"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.
"Studies" these pieces of pop science carry as much weight as "supersize me"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.
so was the idea that stomach ulcers were NOT caused by bacteria, until the studies caught up with reality and facts."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.
This is the very antithesis of the scientific method.
Science isn't broken, people's interpretation of it is.
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
until it isn't because we learn more, understand more, ask different questions.It's established scientific consensus.
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.How do you explain the results of the kempner diet then
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.
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.
Adoption of western liftstyles the maim driver.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.
not proven, a theory yes, but not proven.Adoption of western liftstyles the maim driver.
Eating more, moving less, eating less traditional foods, drinking, etc.
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.
That is review of diet effectiveness IN DIABETICSUNLESS you are a diabetic. Have you understood that yet?
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.
The irony here is strong.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 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.
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.So how do they not apply to you?
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)stomach ulcers
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
The irony here is strong.
Those trials are in those with diabetes. So how do they not apply to 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?