Reversal of diabetes

Pipp said:

The clue is in the signature.

Click to expand...

Wow - snarky! I love it! Ok, I won't ask you anything else. Sorry to have bothered you.

Pipp said:

But maybe I misjudged you @NoCrbs4Me , and you are really interested in what I eat now.

So just in case you think I am really a snark:
I avoid carbs such as bread, pasta potatoes etc. all that stuff we are told by NHS is good. Never liked sweet stuff, so not a problem.
My diet is mainly lots of veg, full fat yogurt, lean meat, fish eggs and cheese. Plenty of fruit. Not much alcohol. Not much fat.

I have tried, as an experiment, encouraged by some n'er do wells on here, gone on a carb fest to see if BG was adversely affected. It wasn't, but I regained some weight, and started to crave carbs. So I don't recommend that.
Have been over 3 years non-diabetic BG levels. That came about very quickly, within days of starting Newcastle diet. (So you see, that is why I am a bit snarky if someone disrespects the ND).

Click to expand...

Thanks. It's kind of impossible to figure out what you eat by "Newcastle diet method and low carbs". It's encouraging to me that the low carb diet has kept you diabetes free for 3 years. Are you still on the Newcastle? If you are eating low carb and low fat, does that mean high protein?

Interesting that you eat plenty of fruit. I was never big on fruit so don't eat any and that also fits in with my reduction of fructose intake to near zero. I also don't eat lean meat if I can help it - that fatter the better, I say. Other than that, I think we have similar diets. Not eating the usual carby suspects of grains, potatoes, and rice should get your carbs below 50 g a day, but perhaps the fruit gets it above that.

I don't completely disrespect the Newcastle diet, just not a big fan of the idea. I've read about it and it's clear the idea is to simulate the weight loss people have when they get bariatric surgery. I'm not a fan of that either. But, as a last resort after trying everything else but surgery, I think the Newcastle diet is worth a go. It just seems a little drastic to me. From what I remember, the big take away from the study was that the weight loss, no matter how long it took, was the important thing for diabetes reversal. For me, I figured about a pound a week is a healthy target. Just reducing the carbs got me good control of my blood sugar. Interestingly, I had already lost quite a bit of weight by a calorie restricted low fat diet before I switched to low carb. I switched when I saw what the carbs I was eating did to my blood glucose after meals when I finally got a blood glucose meter about 6 months after being diagnosed. I started reducing carbs immediately.

I will say that when I first heard of the Newcastle diet I considered it, but decided against it due to the low calories and use of powdered meal replacement. I suppose if my weight were much worse I'd have tried it. However, I'm quite happy that VLCHF is working for me.

And maybe a Newcastle diet is enjoyable, but having lost weight in the past with a calorie restricted diet, I definitely prefer my VLCHF diet over that. Oddly, or maybe it's normal, I've found the amount of fat and calories I have doesn't affect how fast I lose weight, but the lower the carbs the faster the weight loss. I've read the Newcastle study, but I can't remember what percentage of the 800 calories comes from carbs. Can you tell me that? I'm just curious.

As for carb craving, I don't miss carbs and definitely not the cravings. I always thought it was some kind of moral failing on my part when i couldn't stop myself from eating carby food. But now I know it was physiological as much or more than psychological. I simply have no desire for carbs. It's really weird, but I guess that's one way a low carb diet works.

douglas99 said:

Yes, I don't need an an 'enjoyment method' to eat to.

My own method seems to be perfectly fine, to keep none diabetic numbers, and the correct weight.
I seem to be able to eat without being told it's enjoyable, or delicious.
It's just food I like.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know. After Eight ice cream sounds very enjoyable and delicious! I wish that kind of diet would work for me! You are so lucky! I guess it's beef bone marrow broth and bacon for me.

douglas99 said:

You seem to be missing ice cream?

Click to expand...

Just in a theoretical sense - it's not something I ate a lot of before starting to low carb. I used to make some very tasty chocolate ice cream. I have an ice cream making machine, but have only used it 3 times in the 7 years I've owned it. I'm thinking of making some full fat/sugar free stuff using Splenda.

However, I crave a good workout more than ice cream, so off to the gym!

NoCrbs4Me said:

There is one difference. After you're done the Newcastle diet, what then? Go back to your old way of eating until you need to do the Newcastle diet again? With the "enjoyment method", you just keep eating delicious, wholesome, nutritious, healthful food until you die at some ripe old age. I wouldn't discourage anyone from trying the Newcastle diet as a penultimate resort (i.e. before bariatric surgery), but people should give the enjoyment method or something similar a go first.

Click to expand...

