ventra
Member
- Messages
- 21
- Location
- Huddersfield
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Tablets (oral)
- Dislikes
- No Food
Yeah! Got bored with that!
That's the problem with eating.. it's something we have to do so trying to reduce amounts drastically is hard.
Low carb means you are less likely to get hungry so less likely to want to go "off piste".
Eating mainly fat and protein means you are satiated more easily, stay fuller for longer and brings blood sugars down nicely.
Win, win, win!
I find testing my bg when I eat soon brings my boredom back on track. The spikes when I eat anything off track must be doing me harm, even if I don't get symptom or signs immediately.Yeah! Got bored with that!
Very old thread I realise but do you know where this record of him saying this is please? I’m struggling to find it even though I’ve seen it beforeTaylor has been clear that the method of weight loss is not important.
I know he did say it, but not sure when. I am also not sure he is correct in that. If it was simply weight loss then other diet plans such as WW, Slimming world, South Beach and other vlcal diets would also be able to claim diabetes remission, but all I have seen is a one liner saying to the effect that their diet can reduce blood glucose levels. WW say their plan can help you reach your goals.Very old thread I realise but do you know where this record of him saying this is please? I’m struggling to find it even though I’ve seen it before
I’ve searched a heap of threads and keep seeing references to him saying it but can’t find the actual source. I understand the concepts, I’m just looking for his comments about the method of weight loss used. It may have been on twitter but I‘ve barely ever been on there and simply can’t work out how to search effectively on it. So if anyone fancies a challenge……Have a look at the "Newcastle Diet" thread, all the science behind it is there. When I was 1st diagnoses I used it as a "kick start" lost approx 3stone on the 8week plan, then transitioned to a lower carb WOE. Currently down 5ish stone (10 years on) and HBAc1 slowly (very slowly) coming down, for those of us who experience weight gain as a symptom of insulin resistance it can work, as shifting the visceral fat/liver fat reduces this
I think its national, i would guess it will be those with a high BMi, High HBA1c and on Medication will be the target. They will prob target a mix of age groups but more likely target people who are younger.
I don't think it is nationally available yet. I think they rolled out in places with high rates of diabetes first but I am sure this will follow.Good Morning,
Just been reading about the NHS Shake and Soup plan in this mornings news! Does anyone have any experience of it? How is it going and what sort of GP support is offered?
ATB
Bill
Actually, they have NOT reported remission at 23% after five years.I don't think it is nationally available yet. I think they rolled out in places with high rates of diabetes first but I am sure this will follow.
The Direct study is the evidence base behind the 800 kcal diet and they've just reported 23% remission rate at 5 years. This is comparable to Virta Health (keto). The difference is keto doesn't require nutritional deprivation and starvation! Yes it works but the other implication of dropping calories is that Prof Taylor et al believe you would then need to eat a fairly moderate calorie total for life or you will regain both body fat and diabetes.
The method isn't so much about losing weight but is about the loss of the fat around the pancreas and liver though it could be argued that the maker of visceral fat is a high carb diet (nothing to do with calories other than that if you eat 800 calories you're going to be low carb de facto if you are not just eating crumpets!)
For those that aren't overweight but are type 2 the next research is the Retune research which is hoping to show that a less drastic version of the Newcastle diet will be effective!
Amazing. Thank you. I also found some papers of his saying much the same.
Yep my calculations were similarActually, they have NOT reported remission at 23% after five years.
They have reported that at five years 23%, of the 36% (of the 298 original subjects) who were still in remission after two years, were still in remission.
Basically at the extended stage they excluded anyone not still in remission. That all translates to 24 or 25 people from the original 298 in remission after five years - about 8% of the original group.
My opinion is that the figures are being reported in this slightly odd way to make the results look better and to make people think there is a 23% success rate after five years. It does sound a lot better than 8%.
Very old thread I realise but do you know where this record of him saying this is please? I’m struggling to find it even though I’ve seen it before
And, happily, the data from these real experts confirmed the findings of Counterpoint. The average weight loss achieved by people just armed with the basic information was the same as in Counterpoint – 15kg. At home and at work, going about their daily lives, people had replicated our research findings. And what emerged was that it was the weight loss that mattered, not the particular diet the participants went on or how they did it. Around half of the group had used a liquid formula diet – as in Counterpoint – and the other half had merely cut back drastically on their normal eating. A high proportion had sought individual advice as advised on our website and had been told by their doctor or diabetes nurse in no uncertain terms not to try to lose weight rapidly. But they were so highly motivated to get rid of their diabetes that they had emailed me on hearing news reports, and understandably they had gone ahead anyway.
Prof Roy Taylor - Life Without Diabetes 2019
23%, of the 36%
It's a bit of a red flag when numbers in this study are very small and percentages of percentages are quoted without mentioning the actual numbers involved at each point. It seems also that some sources are giving 149 as the number of participants while elsewhere (eg the Times story) the 298 figure is quoted. Percentages are also slightly tweaked.Yep my calculations were similar
149 people Started
1 yr success 68 people (46%)
2yrs 48 people (32%)
5 yrs 11 people (7%)
only 85 were tracked for the last 3 yrs so 23% of those, not the original cohort
Speaking of obsfurcation, I discovered a simple but significat fiddle factor in the trial data report. In the claims being made for improvement of insulin response, the insulin rate is expressed in umol/sec/m^2 which looked to me to be suspect. rates are usually just x per sec. In all the other insulin secretion trials I have looked at they use just umol/sec as I would expect. Further investigation of the Taylor formula showed that he was dividing by a new term called Body Surface Area (BSA) Now BSA is derived from the BMI which includs body weight. So by using the Taylor formula, then the insulin secretion rate will vary directly by body weight, so in a weight loss study, it automatically magnifies the rate so that a 15% weight loss is actually directly creating an 8% increase in insulin secretion.It's a bit of a red flag when numbers in this study are very small and percentages of percentages are quoted without mentioning the actual numbers involved at each point. It seems also that some sources are giving 149 as the number of participants while elsewhere (eg the Times story) the 298 figure is quoted. Percentages are also slightly tweaked.
It's possible that this is all the fault of the media's reporting - and that's possible - but the media normally just print what the press release says, so I suspect this is deliberate obfuscation.
It seems that it would be equally valid to say that 93% of people in this study either never achieved remission, or maintained remission to the five year point. But no headlines in that and probably no NHS contracts either.
As i understand it, the effects on insulin resistance of a very low calorie diet (800ish) were discovered as a side effect of gastric surgery patients follow one pre-op to reduce the fat around and in the liver. Their HbAc1 dropped. Prof Taylor at Newcastle University (hence the name) did some limited studies and found that an 8 week VLCD using meal replacement shakes & 1 meal of 200cal veg produced a dramatic drop in liver fat, and reduction in HbAc1, which was still lower after 2 years than at initial diagnosesI’ve searched a heap of threads and keep seeing references to him saying it but can’t find the actual source. I understand the concepts, I’m just looking for his comments about the method of weight loss used. It may have been on twitter but I‘ve barely ever been on there and simply can’t work out how to search effectively on it. So if anyone fancies a challenge……
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?