctor told me it’s because of keto diet . Of course my BG went down but naturally if I don’t eat sugar or carb , it will go down . My suggestion is to see a nutritionist and ask for a diet that matches your system and other medical concerns .

Pls don’t listen to ppl preaching their diet . Just seek expert advise and follow it and report back so we can support each other and get inspiration. I’m much better since I started my own tailored diet . But it might not work for you .

 

[Oldvatr]

I did not know science can blind ppl ( it used to be a thing if middle ages) or you are not capable of reading and deciding for yourself so having some links upsets you . I just sent you some links to scientific papers. Read or don’t . I don’t care .

So here is my suggestion , eat your fat , practice your keto diet religion. But don’t preach your keto religion to others without license . You can hurt other people . You can only report your observation and self experience. Not more .

It is not ethical if a person (having no expertise) , continue giving medical advice against experts or undermine and deny what others have experienced or heard from their medical team.

And yes you need a phd to prove your expertise . If your boat does not float with the foundation of academic institution, then maybe you need to repair it . If you had a phd , you knew phd was more than a title. Clearly you don’t .

And yes I continue to post my personal on keto diet so ppl know my experience and they can help me and I can help them , so you MUST learn to cope with it . We are here to help each other not to be fanatic about a diet and get to petty religious wars about it.

Giving medical advice without a license in some countries is a crime and that is why I don’t fall into trap of supporting or rejecting any diet .

That is exactly why I posted published papers and let ppl to read it. That is exactly why I did not reject or support keto diet and instated I don’t know. That is exactly why I only reported back what my medical team told me. And nothing more.

Because I am intelligent enough not to cross that line. Don’t cross your line . People here are to get help and share their experience, not to be preached and pushed into worshiping fat !

I will try to make this simple to understand, I am not using ketosis or a ketogenic diet but would not be worried if it was. I have not described my diet in this thread, but I have mentioned several that others have found to benefit them in the management of their condition. The diet I follow does have a name, and it happens to be the one recommended by my cardiology team, and also by my GP and HCP's. It is recognised by the NHS and can be prescribed by GP's. It is recognised by the ADA , and the AHA in the US as being suitable for diabetes control.

Please be aware that by trying to tell this thread which is a keto thread that we must follow a low fat diet because your HCP;s say so and then giving a list of googled papers for us to read is like applying a sledgehammer to crack our nuts. It is as if you are trying to mandate it on us, but under cover of the HCPs. BUT the papers you linked in support of your stance do not in effect back you up, but will appear to do so simply by being there in the list. That is deception and I cannot let it go by without passing comment as I have done. What you have done here could also be thought of as dangerous and misleading. I am sure you mean no harm, but please be more careful.

I am a big boy and capable of taking care of myself. Others reading this thread do not have the time or experience to be ablr to give those papers anything more than a cursory glance of the titles perhaps. They will jump to conclusions made on the list only, and not the contents of the list. Human nature. Do NOT assume that everyone will read those papers and make an informed judgement.


Post edited by moderator to remove an expletive.