I don't think there is any indication in the Newcastle diet to go back to unhealthy eating afterwards! At least not be design. But of course people should give what you call the enjoyment method a good go first. (To be honest, changing my lifestyle was not so enjoyable, although I do enjoy knowing how to cook and knowing about nutrition now.) The two Very Low Calorie Diet (VLCD) case studies I have followed are the ones published online - Carlos Cervantes (in YouTube), and Richard Doughty (in the Daily Mail), and they maintained a weight afterwards that allowed them to remain T2D free. The emphasis is on weight, and not food quality (at least in the publications) - you are right, but the Newcastle Uni folk are scientists and not really interested in nutrition in the way we are. (Have you ever noticed the difference between the reversal folk who are diabetic themselves? and those otherwise. Much greater emphasis on nutrition for life, in a way we T2Ds understand and relate to - as there is more than a hint of 'lifesaving' about it perhaps.)

Douglas99 is right here - people have very different metabolisms, and their T2D has its own ghastly rhythm and expression, according to that. And people deal with dysfunction and disease in very different ways. You are lucky, NoCarbs4Me - you could beat your diabetes by lifestyle changes only, without having to do anything radical, like the VLCD. But there are plenty of folks, me included, who that is just not enough for, to get to normal BG and HBA1c levels. (For me I don't know yet if normal levels are possible - I hope so!) According to Prof Taylor et al at Newcastle University, it depends on personal fat thresholds - ie how much fat your own liver and pancreas can take before falling into dysfunction re the blood glucose and insulin system. For some people it is very low (as it must be with Richard Doughty - he was slender by any standards when he was diagnosed, but had to get even slender-er to beat the diabetes - which he did). The idea, with the Newcastle/VLCD, is to find your own personal fat threshold with weight loss - and then maintain the weight that allows you to be T2D free. How you do it is left up to you - what kind of weight maintenance routine is right for you. Because T2D is a dysfunction one is susceptible to, that doesn't change. So of course one cannot go back to eating a high carb diet, and processed food etc, and not expect to get T2D again, is my understanding of the literature, including the Newcastle University studies behind the diet.

@AloeSvea I think your reading is pretty spot on. However, the last sentence "So of course one cannot go back to eating a high carb diet, and processed food etc, and not expect to get T2D again" may be a little bit of a jump. I did precisely this for many months and managed to reduce my HbA1c further. I did have to watch the amounts I ate and make sure I didnt over indulge and when I did I used to burn off the extra calories with extra exercise if necessary.

I actually am on a very low carb diet - less than 40 g these days. However, it sure doesn't feel drastic! It feels healthy! I've never felt this healthy in my life.

Andrew Colvin said:

@AloeSvea I think your reading is pretty spot on. However, the last sentence "So of course one cannot go back to eating a high carb diet, and processed food etc, and not expect to get T2D again" may be a little bit of a jump. I did precisely this for many months and managed to reduce my HbA1c further. I did have to watch the amounts I ate and make sure I didnt over indulge and when I did I used to burn off the extra calories with extra exercise if necessary.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Interesting for me to read your experience - I have just assumed the McDonald's breakfast will be a thing of my past, even if I was able to get my HBA1c down to the degree you have. Cheers.

NoCrbs4Me said:

Thanks. It's kind of impossible to figure out what you eat by "Newcastle diet method and low carbs". It's encouraging to me that the low carb diet has kept you diabetes free for 3 years. Are you still on the Newcastle? If you are eating low carb and low fat, does that mean high protein?

Interesting that you eat plenty of fruit. I was never big on fruit so don't eat any and that also fits in with my reduction of fructose intake to near zero. I also don't eat lean meat if I can help it - that fatter the better, I say. Other than that, I think we have similar diets. Not eating the usual carby suspects of grains, potatoes, and rice should get your carbs below 50 g a day, but perhaps the fruit gets it above that.

I don't completely disrespect the Newcastle diet, just not a big fan of the idea. I've read about it and it's clear the idea is to simulate the weight loss people have when they get bariatric surgery. I'm not a fan of that either. But, as a last resort after trying everything else but surgery, I think the Newcastle diet is worth a go. It just seems a little drastic to me. From what I remember, the big take away from the study was that the weight loss, no matter how long it took, was the important thing for diabetes reversal. For me, I figured about a pound a week is a healthy target. Just reducing the carbs got me good control of my blood sugar. Interestingly, I had already lost quite a bit of weight by a calorie restricted low fat diet before I switched to low carb. I switched when I saw what the carbs I was eating did to my blood glucose after meals when I finally got a blood glucose meter about 6 months after being diagnosed. I started reducing carbs immediately.

I will say that when I first heard of the Newcastle diet I considered it, but decided against it due to the low calories and use of powdered meal replacement. I suppose if my weight were much worse I'd have tried it. However, I'm quite happy that VLCHF is working for me.

And maybe a Newcastle diet is enjoyable, but having lost weight in the past with a calorie restricted diet, I definitely prefer my VLCHF diet over that. Oddly, or maybe it's normal, I've found the amount of fat and calories I have doesn't affect how fast I lose weight, but the lower the carbs the faster the weight loss. I've read the Newcastle study, but I can't remember what percentage of the 800 calories comes from carbs. Can you tell me that? I'm just curious.

