• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

There is a cure.. how come nobody does this?

Thanks for taking the time to write that out.

And YES you hit the nail on the head!
Half to 2-3 sounds about right!

But think about it.. 1/2 of 4000-5000
Calories IS NORMAL eating..

I think a large portion of people in this group don't seem to understand their view of normal eating is NOT normal..

It's not normal to consistently overeat.. it doesn't happen in nature..

Thanks again for your input!
 
Your body will NOT store fat UNDER any circumstances if your eating less
Calories then you burn...

It is IMPOSSIBLE..

If you burn 2000 calories and eat 800..
How can your body store fat? Your burning more calories then your consuming..

It is literally impossible..

That is a kin to saying that you can save money (gain fat) while spending $2000 a week while only getting $800 a week paycheck...

There is NO WAY.. do not get confused or suckered into this myth . If younhave any questions I'll be happy to answer
 
But 5.5 is smack in the middle of normal according to that table, so I would argue that it is not a bad result.
 
What is in your view "normal eating" . You need to establish that before anyone can comment on what you have asked.
My view of normal eating is eating in moderation.. NOT Eating to apoint where you become obese..

And to add to that eating majority of REAL food... not this process **** that's most people eat these day.,

I'm a fan of the fist palm thumb method..
They are easy way to size up your meals...

A palm size portion of meat
/ fist size portion of either carbs or vegetables ... and a thumb size of healthy fats...

If you eat like this with REAL food. It's 1000 times easier to get control of yoir diet. Even when eating out!
 
Ok so please add to why you disagree?

Do you have a reason? Maybe a scientific study? I would love to see .. thanks

Yes, I have plenty of reasons. They are based on personal experience, a lot of research, and years of interaction with others here and elsewhere. All things that you seem to be lacking.

And no, I am not going to waste my time answering your long lecturing post point by point.

You wrote a forum post expressing your opinion, with no evidence. You instructed us to accept your opinion for no better reason than you think you are right and other people should agree with you.

So I have expressed my opinion too - I disagree with you.

If you want to learn why, carry on reading the forum with an open mind. You will see many, many, references and experiences that show your current beliefs to be wrong. Some of those will be mine, some will be other peoples'.
 
Last edited:
Reread my post. It becomes harder and harder to eat less calories than you burn if you are in starvation mode. Years back I used to maintain my weight on 1000 calories, if I ate more than that I gained. Myth or not it's what my body has done. I have 35 years of experience in trying to lose weight. In 2007 my son and I both got flu. We ate nothing for 5 days and then very little (200 cals at the most) for 6 days. We only drank sips of water, it's all we could manage. He wasn't overweight to start with. I was morbidly obese. He lost 11.5 pounds, I lost half a pound. It was then that I stopped dieting. There was no way that I could eat little enough to lose weight and still stay healthy. So I cut out the big carb items of bread, flour, sugar, rice, potatoes and ate as much as I wanted of everything else. I lost a pound a week for 7 weeks, then health problems which had been building up for some time came to a head and they took over for a while. A few years after that I discovered LCHF. I lost over 2 stones whilst eating until I wasn't hungry anymore and became healthier too. Then I discovered this forum and realized there were others who had struggled with weight loss too.
 
Last edited:
This study is junk. There was a 27% drop-out rate, and three of the patients were kicked out due to not being in ketosis, which the authors chose to interpret as presumed non-compliance with the diet. They made a lot of comparisons of outcome measurements at several time points, but didn't correct for the increased risk of false positives in determining statistical significance - combined with the very low number of participants, that means that the results are very unlikely to actually be significant. Controls were used, but not in any meaningful way, so were probably just added to try to make the study look better than it is. Recent use of diabetic medications is also a likely confounder, given the reputation that Metformin at least has for having a delayed and cumulative effect.

Usually in a study this small with results at least trending toward significance, it would indicate potential for a bigger study with better power to detect a significant impact. But with the methodological flaws present in this one, they'd probably fiddle around with a bigger study just as badly. My hope is that they stay out of research, and the funding goes toward groups with a firmer foundation in research and science.
 
So basically you have nothing to say. Or add.. ok well thanks for sharing your OPINION wth nothing to back it up.

I clearly asked if
You can share with us why you believe otherwise.. everytbing I said is facts based on research.. and I have experienced it first hand...

I will ask again if you have anything to back up your claim I'm more than happy to read .. otherwise please stop
Propagating this myth.
 

You would be perfect for what I'm describing...

