Scientists discover how to turn on calorie-burning fat and improve metabolism

Everyone seems to have a different view on what constitutes 'reversal', but really, how can a claim be valid if there are diabetic drugs, yoyo dieting, and it is only for a year or two? We simply don't have verifiable data for longer, and the followups just aren't there in sufficient numbers. Yet.

I mean, heck, I have a non-D HbA1c, stable weight, I've lost 25% of body weight, and I'm not on D drugs. I can even eat carbs on occasion with minimal blood glucose impact. But I would cackle like a hyena on laughing gas at the suggestion my D is reversed, because it simply isn't. It is well controlled.

Hopefully when we start to get stats through for people who have been off all D meds, with nicely stable weight and non D HbA1cs for 5 and 10 years, then I will start to give the idea more credence. And when we get people dying of a happy old age with non-diabetic related conditions, after 30 or 40 years of steady 'reversal' then I will accept that it is possible.

CherryAA said:

and theirein lies the difference !

My worst excess of a "binge" would have been a chocolate bar of say 150 grams, or a couple of bags of crisps. or a single cornish pasty. I don't like sweet foods and never have. My body craved savoury foods and because of the high fat content I denied it for years .

I adored things like vegetable curry with beansprouts - which spiked me horribly.
I love couscous and rice - both no go'es

Today I add liberal amounts of fat to the things I cook (all weighed and counted into my allowance) . I find that because the food is fatty, a small portion size is enough . because I like the savory foods i can quite happily eat the curry and sauce and skip the accompanying carb by replacing that with fresh spinach.

I think many women have a similar problem to mine. Years of low fat dieting have wrecked their metabolism and the fear of fat prevents them embracing a dietary change that might be good for them, as it seems to have been for me. I was fortunate that on the day of diagnosis I KNEW that the low fat diet recommended by my doctor was not the answer for me personally because I knew I had already been doing it and it had got me to where I was.

Click to expand...

Maybe that specific group needs it's own sub forum?

Brunneria said:

Everyone seems to have a different view on what constitutes 'reversal', but really, how can a claim be valid if there are diabetic drugs, yoyo dieting, and it is only for a year or two? We simply don't have verifiable data for longer, and the followups just aren't there in sufficient numbers. Yet.

I mean, heck, I have a non-D HbA1c, stable weight, I've lost 25% of body weight, and I'm not on D drugs. I can even eat carbs on occasion with minimal blood glucose impact. But I would cackle like a hyena on laughing gas at the suggestion my D is reversed, because it simply isn't. It is well controlled.

Hopefully when we start to get stats through for people who have been off all D meds, with nicely stable weight and non D HbA1cs for 5 and 10 years, then I will start to give the idea more credence. And when we get people dying of a happy old age with non-diabetic related conditions, after 30 or 40 years of steady 'reversal' then I will accept that it is possible.

Click to expand...

Won't ever be including me then,
I'll never be off the Metformin if I have a say in it.
I don't need the kudos that seems to be given by some to the 'drugs free' label, and after seeing the other benefits Metformin is supposed to have, I'll stay on it.
However, after self testing on it, and self testing when I don't take it, I'm more than happy 500mg doesn't' have any impact on my reversal, and my BG readings.

It really would be a wonder drug though, if 500mg could actually reverse diabetes, or even keep BG readings in the normal range, wouldn't it?

What are the other benefits that it's supposed to have? Are there any studies proving them?

As usual there is a vast range of contradictory outcomes when looking at drug uses of any type. I have seen various statements that its protective for cancer, others that it increases dementia . So basically it might be very good, very bad, or somewhere in between depending on what the user is actually vulnerable to depending on their own genetic make up. .

As in all things, if the drug in question does something that you can do via natural food instead, I would opt for the natural food as my first resort and then move onto the drugs if I had to. Which is why think the advice should be to try through diet first so you can see exactly what difference the metformin actually makes rather than simply prescribing it as a first option.


Here it is represented a a wonder drug - reducing cancer risk
https://www.diabetesselfmanagement.com/blog/metformin-wonder-drug/
primarily through bringing down blood sugar and insulin - both often acheivable through diet

Here is is represented as a very bad drug which increases the risk of alzheimers and dementia
https://www.diabetesdaily.com/forum/diabetes-news-and-studies/96797-metformin-very-bad-if-true/
Table 1. Outcomes in Metformin Users vs Nonusers
Outcome Event Rate (%) Adjusted Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval)
PD 6.85 vs 2.78 2.27 (1.66 - 3.07)
All-cause dementia 11.5 vs 6.7 1.66 (1.35 - 2.04)
Alzheimer's dementia 1.64 vs 0.83 2.13 (1.20 - 3.79)
Vascular dementia 1.64 vs 0.69 2.30 (1.25 - 4.22)
In addition, the outcomes mostly increased as the use duration and dosage of metformin increased, especially with use for more than 300 days and doses greater than 240 g.
Table 2. Comparison of Metformin Use Duration vs Nonuse
Risk Event Rate (%) Adjusted Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval)
For PD

<180 d 5.90 1.77 (1.17 - 2.68)
180 - 300 d 4.30 1.46 (0.90 - 2.37)
300 - 400 d 6.05 2.20 (1.47 - 3.28)
≥400 d 14.3 4.49 (3.06 - 6.58)
For all-cause dementia

<180 d 7.99 1.02 (0.74 - 1.41)
180 - 300 d 11.4 1.79 (1.32 - 2.43)
300 - 400 d 10.4 1.61 (1.21 - 2.16)
≥400 d 20.6 2.84 (2.12 - 3.82)