Sorry, I accidentally posted a different link. Here is the correct one http://wwwtype2diabetesisreversible/.ncl.ac.uk/press/articles/archive/2017/09/Just a small point but when you're posting an entire page as a quote, could you also post a link to the source material? It allows us to read more for ourselves (and bookmark as required) judge the quality of the source and, of course, acknowledge that the words belong to someone and who that someone might be (writers still own their words, even if quoted anonymously - I'll resist a rant on IP here).
Thanks.
Sock
That doesn't work either.. are you trying to attach this?Sorry, I accidentally posted a different link. Here is the correct one http://wwwtype2diabetesisreversible/.ncl.ac.uk/press/articles/archive/2017/09/
This article has NOT been posted before by anyone as far as I know. A lot of people, especially on this thread if you take a closer look, are very interested in Newcastle. Further, I am not "discussing " it or giving my own opinion of it on here, but posting a useful link so that people can make an informed choice but . It worries me a bit that there are people on here who would rather as few people as possible did Newcastle and seem to want to suppress mention of it. Prof Taylor is a widely acclaimed diabetologist, internationally famous for his discovery of the mechanism that reverses diabetes. What about free speech on here?I think this has been discussed to death on other threads, @Tannith (mostly by yourself)
Why are you posting this again?
This article has NOT been posted before by anyone as far as I know. A lot of people, especially on this thread if you take a closer look, are very interested in Newcastle. Further, I am not "discussing " it or giving my own opinion of it on here, but posting a useful link so that people can make an informed choice but . It worries me a bit that there are people on here who would rather as few people as possible did Newcastle and seem to want to suppress mention of it. Prof Taylor is a widely acclaimed diabetologist, internationally famous for his discovery of the mechanism that reverses diabetes. What about free speech on here?
They sound like three great research questions to me.1. Is it really excess calories that causes excess fat in the liver, or is it excess sugar and starch?
2. Doesn't a starvation diet mess up your metabolism?
3. Does the Newcastle diet work better than a low carb diet for reversing type 2?
1. Is it really excess calories that causes excess fat in the liver, or is it excess sugar and starch?
2. Doesn't a starvation diet mess up your metabolism?
3. Does the Newcastle diet work better than a low carb diet for reversing type 2?
1. I think it does matter whether the statement "Excess calories leads to excess fat in the liver" is true or not, since he then uses that as an argument as to why a calorie restricted diet works to defat the liver.I have had an after thought. I am not trying to be argumentative just your note got me thinking quite a bit.
I still think they are great research questions but my thoughts are:-
On 1 - does it matter in terms of trying to improve? We are where we are? In his research he found high levels of fat in the pancreas and his diet removed it. How it got there is a deduction I would agree rather than evidenced based. And very difficult indeed to prove without subjecting mice I suppose to different diets.
On 2 - As T2 is a metabolic disorder, are we not already a bit messed up? What does messing up mean - and is the messing up easier to reverse than T2? I read in one of Jason Fung's texts that one of his intermittent fasting techniques speeds up metabolic rate so you could always do a course of those afterwards. That is on the assumption it worked mind you.
On 3 - why is that important - why pit them against each other.
I might have asked
4. Can a collection of techniques, including low carb, IM fasting, a two month calorie restriction and moderate exercising - together with sound measurement and monitoring give people the greatest change of achieving low blood G?
I still do no understand why a short 8 week diet which is still low carb is seen as a contrast to a low carb diet. It feels like they have to be mutually exclusive and I just do not understand why?
1. I think it does matter whether the statement "Excess calories leads to excess fat in the liver" is true or not, since he then uses that as an argument as to why a calorie restricted diet works to defat the liver.
2. I was thinking of the story about how contestants on "The Biggest Loser" had their metabolism messed up by being starved: https://www.scientificamerican.com/...r-metabolism-is-slower-and-weight-is-back-up/
3. It would be useful for people considering either option to know which would be more likely to be more effective or even if they are equally effective. Perhaps the Newcastle diet works by carb restriction and the calorie restriction is not necessary to defat the liver.
1. I think it does matter whether the statement "Excess calories leads to excess fat in the liver" is true or not, since he then uses that as an argument as to why a calorie restricted diet works to defat the liver.
2. I was thinking of the story about how contestants on "The Biggest Loser" had their metabolism messed up by being starved: https://www.scientificamerican.com/...r-metabolism-is-slower-and-weight-is-back-up/
3. It would be useful for people considering either option to know which would be more likely to be more effective or even if they are equally effective. Perhaps the Newcastle diet works by carb restriction and the calorie restriction is not necessary to defat the liver.
I know a few people with fatty liver but no blood glucose problem.
Yet...I know a few people with fatty liver but no blood glucose problem.
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?