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 ?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.
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.
Well, it worked for me. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one on here that can say that.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.
It's beyond a sea change.
She's claiming it 'can beat killer conditions like diabetes,
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.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)
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.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.
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.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..
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.If you don't believe it's a 'them and us', do you endorse the 'eatwell plate'
Or do you believe 'they' are wrong?
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?