I liked the remission definition in the study NoCarbs cited for us (In ADA Diabetes Care journal -
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/37/12/3188.long) : "Remission required the absence of ongoing drug therapy and was defined as follows:
1) partial: at least 1 year of subdiabetic hyperglycemia (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] level 5.7–6.4% [39–46 mmol/mol]);
2) complete: at least 1 year of normoglycemia (HbA1c level <5.7% [<39 mmol/mol]); and
3) prolonged: complete remission for at least 5 years."
And the study goes on to say:
"Although remission of type 2 diabetes is uncommon, it does occur... Moreover, we found evidence of remission, albeit rare, even in individuals previously requiring oral antiglycemic medication or insulin therapy. It is important to consider that these findings were based on a conservative sampling frame... and using a more stringent definition of remission than typically used in the literature. These findings challenge widespread assumptions that type 2 diabetes is uniformly irreversible and progressive."
This is ultimately positive. And a huge advance, considering the journal it is in (ie conservative, if I can say this). And the first study of its kind, apparently. This means more studies to come? More than likely. And goodie.
I am not so happy with the observation that those diabetics with high baseline HBA1c's are way less likely to have "prolonged remission", particularly when they presented with dyslipidemia (ie there were "higher rates of remission among individuals without dyslipidemia") - but it makes sense, unfortunately, from my BG-perspective. And perhaps them's the breaks!
At the same time, there is being so much fabulous experimentation and success with the likes of the Newcastle Diet and Fung's work, and the power of low-carbing - maybe we are at the cusp of a diabetes remission revolution?
And I continue to live in hope that something revolutionary will happen with our standard food environment.