Links to studies supporting Low Carb/showing calorie restriction ineffective?

[ATZ]

Is your hypothesis.
Overeating studies where excess energy is taken in without increasing exercise such as those carried out by Sam Feltham and Jason Wittrock with no weight gain demonstrate the lie to this particular piece of your theory.. so like the black swan your hypothesis is denied as being 100% correct.

"Studies" these pieces of pop science carry as much weight as "supersize me"

It's no longer a hypothesis when it's supported by the majority of the data. It's established scientific consensus.

 

[lucylocket61]

"Studies" these pieces of pop science carry as much weight as "supersize me"

It's no longer a hypothesis when it's supported by the majority of the data. It's established scientific consensus.

so was the idea that stomach ulcers were NOT caused by bacteria, until the studies caught up with reality and facts.

I worry that you appear to see things as cast in stone, inflexible, with no room for exceptions and additional conditions which affect the given consensus of information.

 

[Guzzler]

This is the very antithesis of the scientific method.

Science isn't broken, people's interpretation of it is.

For real people, if something works in theory but not in practice, it doesn't work.

For academics, if something works in practice but not in theory, it doesn't exist.

-Taleb.

 

[ATZ]

which specific trials? the rice one?

Shows that that diet is better than the standard dietary advice given to T2's. To be honest, almost anything is better than the Eatwell plate for a T2. It was not a low carb diet, and was to do with inflammation, not blood glucose control.

The control group were given 49% carbs. From the study:

The Ma-Pi 2 diet consisted of whole grains, vegetables, and legumes.The control diet was adapted to the Mediterranean culinary style.

Not the same type of carbohydrates. We all know, on here, that refined carbs spike our blood sugar levels quickly.

https://drc.bmj.com/content/3/1/e000079

So it's a shifting of the goal posts to carb type rather than amount now?

How do you explain the results of the kempner diet then? Using white rice? Doesn't get much more refined than that.

 

[copilost]

It's established scientific consensus.

until it isn't because we learn more, understand more, ask different questions.
It can remain accepted theory but be found to be too limited, doesn't explain everything (physics anyone).
There is a lot of bad science out there both from "pop" science and "establishment" science. Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" is a good read.

 

[lucylocket61]

Its part of the argument about carbs being different to diabetics than to non-diabetics. You say a calorie is a calorie, regardless of where it comes from. I am explaining that, for diabetics, it isnt.

I cannot engage with a closed mind.

 

[copilost]

How do you explain the results of the kempner diet then

I wouldn't "explain" them, I'd try to understand them in context with other evidence. It's not a battle, it's a constant quest to understand, which we will always fail. There are some interesting discussions around what's happening in China and the diabetes epidemic, people who have eaten high carb rice diets are suddenly developing diabetes. No one knows why. It isn't obviously linked to obesity, these people are healthy normal weights. Asians and diabetes is a hot topic.

 

[ATZ]

The Ma-Pi 2 diet, linked upthread also consisted of 25 diabetics, over 21 days, with no differentiation or mention of how many were on oral meds and how many were diet control. There were 26 non diabetics.

Also I couldnt see a chart/graph or similar for the results for their weightless, blood glucose levels after, or any follow up after the initial 21 days for either group, so a link to that would be helpful.

Are you kidding? It's all there in the link, fully documented.

Overweight or obese (BMI 27–45 kg/m2) males and females, aged 40–75 years affected by type 2 diabetes were recruited by the medical team during regular visits to the Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes of the University Campus Bio-Medico in Rome, Italy. Additional inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes at least 1 year prior to the start of the trial and management with dietary intervention, oral hypoglycemic drugs (OADs), or both for 6 months prior to study entry.

A significant reduction was observed in both groups for FBG and for PPBG. The reduction in PPBG (p = 0.035) levels was significantly greater in patients in the Ma-Pi 2 group compared with those in the control group.

See the images attached. It's all there in the link

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4190933/

 

[ATZ]

I wouldn't "explain" them, I'd try to understand them in context with other evidence. It's not a battle, it's a constant quest to understand, which we will always fail. There are some interesting discussions around what's happening in China and the diabetes epidemic, people who have eaten high carb rice diets are suddenly developing diabetes. No one knows why. It isn't obviously linked to obesity, these people are healthy normal weights. Asians and diabetes is a hot topic.

Adoption of western liftstyles the maim driver.

Eating more, moving less, eating less traditional foods, drinking, etc.

 

[copilost]

Adoption of western liftstyles the maim driver.

Eating more, moving less, eating less traditional foods, drinking, etc.

not proven, a theory yes, but not proven.

 

[ATZ]

Its part of the argument about carbs being different to diabetics than to non-diabetics. You say a calorie is a calorie, regardless of where it comes from. I am explaining that, for diabetics, it isnt.

I cannot engage with a closed mind.

Please tell me where I've stated that a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from?

As a unit of measurement it's always a calorie.

But different foods have different hormonal effects. Again, this does not invalidate energy balance or themodynamics.

 

[ATZ]

UNLESS you are a diabetic. Have you understood that yet?

That is review of diet effectiveness IN DIABETICS

 

[Brunneria]

If that was universally the case how to you explain the efficacy of the two high carb diet examples I posted in treating T2D?

Fat is only "laid down" when there is an excess of energy present. So while insulin resistance can make things more difficult you cannot get fat without over eating.

What on earth makes you think I was trying to say anything was universal?

And your two high carb studies are of absolutely no relevance to me and my body. My body hasn’t tolerated high carb for 30? 40? years. What happens to people who can tolerate high carb is probably useful to them - for as long as they continue with that tolerance.

There is no point endlessly regurgitating the same study links when they do not apply to so many of us.

