Now the X-PERT advice is low carb, high fat

[zand]

It's beyond a sea change.

She's claiming it 'can beat killer conditions like diabetes, heart disease, epilepsy, cancer and dementia and even slow down the ageing process.'
That's the fountain of youth.

Even I'll be impressed if she can back it up.

Well yes! It's been said for a long time that sugar ages your mind and your body. I'm not talking about LCHF followers here, I'm talking magazine articles, TV programmes etc. OK on this forum we think of total carbs, not just sugars. I'm not sure about epilepsy as I don't know anything about it, but all the other conditions can be improved by reducing sugars. It's well known that cancer tumours feed on sugars. I read it in a daily newspaper years ago (no, not the Daily Mail I've never read it)

 

[dannyw]

It's beyond a sea change.

She's claiming it 'can beat killer conditions like diabetes, heart disease, epilepsy, cancer and dementia and even slow down the ageing process.'
That's the fountain of youth.

Even I'll be impressed if she can back it up.

I somehow very much doubt you'll be impressed. It's clear you're looking for loopholes and flaws rather than accept LCHF is gaining momentum in this big world of diabetes. We'll see eh Douglas ?

 

[Pipp]

It'll be interesting to see if she changes the entire X Pert program, and if she does, if she keeps the NHS contract as a service provider, or if they keep or cancel the now conflicting Desmond program.

And what about those people who did the original programme? If their diabetes progresses and they get devastating complications, after following the recommendations do they have a case for compensation claim against the programme providers?

 

[zand]

Douglas - yes they are amazing claims. They are true, that's what's amazing! Some of us have been telling you about these things since you joined this forum. Are you one of those people who doesn't believe the moon landings were real?

 

[NoCrbs4Me]

Entirely possible you would think.
Or even against the NHS if they now give the new diet their blessing.
But, has anyone actually seen evidence that diabetes has indeed been reversed though, on LCHF, in the same manner Prof Taylor has established the providence of the Newcastle Diet.
I would have thought that would be a necessary requirement to show the complications could't have occurred.
It will be an interesting period, if the evidence stands up to peer reviews, and if there isn't the usual disclaimer in the back of the book that some writers feel the need to hide behind.

Well, it worked for me. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one on here that can say that.

 

[Kaz70]

Well I only attended the X-Pert course July/Aug this year so still have my book, and have just gone onto the X-Pert website and ordered the new one so I can compare - should be interesting!

 

[sanguine]

It's beyond a sea change.

She's claiming it 'can beat killer conditions like diabetes,

Yes, 'beat the condition'. That's not the same as claiming a cure which is how you seem to want to interpret it. Reaching non-diabetic blood sugar levels while minimising meds isn't fanciful to me or many more on here.

 

[dannyw]

So, to be clear, it says "can be prevented", not "will be prevented". Thanks. In the meantime, keep looking for loopholes
The rest of us will just be content that at long last, LCHF is gaining strength.

 

[Southport GP]

I have seen a copy of this book and thought it was quite sensible In fact for a better look I will go to the book launch next Monday in Hebden Bridge and get one.
More anon

 

[tim2000s]

Well yes! It's been said for a long time that sugar ages your mind and your body. I'm not talking about LCHF followers here, I'm talking magazine articles, TV programmes etc. OK on this forum we think of total carbs, not just sugars. I'm not sure about epilepsy as I don't know anything about it, but all the other conditions can be improved by reducing sugars. It's well known that cancer tumours feed on sugars. I read it in a daily newspaper years ago (no, not the Daily Mail I've never read it)

Epilepsy used to be widely treated in the early part of the twentieth century, before drugs were available, with a low carb high fat diet. It helped reduce the number and intensity of seizures. There's a fair amount of evidence banging about for this too.

 

[donnellysdogs]

82% fat according to the Mail online article today!!

 

[dannyw]

Higher than I thought to be honest, and so specific too. Wonder why they felt they needed to stick that 2% on the end. Was it just to make things difficult lol.

 

[sally and james]

I'm waiting to see if the whole foolish edifice of low fat/high carb, especially for diabetics, will come tumbling down in the very near future. I doubt if Trudi Deakin is a foolish woman. If she wants to keep her business, my guess is that things will have been going on behind the scenes. She might even have been put up to it by the NICE/NHS or whatever, face saving for them, but allowing the obvious and essential to happen. Then again, the NHS/big pharma etc may already be rolling out the tanks and heavy weaponry to deal with a woman who has come across the truth and has had the moral courage to go with it. Interesting times.
Sally

 

[Bluetit1802]

Blimey, she has gone really hardcore.

 

[donnellysdogs]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...carbs-fuelling-obesity-diabetes-epidemic.html

Certainly interesting.

She's thrown her hat into the ring, and gone head to head with the NHS.
It's going to cause a conflict between her beliefs, and the diet her employers (the NHS) believe is correct.
It will be interesting to see if

a) she keeps the contract, and the NHS change their recommendations.
b) she loses the contract
c) she keeps the contract, advises the NHS 'eatwell plate' on her courses, and sells her book privately.

Thank you for the link. I still can't manage to do it...x

 

[tim2000s]

However you look at it, if it hits the daily mail it means it will filter into public conciousness sooner rather than later. I suspect, as @sally and james has mentioned, there is more going on behind the scenes here.

From the perspective of a diabetic who was told to manage carb intake from the word go, and not given the eat what you like nonsense that appeared in the nineties, it hasn't come as a massive surprise...

 

[Sid Bonkers]

Well I cant see the NHS ever recommending that anyone eats an 82% fat diet and personally I know I wouldnt want to eat such a diet.

My whole approach to diabetic control was to reduce my insulin resistance, and it worked, a high fat diet only increases insulin resistance so is not for me thanks, yuk..

 

[dannyw]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...carbs-fuelling-obesity-diabetes-epidemic.html

Certainly interesting.

She's thrown her hat into the ring, and gone head to head with the NHS.
It's going to cause a conflict between her beliefs, and the diet her employers (the NHS) believe is correct.
It will be interesting to see if

a) she keeps the contract, and the NHS change their recommendations.
b) she loses the contract
c) she keeps the contract, advises the NHS 'eatwell plate' on her courses, and sells her book privately.

You make it sound like a battle. "Thrown her hat into the ring", "head to head with the NHS", that's much of the problem here. It's not a them and us. I would be extremely surprised if the NHS are unaware of her new thinking or book. She won't lose her contract and she won't teach one thing whilst producing a book teaching the exact opposite. All that's happened is she has realised that for the majority ( I choose that word carefully ) of diabetics manage their condition much better on a LCHF regime. Simple.

 

[dannyw]

Well I cant see the NHS ever recommending that anyone eats an 82% fat diet and personally I know I wouldnt want to eat such a diet.

My whole approach to diabetic control was to reduce my insulin resistance, and it worked, a high fat diet only increases insulin resistance so is not for me thanks, yuk..

And you probably never saw x-pert doing a complete 180 coming either. You never know what's round the corner. As for the 82%, it's only a recommendation, it's not law. I doubt if anyone stuck rigidly to the "eatable plate" either. Any diet will be adapted slightly to suit the individual. Stick with what works for you.

 

[dannyw]

If you don't believe it's a 'them and us', do you endorse the 'eatwell plate'
Or do you believe 'they' are wrong?

The eatable plate doesn't suit me. It may suit others. That doesn't make it a them & us or a battle. The eatable plate was never "thrown into the ring". It never went "head to head" with anything.