• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Newcastle diet starting Monday, done it once who gonna join me on my journey??

I thought Prof T recommended 15% or 20% weight loss, I can't remember which now. Where has 25% come from? Is there some more recent advice?

I'm very recently diagnosed and currently LCHF and am losing weight but am considering the ND in the future. Very much doubt I could lose 25% though - that would make me half a stone lighter than when I was 20 and there was not an ounce of fat on me!
 
This chap lost about 43% of his body weight (from his highest level - not necessarily all of it on the ND) - but this seems extreme.
 
Week 6 completed.
Total weight lost 17.8 kilos.
Not seeing 5's at all even after 1 hour of shake. At 2 hours I am about 4.2 4.3 and fasting all in 4.
Finishing the diet on 12th and DN appointment on 14th. Waiting for the torture to finish but I have lately started finding it easier no cooking no thinking what to cook all the time and no dishes :)
I think I will miss the ease of it once I am off it and by ease I mean the points I wrote above and not that it's easy to do.
 
And of course everybodys favourite - Dr Fung - gives loads of examples of people who drop large amounts - suggesting in most cases more than 15%.

But - everyone is different! Some cases were reversed with far less weight loss.
 
brettsza said:
So what bmi did you actually come to?
Click to expand...
Steve50 said:
So what percentage of your weight was 25kg? I'm asking because Prof T suggests a 25% weight reduction for reversal.
Click to expand...
I am 80kg now at 5'11 so bmi 24.8 (so I started at around 105kg loss of 26% body weight)
However I kept records of weight, waist size and bp so if I go back to after I finished the diet (2013) I actually lost another 4kg to 76kg (and waist size of 85cm )over the next year. However I was still out of the normal range( Hba1c at this time was 42 and fasting was around 6)
Then in 2014 I started a bodyweight exercise regime of pull ups, push ups and burpees every day. I put on weight up to 83kg but a lot of that was muscle. I then checked my bloods, at this weight, and fasting under 5, Hba1c 36. I have now cut down again to 80kg and waist 85cm again but am 4kg heavier than before at this waist size.#
Another interesting fact I bought a viseral fat monitor and, although I suspected it would not be too accurate, when I was 76kg it consistently put my viseral fat at 14 (which is high). My wife and her mother used it also and it put their viseral fat at 2 and 1. Now I have started using it again after I started exercise regime it has put my viseral fat at 10 then 9 and this week 8 which is in the "normal range".
Hopefully you can get some info from those ramblings ,sorry, was just writing as it came to me :)
 
trotskyite said:
I am 80kg now at 5'11 so bmi 24.8 (so I started at around 105kg loss of 26% body weight)
However I kept records of weight, waist size and bp so if I go back to after I finished the diet (2013) I actually lost another 4kg to 76kg (and waist size of 85cm )over the next year. However I was still out of the normal range( Hba1c at this time was 42 and fasting was around 6)
Then in 2014 I started a bodyweight exercise regime of pull ups, push ups and burpees every day. I put on weight up to 83kg but a lot of that was muscle. I then checked my bloods, at this weight, and fasting under 5, Hba1c 36. I have now cut down again to 80kg and waist 85cm again but am 4kg heavier than before at this waist size.#
Another interesting fact I bought a viseral fat monitor and, although I suspected it would not be too accurate, when I was 76kg it consistently put my viseral fat at 14 (which is high). My wife and her mother used it also and it put their viseral fat at 2 and 1. Now I have started using it again after I started exercise regime it has put my viseral fat at 10 then 9 and this week 8 which is in the "normal range".
Hopefully you can get some info from those ramblings ,sorry, was just writing as it came to me :)
Click to expand...
What you say is interesting but I lost a lot of weight in 4 months I was undiagnosed so should I take25 percent of my weight before diagnosis or after as the difference between two was massive. I definitely can't loose 25% of at my diagnosis as I was healthy bmi at that time but I lost during the time I was undiagnosed.
 
I lost about 18kg over 6 months prior to going onto the ND. So with that - added to my current weight loss on the ND is about 21% of my original weight. But I thought the point of the rapid weight loss (as opposed to the slower, more gradual weight loss) was to mimic bariatric surgery and effect targeted weight loss from the liver and pancreas. I would not be able to lose 25% of my weight on starting the ND - that would put me at 19.8bmi - or the lower end of 'normal'.
 
brettsza said:
What you say is interesting but I lost a lot of weight in 4 months I was undiagnosed so should I take25 percent of my weight before diagnosis or after as the difference between two was massive. I definitely can't loose 25% of at my diagnosis as I was healthy bmi at that time but I lost during the time I was undiagnosed.
Click to expand...

