Low Carb Vs Low Animal Fat Debate

I think it depends on where the funding for the sites comes from.

Personally low fat didn't suit me at all. I was hungry all the time and despite sticking to a diet I put on weight.

Low carb gives me better blood glucose figures and I have lost weight and I am rarely hungry (I have just had 'breakfast' and it's 17:00 hours here. )

Regardless of any "expert" opinions either way, eating a high carboydrate diet for several years made me very fat, lethargic, completely brain fogged, and probably helped cause my diabetes. Cutting right down on the carbs and eating a sensible amount of animal and full fat foods very quickly rid me of these symptoms, lowered my glucose to pre-diabetic levels, and reduced my weight. The results speak for themselves, so I definitely know which type of diet is best for me.

Robbity

Hello and welcome to the forum.

Perhaps the recent results from Virta Health would be of interest to you.
All I can tell you as a n=1 is that carbohydrates are plentiful in plants, especially the starchy vegetables and it is the carbs in our diet that raises blood glucose levels so I have cut drastically the number of carbs in my diet. To replace the fuel from carbs I have a higher level of healthy fats including all meat fat and dairy. My HbA1c and my daily blood glucose levels have improved, I have lost visceral fat and ectopic fat and my overall health has improved. My lipids are great, in my opinion.

If you are looking to chose a new approach then you are wise to research all avenues. Good Luck.

daljitscheema said:

Thanks Zand/Robbity - These are impressive HBA1C numbers and after trying the low fat, very little animal products for 12 months, i did lose weight but HBA1C did not see much improvement...So I may try the low carb approach as next move...I think if you promote reduction of animal products you are definitely going against the grain in terms of funding since the farming/diary lobby is so strong hence why I was intrigued by so many leading US cardiologist backed that approach with credible evidence....

Click to expand...

hmm I expect the US grain industry has a lot to do with that.....

Oh and I forgot to say 'welcome to the forum'

It seems to be a very interesting conundrum.
Extremes of diet at both ends are meant to help with Type 2 either extremely low fat (and therefore by default higher carbs). Or higher fat and by default lower carbs.
The way I look at it (with my admittedly biased hat on) is that there are no essential carbs but we cannot live without some fat and protein. Therefore if restricting anything I personally would restrict carbs.
Anecdotally on this site we find a lot of people reporting great results when following a restricted carb regime. There appear to be far fewer doing the same for a WFPB way of eating. This may of course be because they are elsewhere so we never get to hear from them. And of course it is possible to be a low carb vegetarian.. I am trying to think of a meal for my nephew who is trying to do a vegetarian keto regime... any help gratefully appreciated! So I think it probably makes sense to try one and if results aren't good then try the other.
For me I knew that I was extremely unlikely to survive on a WFPB diet so didn't try it and just ate the food I loved but cut carbs to a bare minimum. Luckily it worked for me.
Those are just my random thoughts on the subject..
I did read an interesting article about why the different approaches could both be valid but for the life of me I can't find it sorry...

This was posted just minutes after you posed your question.

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/two-new-award-nominations-for-low-carb-program.154500/

For me it’s not really a debate. Low carb and enough fat and protein for me not to being hungry has saved my life.
I have lost 60 pounds. Normal BG numbers and I have Energy to live a productive life.

I started low carb eating the night I was diagnosed in May 2017. I have in the last 14 months lost 6 stone and kept my HbA1c at non diabetic levels for the last 9 months. I think you really have nothing to lose by giving it a try. Yes my cholesterol levels deteriorated initially but are now improving again

Rachox said:

deteriorated

Click to expand...

I think you mean your ratios changed,...? maybe? just a bit...

bulkbiker said:

I think you mean your ratios changed,...? maybe? just a bit...

Click to expand...

Yes depends how you look at it. The ratios initially changed for the worse but my last test although the total was the same the ratios were better. Next test next week so hoping for further improvement

Hi @daljitscheema welcome to the group. I'm also type 2. I started Low Carb High Fat (LCHF) 3 months ago. My HbA1c was 82 blood glucose 16.6 and weight 157kg. My diabetes check yesterday came back at HbA1c 41 blood glucose at 4.7 averaged over 30 days and 4 stone lighter! So its worked for me. Give it a go and good luck.

Hi, very low carb, higher fat (saturated only) has changed my life drastically.
I have a condition like some T2s that cannot tolerate carbs.
Avoiding these foods is crucial to my future health.
I eat a balanced diet of mainly protein, meat and other, with salad vegetables most days. Eggs and other sources of healthy foods that suit my taste, ethnicity and availability!
I cannot tell you what will work for you, only the premise that for nearly twenty years, I have tried every diet, that exists and some that I made up! Only this diet that worked for me.
Diabetes or other conditions that you may have, is so individual, you have to find out if you can tolerate a certain amount of carbs or only adjust your healthy diet by eating less and doing more exercise.
I have lost a lot of weight and have never been as healthy as I am now.
It is what you put into your body that dictates your own individual balanced diet to give you your really good future health.

Best wishes.

A few weeks ago I was convinced LCHF / Keto was the way to go due to the research I have been exposed to for several years. I know that low fat can reverse diabetes also if it is adhered to; but after listening to "The Big Fat Surprise", I will not give low fat the time of day or another minute of research ever. What a shambolic experiment we have been put to just due to low fat reducing LDL (so...what).

The global decision to back low fat has a foundation of sand, actually this is too good as sand at least has substance. It is not so much the concept of low fat, it has been the vegetable oil hydrogenation, trans fats and aldehydes by products, just so that chips can be fried, biscuits and cakes can made to taste similar to how they used to be with saturated fats in days gone by. Each time big food has been forced to make a change, what legacy to billions have they left behind. The latest (which they don't have to advertise) is in the form of interesterified fats to reduce rancidity in vegetable oils. If something needs rancidity lowered should it be anywhere near our food supplies. Seriously if you saw that word on a label of cooking oil would you put it in your basket or put it back on the shelf - this is 90 to 100 years of experimentation, and as low fat tracks with high sugar I would select low carb in 100% of cases, I care nothing for PHD's, MD's, ...ologists who are on the side of low fat if they still support the low fat mantra when confronted with the history and now present - even is Denmark, oil concoctions have been formulated, it took around 30 years for "us" to find out the damage trans fats cause.

The beauty of Freestyle Libre Flash Glucose Meter is that it clearly show that animal fats and proteins don't raise glucose...