Yes the participants had an average BMI of 34. Tannnith is not overweight.
This is Diabetes UK (DUK i.e. the other lot) who funded the Newcastle Diet Paper and the research banging their own drum. They are postulating the cardiovascular improvement as a "possibility", i.e. not proven. It is assuming that the improvement of HDL from 1.1 to 1.3 mmol/l will do that magic, but this improvement is not that spectacular.
My hba1c started at 55mmol, HDL cholesterol went from 1.26 to 1.63, bmi from 31 to 23, lost 19kg and I was diagnosed immediately prior to changes made. No medication. So I exceeded all the necessary criteria.This is Diabetes UK (DUK i.e. the other lot) who funded the Newcastle Diet Paper and the research banging their own drum. They are postulating the cardiovascular improvement as a "possibility", i.e. not proven. It is assuming that the improvement of HDL from 1.1 to 1.3 mmol/l will do that magic, but this improvement is not that spectacular.
As has been pointed out there was only a 41% remission success, and it does not mention the regression that occurred in the 2nd year that followed the end of the trial. So, as mentioned in other posts here, it is only a partial success. I note the date it was published was 21/4/ 2021, i.e. today. I wonder why? This article seems to have no new data to present.
But I was when I first started, in terms of BMI, and even last Nov/ Dec I was above my Personal Fat Threshold. According to the OGT at that time I was well into the diabetic range. Though FBG was prediabetic as was HBA1C. OGT is the most significant test as it measures beta cell function albeit not as well as lab tests.Yes the participants had an average BMI of 34. Tannnith is not overweight.
Thank you. Could you or someone put this information into easy words please?The name of the game is the reduction of diabetic complications.
The best known 20 year study is the Swedish Obesity Subjects which followed 1,000s of patients post bariatric surgery.
The data on prevalence of microvascular complications can be found here
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28237791/
As you can see the incidents of microvascular events was vastly reduced in the normoglycemic group. Even the pre-diabetic group faired way better than those who still remained diabetic post surgery.
Better sugars = Less complications
No data on of severity of complications vs glycemic control
Basically, changing the plumbing of your gut by bypass surgery has a benefit for patients identified as having or threatening to have Type 2 diabetes. (T1D were excluded) They found that the reduction was strongest for those who started with a prediabetic HbA1c and steadily worsened the higher the baseline HbA1c. They were testing for microvascular events (long term complications involving the small blood vessels, such as retinopathy, kidney damage, neuropathy)Thank you. Could you or someone put this information into easy words please?
Thank you. Could you or someone put this information into easy words please?
I see another useful takeaway from that graph. The Euglycemic group (bgl less than 14 mmol/l ie in control) is running close to those having the surgery. So, if you don't need it for obesity correction, don't go under the knife. Wonder how the ND cohort would compare.As @Oldvatr points out above the big winners here were the pre-diabetics who underwent bariatric surgery.
View attachment 49052
Their chances of a diabetic microvascular complication were the same, <10% @ 20 years, as the non-diabetic cohort. In fact they were even less likely than the non-diabetic control group who did not undergo surgery.
Now you can see where the prevalance of increased retinopathy became the A1c cutoff point for diagnosing diabetes.
That >6.5% is where the graph starts to go up.
PS VBG = Vertical Banding GroupFor those wondering about the % weight loss in that study here's the data
Hmmm.....I wonder how the results over time would compare for those of us who are controlling our diabetes through low carbing?I'll try anyway
Take this graphic
View attachment 49051
So the Kaplan-Meier estimate on the Y-axis is the probability of an event occuring vs time on the x-axis.
So after 20 years a T2 diabetic, who didn't achieve remission through bariatric surgery, looks to have a 0.52(52%) chance of a microvascular complication.
For those in the control group, who didn't have surgery, that risk increased to 0.78(78%).
What the data doesn't show is how severe the complications were & how good the patients glycemic control was over that 20 year period.
What I'd take from the graph above is that the surgery improved sugars enough to reduce their risk by 26% over 20 years even though they never gained remision.
Hmmm.....I wonder how the results over time would compare for those of us who are controlling our diabetes through low carbing?
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?