If I was to give you advice I would 100% use waist size, and forget bmi and weight, as it correlated much closer to body fat levels. For example an average 20year old reaches 60years they will lose 50% muscle and are now 60% fat but have identical weight and bmi.
I would read this website as it gave me a lot of info about that and metabolic problems http://www.myhealthywaist.org/
You can read it as a patient or a doctor/pro so it has all levels knowledge.
Also if you accept prof T personal fat threshold theory the only way we can tell how well we are doing , at home, is to monitor fasting bloods. As I believe this highly correlates to how insulin resistant (ie fat) your liver is. The way I did it was when I got to a consistent 5, fasting,I went into gp and got Hba1c and then I was in normal range ie 36 and have stayed there since.
 
Steve50 said:
I lost about 18kg over 6 months prior to going onto the ND. So with that - added to my current weight loss on the ND is about 21% of my original weight. But I thought the point of the rapid weight loss (as opposed to the slower, more gradual weight loss) was to mimic bariatric surgery and effect targeted weight loss from the liver and pancreas. I would not be able to lose 25% of my weight on starting the ND - that would put me at 19.8bmi - or the lower end of 'normal'.
Click to expand...
Just to mention that is not the amount you have to lose on this diet it is only the average amount that was lost that showed a reversal but the average bmi at starting was 31 which is obese. There are stories all over the web about people esp Asians that get type2 at a low bmi and only have to lose a few kilos to reverse it. Also if you read prof taylor it is nothing really to do with the rate of loss it is just the loss you have to worry about he said any diet that promotes weight loss will work.
 
I would be underweight but if I am not wrong it says 20 to 25percent of pre diagnosis weight. But I lost so much just before diagnosis, if I take my first weight when I was not diagnosed I would have lost 25 percent may be more.
 
"This suggests that body mass index, or BMI — a measure of weight compared with height — is an inaccurate predictor of diabetes risk. Instead, your risk depends on how well your body can store fat.

And this fat may not be visible on our hips or tummy — but would be inside our organs.

Crucially, seemingly healthy-weight people can have a high amount of fat in their internal organs.

The theory is that diabetes is triggered by fat clogging the liver and pancreas, which are crucial for producing insulin and controlling blood sugar.

But it seems some people are more likely to store fat around these organs — and the likelihood of doing this is independent of weight.

In the medical breakthrough, scientists, led by Roy Taylor, professor of medicine and metabolism, have found evidence suggesting anyone — even if they are normal or low weight — can become diabetic despite thinking they eat healthily and do enough exercise."



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...o-defence-against-diabetes.html#ixzz3YgnkdXJw
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
T

I started at 110kg - or 30.7bmi. Today I am 87.2 or 24.4bmi. So I have a bit more to go to match your achievement. I am hoping to effect reversal - so my target is 82.5. How many inches/cm's did you lose in waist measurement?
 
Steve50 said:
T

I started at 110kg - or 30.7bmi. Today I am 87.2 or 24.4bmi. So I have a bit more to go to match your achievement. I am hoping to effect reversal - so my target is 82.5. How many inches/cm's did you lose in waist measurement?
Click to expand...
I was measured at gp sometime in the year before at 110cm but I'm not sure where he measured?I myself was measuring midway between the bottom rib and the top of hip which is 85cm but I have read lately it is more accurate around the belly button just above the hip bone if I measure that it is 94cm. But I went from 43inch jeans to 30inch jeans which i think sounds better lol
 
trotskyite said:
"This suggests that body mass index, or BMI — a measure of weight compared with height — is an inaccurate predictor of diabetes risk. Instead, your risk depends on how well your body can store fat.

And this fat may not be visible on our hips or tummy — but would be inside our organs.

Crucially, seemingly healthy-weight people can have a high amount of fat in their internal organs.

The theory is that diabetes is triggered by fat clogging the liver and pancreas, which are crucial for producing insulin and controlling blood sugar.

But it seems some people are more likely to store fat around these organs — and the likelihood of doing this is independent of weight.

In the medical breakthrough, scientists, led by Roy Taylor, professor of medicine and metabolism, have found evidence suggesting anyone — even if they are normal or low weight — can become diabetic despite thinking they eat healthily and do enough exercise."
Click to expand...
This is exactly my case. I am now try to gain weight to i can do ND. I am only 63 KGs, very slim. Even though i lost like 5-6 KGs due to diabetes in last 4-5 months. During my liver test my doc did tell me I had a fatty Liver of Grade one. This kind of reinstated my faith in Prof Taylor's observation.
 