If you wheee to add weight training.. you would be allowed MORE calories.. and you wouldn't get fat... any extra calories would go to building muscle... which in turn would "build up your metabolism"

Allowing you to eat more calories per day
 
Why are people not doing this and choosing instead to live a life with diabetes?


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168743/#!po=59.0909

Congratulation on your endeavor. I have to tell you, Newcastle devotees are few and far between. After speaking to most folks, their eyes glaze over like they were looking at a 3 headed martian. The old saying, "it's not for everyone" doesn't apply to Newcastle. It is for most people and even for Type 1 due to overall bodily benefits, but the truth is, the majority and with their doctor's encouragement, prefer to eat more trash in both substance and volume and carry on like good little Type 2 soldiers than being valiant and aggressive and be part of people that can keep the disease at bay. It seems like a lot here obviously adhere to the knowledge we have been blessed with but that is still a very small minority compared to society at large. All we can do is demonstrate a steely determination and use our example. I still explain myself but most times all I can do is pray for those to both see the light and act decidedly on it.
 

The ridiculously low number of participants was the first thing that made me go "Welp this is the most unreliable study you can find". When this is reproduced on a scale with tens of thousands participants with consistent results under careful monitoring, I'll bite. Until then...

I believe a lot of people have success stories based on the ideas presented in the study, but we all know 'One size fits all' is not viable when it comes to medicine.
 
How can one be starving when there is a surplus of calories held within the body. I would love to hear the answer to this..
Nutrients. An obese person can starve to death due to a lack of vitamins, minerals and other nutrients that are essential to keep the organs functioning. I though this was common knowledge? Muscle is also the first thing to go in someone who is really starving, not bodyfat, as it is easier metabolized.
 
Throwing my 2 penny worth in here How does a person's metabolic rate factor in for instance I am a skinny type 2 and have always had a high metabolic rate I eat as.many calories as I can stuff into my face ( I limit carbs ) and yet I really struggle to gain weight _my BMI is 18
CAROL
 

No. You expressed your opinion.
I simply responded in kind.
I also told you where to find masses of information, both scientific and anecdotal. But you seem to have ignored that bit.

You are still referring to you pet theory about 'starvation mode', yes? The one that you told us we should all agree with you but failed to produce anything to support your declarations.

If you really want facts and evidence and references (I haven't seen much sign so far that you do), then have a read of Jason Fung's blog Intensive Dietary Management. That'll start you off. But I warn you, he has little time for the kind of vague 'everyone should do what I say' thinking that you seem to like.
 
Last edited:
Why are people not doing this and choosing instead to live a life with diabetes?


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168743/#!po=59.0909
Since you've asked, I will tell you.

I have done LCHF diet and it DOES work. Blood sugar levels and triglycerides came WAY down. HOWEVER, I suffer from diverticulitis, and a high protein diet does my digestive system MASSIVE damage. I've already had 12 inches removed from my colon due to it, and I'm trying to avoid that particular fun, at any costs. So for me, this way of eating simply doesn't work.
 
So @Djstevesire you think I would be perfect for your method, which I think you mean Newcastle diet and weight training?
If you read my previous posts you would be aware that ND worked well for me in that it returned my BG to non-diabetic levels. Despite the huge weight loss, I remain in the obese category. I do not want to be able to eat more. Quite happy with my calorie intake, and stable weight maintenance. More happy with well maintained blood glucose levels.
As a disabled woman OAP weight training is not for me. So please do not make assumptions that you can 'fix me' .I keep as active as my many impairments allow. Exercising from a wheelchair some days, and as often as I am able in the swimming pool, or at an adapted gym for older disabled people.

As for you statement 'wouldn't get fat' , it is a bit too late for that. Already fat, have been for half my life, still fat despite ND and exercise. That is not important to me. What is, is that I keep stable non-diabetic BG.
 
But the LCHF way of eating should not really be all that high protein..why do you think it is?
 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/'

this guy fasted for 382 days, but he did take his vitamins. It went well, read it, makes for very interesting stuff. Was flabbergasted the first time I found this article.
 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/'

this guy fasted for 382 days, but he did take his vitamins. It went well, read it, makes for very interesting stuff. Was flabbergasted the first time I found this article.
Fasting is not the same as starving. Taking vitamin supplements is not the same thing as not eating. Anorexia patients die from starvation, even obese ones. They die because the heart muscle is eaten away by the body, leading to heart failure if other organs didn't fail first. That's the starvation I was talking about.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…