As for carb craving, I don't miss carbs and definitely not the cravings. I always thought it was some kind of moral failing on my part when i couldn't stop myself from eating carby food. But now I know it was physiological as much or more than psychological. I simply have no desire for carbs. It's really weird, but I guess that's one way a low carb diet works.

Click to expand...

I don't really want to enter into the wider debate on the pros and cons of the ND, as like most things, when we each have a differing start point and set of personal circumstances, we may have different options on the cost/benefit analysis of the ND.

My comments would be though, that so many people who are diagnosed with T2, in particular, are carrying extra weight, and a fair proportion of those carrying significant amounts of weight. For those folks, the prospect of halving their body weight, or having to lose 20, 30, 40kg or more must be absolutely daunting, and expecting anyone to completely embrace that goal with belief and enormous enthusiasm is likely to be a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure.

Having read Professor Taylor's work, he states, quite clearly, that post-diet there is a need to maintain a reduced calorie intake, which makes sense, even if purely based on a reduced base metabolic rate due to the weightloss. I don't believe anywhere he, or anyone else, suggests the effect of the diet is to flick the diabetes switch and "glue it" into the off position.

In my view, what the ND can offer is a short, sharp attack on two of the major issues at hand, in one fell swoop; blood scores and weight loss. An individual seeing significant improvements in their blood scores and weight loss to boot, will surely be encouraged, if not inspired to carry on? Sadly, in this day and age, we are a "right now". the prospect of waiting a couple of months to see much improvement can be a bit unappealing, and for some people, losing 5kg or even 10kg just doesn't touch the edges, but the harsh calorie reduction scythes the blood scores to at least an encouraging level.

Had I discovered this work, immediately after my own diagnosis, I can't be sure how I would have reacted. Part of me knows I would have wanted to give it a go; on the basis of "what's x weeks out of my life, if I can make a seismic shift", and the other half says I would have been scared by the very low calorie aspect, and the prospect of getting hooked on an ultra-low calorie lifestyle. Thankfully, the steps I took appear to have made a significant difference to my bloods, weight and general lifestyle.

douglas99 said:

A McDonalds breakfast isn't particularly worse than any other, providing you get a decent response from your BG.

Click to expand...

And for the vast majority of diabetics that means ditching the bun, and not being tempted by the McMuffin, McFlurry or soda that comes with it.

t.[/QUOTE]

sanguine said:

And for the vast majority of diabetics that means ditching the bun.

Click to expand...

This to me is one of the most remarkable things about following low carbs. I had a pub lunch recently and my non diabetic friend questioned whether a flame grilled burger with cheese would be healthy for me. And as I didn't eat the bun, my blood sugars were fine.

Isn't it odd after all those years being indoctrinated about eating low fat/low calorie, one can lose weight by eating low carbs.

douglas99 said:

This to me is one of the most remarkable things about following low carbs. I had a pub lunch recently and my non diabetic friend questioned whether a flame grilled burger with cheese would be healthy for me. And as I didn't eat the bun, my blood sugars were fine.

Isn't it odd after all those years being indoctrinated about eating low fat/low calorie, one can lose weight by eating low carbs.

Click to expand...

If you do reverse diabetes, as being discussed in this thread, it's academic, as you'll be in the same place as your non-diabetic friend.
You can eat the bun.[/QUOTE]

I think what someone eats, having reversed their diabetic state, very much depends how lucky they feel, having reviewed their personal cost/ benefit analysis on reverting to higher carb eating versus enjoying the option to do so, but maximise their personal chance or remaining in the non-diabetic ranges. And all of this whilst fending off the probably natural degradation of physical functionality caused by the ravages of time.

As Clint Eastwood said, "Do you feel lucky?"

douglas99 said:

I would say, if you can't eat one bun, claiming to have reversed diabetes is a tad optimistic.

Luck probably doesn't really come into it.

Click to expand...

I was referring to any potential cumulative impact of reverting to a "normal carb" diet, not to any isolated eating episodes.

douglas99 said:

I guess it proves the facts behind the Newcastle diet, it's the weight loss that improves insulin resistance.

Click to expand...

What proves that?

I don't think a cure is very common if at all. Control is relatively easy for some people but not for others.

douglas99 said:

I would suggest you email Prof. Taylor to discuss it further, it's his study.

Click to expand...

No thanks.

Personally I think the term 'reversed' can be very misleading. In most of the examples quoted, the person has not gone back to eating what they did before diagnosis. Only if they did that and showed no diabetic symptoms could they be said to have 'reversed' their diabetes. As most have significantly modified their diet by removing carbs and sugars then they really should be classed as well controlled.

There's a graph of blood glucose levels over time in one of the earlier posts showing what happened when the poster ate a breakfast similar to that which they'd have had prior to diagnosis. The poster said they'd reversed their diabetes yet the graph shows a diabetic response to the food. They're obviously well controlled with their current diet, but they've not reversed their diabetes as the graph clearly demonstrates.