mohanankur said:
This is exactly my case. I am now try to gain weight to i can do ND. I am only 63 KGs, very slim. Even though i lost like 5-6 KGs due to diabetes in last 4-5 months. During my liver test my doc did tell me I had a fatty Liver of Grade one. This kind of reinstated my faith in Prof Taylor's observation.
Click to expand...
It would be a very bad idea to gain weight to go on the nd. You are actually on the high side of normal bmi (see below). Metabolic syndrome kicks in at a much lower bmi than european bmi scale.
The whole point of the diet is to lose fat from the liver and pancreas this happens because you are eating less than you need. The first store of fat that is used to fuel your calorie deficit is in your liver it is there, from an evolutionary point of view, to get you up and about while fasted to search for food. The problem with a lot of people now is they never use this fat so it constantly increases fuelled by huge modern consumption of fructose, alcohol, trans fats, branch-chain amino acids etc coupled with low levels of activity which is also visceral fat burning.
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal.htm
"Some people can tolerate a BMI of 40 or more without getting diabetes. Others cannot tolerate a BMI of 22 without diabetes appearing, as their bodies are set to function normally at a BMI of, say 19. This is especially so in people of South Asian ethnicity."

According to your profile you have a bmi of 21.7 which if you see below the bmi measures for "asian indians" is on the higher side of normal

"BMI or Body Mass Index is a globally acknowledged, scientific method of measuring obesity. Recommended by the WHO (World Health Organization), it is a simple index of weight- for- height, which is used to classify underweight, normal, overweight and obese adults along with their level of associated health risks. It is calculated by dividing the weight in kilograms by the square of an individual’s height in meters. The classification of Underweight, Normal Overweight and Obese according to BMI is given in the table below (Ref: Misra A. Body Composition and the metabolic syndrome in Asian Indians: A saga of multiple adversities. Natl Medical J India 2003;16(1):3-7 )

Classification of adults according to BMI
Classification

Normal range

Normal
18.5 - 22.9
 
trotskyite said:
It would be a very bad idea to gain weight to go on the nd. You are actually on the high side of normal bmi (see below). Metabolic syndrome kicks in at a much lower bmi than european bmi scale.
The whole point of the diet is to lose fat from the liver and pancreas this happens because you are eating less than you need. The first store of fat that is used to fuel your calorie deficit is in your liver it is there, from an evolutionary point of view, to get you up and about while fasted to search for food. The problem with a lot of people now is they never use this fat so it constantly increases fuelled by huge modern consumption of fructose, alcohol, trans fats, branch-chain amino acids etc coupled with low levels of activity which is also visceral fat burning.
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/magres/research/diabetes/reversal.htm
"Some people can tolerate a BMI of 40 or more without getting diabetes. Others cannot tolerate a BMI of 22 without diabetes appearing, as their bodies are set to function normally at a BMI of, say 19. This is especially so in people of South Asian ethnicity."

According to your profile you have a bmi of 21.7 which if you see below the bmi measures for "asian indians" is on the higher side of normal

"BMI or Body Mass Index is a globally acknowledged, scientific method of measuring obesity. Recommended by the WHO (World Health Organization), it is a simple index of weight- for- height, which is used to classify underweight, normal, overweight and obese adults along with their level of associated health risks. It is calculated by dividing the weight in kilograms by the square of an individual’s height in meters. The classification of Underweight, Normal Overweight and Obese according to BMI is given in the table below (Ref: Misra A. Body Composition and the metabolic syndrome in Asian Indians: A saga of multiple adversities. Natl Medical J India 2003;16(1):3-7 )

Classification of adults according to BMI
Classification

Normal range

Normal
18.5 - 22.9
Click to expand...
Hmm. Thanks very much. I never realised they changed these for Indians recently in 2014.

'India's new diagnostic cut-off for the body mass index is 23 kg/m2 as opposed to 25 kg/m2 globally. A person with a body mass index of 23 kg/m2 will now be considered overweight and below 23 kg/m2 as one with normal BMI, unlike the cut-off limit of 25 kg/m2 earlier. "

If ND makes me lose like 10-15 KG, i will tip to the other side of red zone. What confusion.o_O
 
mohanankur said:
Hmm. Thanks very much. I never realised they changed these for Indians recently in 2014.

'India's new diagnostic cut-off for the body mass index is 23 kg/m2 as opposed to 25 kg/m2 globally. A person with a body mass index of 23 kg/m2 will now be considered overweight and below 23 kg/m2 as one with normal BMI, unlike the cut-off limit of 25 kg/m2 earlier. "

If ND makes me lose like 10-15 KG, i will tip to the other side of red zone. What confusion.o_O
Click to expand...

If I were you I would stick to 1200kcaI wouldn't bother thinking about amounts to lose just monitor your fasting bloods, if you can, and when you are in the normal range (below 6?) stop losing weight and up your healthy calories. You probably don't have anywhere near 10kg to lose. Also add some squats and deadlifts to your day and your bmi with shoot up with healthy muscle ;)
 
Back
Top