As for laying down fat... my statement about ketones obviously didn’t register with you.
How can you claim to have views based on unbiased science, when you refuse to appreciate the personal variation of circumstances between individuals?

 

[ATZ]

What on earth makes you think I was trying to say anything was universal?

And your two high carb studies are of absolutely no relevance to me and my body. My body hasn’t tolerated high carb for 30? 40? years. What happens to people who can tolerate high carb is probably useful to them - for as long as they continue with that tolerance.

There is no point endlessly regurgitating the same study links when they do not apply to so many of us.

As for laying down fat... my statement about ketones obviously didn’t register with you.
How can you claim to have views based on unbiased science, when you refuse to appreciate the personal variation of circumstances between individuals?

The irony here is strong.

Those trials are in those with diabetes. So how do they not apply to you?

 

[ATZ]

And here's a pretty strong point to consider.

The most effective diet ever studied in treatment of T2D, isn’t even low in carbs - at least not as a percentage of its calories.

It’s the very-low-calorie diet used by Dr. Roy Taylor at Newcastle University in the U.K. Volunteers with type 2 diabetes ate just 800 calories a day for several months, with the goal of losing at least 30 pounds.

Their success rate was extraordinary, in large part because it addresses the underlying issue: the accumulation of fat around the pancreas, liver, and muscle tissue. Visceral fat is always the first to be lost on any diet so an aggressive strategy like this resolves that quickly.

The total energy intake was thus around 2.93 MJ (700 kcal)/day. A relatively high sugar content was necessary for palatability, but this did not prevent normalisation of fasting plasma glucose within 7 days despite withdrawal of oral hypoglycaemic agents.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00125-017-4504-z

And:

https://www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal/#overview

 

[copilost]

So how do they not apply to you?

because there is still so much we don't know so that a diabetic might not be the same as a diabetic, this isn't a difficult or indeed unusual concept in medicine.

 

[copilost]

for schizophrenia two people can share the same diagnosis and not have one single symptom in common, it's a measure of our current limitations not denial.

 

[copilost]

stomach ulcers

this is a really interesting one, because the theory wasn't popular with the establishment in the end the researchers ended up testing on themselves (sound familiar)

 

[Guzzler]

And here's a pretty strong point to consider.

The most effective diet ever studied in treatment of T2D, isn’t even low in carbs - at least not as a percentage of its calories.

It’s the very-low-calorie diet used by Dr. Roy Taylor at Newcastle University in the U.K. Volunteers with type 2 diabetes ate just 800 calories a day for several months, with the goal of losing at least 30 pounds.

Their success rate was extraordinary, in large part because it addresses the underlying issue: the accumulation of fat around the pancreas, liver, and muscle tissue. Visceral fat is always the first to be lost on any diet so an aggressive strategy like this resolves that quickly.


https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00125-017-4504-z

And:

https://www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal/#overview

Pay close attention to the inclusion parameters.Then search (this could take a while) for the drop out rates of each phase.
Prof. Taylor's work has been discussed on the forum ad nauseum and yes, some people do well on it but imo Virta trumps Cambridge on IP and on drop out rates.

 

[Brunneria]

The irony here is strong.

Those trials are in those with diabetes. So how do they not apply to you?

And that is the root of the problem.

You are so limited in your perspective that you cannot see what you are being told, over and over again on this thread (and everywhere else on the forum, if you go and look).

The thing that unites diabetics is that they got diagnosed as having high blood glucose, and given a label of ‘Diabetic’. With the likely addition of a secondary label, ‘type 1’, ‘type 2’, ‘type 3’ (there are lots of those), ‘insipidus’, ‘bronze’, etc.

These types of D are fundamentally different. In their physical manifestation (autoimmune, insulin resistance, alpha and/or beta cell damage, or total pancreatic failure, AVP/ADH hormones being wonky, damaging levels of ferritin, etc.), and their treatment (insulin, diet, exercise, oral meds, phlebotamy, etc).

The thing that makes every diabetic an individual within those groups, is that each has a personal experience, based on the individual way that their body is failing. No two type 1s have the same experience, from each other, from yesterday, from tomorrow. Every day an adventure. Each type 2 has a different carb tolerance, level of insulin resistance, reaction to different foods, to medication... The variation is endless.

Your belief that there are universal rules that apply to everyone is... well, actually, it is betraying your lack of understanding of ‘diabetes’ with every post.

You have people posting on every side, trying to explain this, but you reject what they are saying. Over and over again.

So the carb tolerating diabetics in that study are not relevant to me. My body doesn’t tolerate carbs. Thats a fundamental difference, right there. A high carb diet would send me into a cycle of hypers and hypos and i would have been expelled from the study by day 3. Actually, I would have walked out as soon as I got ill, or been excluded from the study before it started.

These studies have stringent selection processes and I would have been weeded out as soon as they discovered my reaction to carbs and my other health issues. It is a common feature of these studies that they are only as good as their selection process. Just as Professor Taylor’s Newcastle Diet studies select their participants.

You did know that, didn’t you? That the ND pre-study selection process weeded out large numbers of ‘unsuitable’ diabetics? Rejecting those with longer term diagnoses, those who did not have a BMI high enough, and those with other health issues and co-morbidities. Yet even then, the participants did not all respond in the same way. The non-responders seem to be swept aside, with all the focus being on the responders.

I would not even have got through the ND selection process (no point in trying to defat a liver that doesn’t have fat in it, is there?).

So no, those high carb studies you mention are of no relevance to me. Just as the ND is of no relevance to me.
Or to many of the other people posting on this thread who are banging their heads against the wall of your faith in science and its universal application.