Well that was a disappointment

[Peanut234]

It's obvious from the various accounts on here that we are not built the same way. Some of us on low carb or keto lose body fat and reduce BG: others do one but not the other. It is not as simple as it is sometimes suggested. For me, my BG was back in normal range in four months at 20g/day, and over the next three years I lost around 90lbs. BG first, substantial weight loss some long way behind. So the "lose 10% of body weight first" requirement doesn't work with me.

It's possible perhaps that we may have slightly different conditions, so we respond differently to low carb/keto depending on what part of the very complex body system is broken or impaired. We may all have the same raised blood glucose symptom, but it's possible that it doesn't always have the same exact cause - if your car's mileage suddenly goes down it might not have the same cause as my poor mileage: you've got ten bags of cement in the boot: I'm driving everywhere in second gear: Bob down the road hasn't had his car serviced for five years.

Love this analogy If only I could replace my battery...(and a few other parts!)

If you get a BG meter or a CGM then you can also check which foods are the worst for your numbers and which are OK. People seem to react differently to each different carb and even some proteins. So this might help you make some tweaks which may be easier to maintain longer term.

Wearing the CGM was also useful to me as it helped me understand how much pain and inflammation affected my blood glucose level, which is another variable.

 

[KennyA]

Love this analogy If only I could replace my battery...(and a few other parts!)

If you get a BG meter or a CGM then you can also check which foods are the worst for your numbers and which are OK. People seem to react differently to each different carb and even some proteins. So this might help you make some tweaks which may be easier to maintain longer term.

Wearing the CGM was also useful to me as it helped me understand how much pain and inflammation affected my blood glucose level, which is another variable.

I would say that you can't really tackle the high BG issue without a consistent metering system of some kind. Both fingerpricks and CGMs have their strengths, and fortunately it's not an either/or.

 

[Melgar]

It's obvious from the various accounts on here that we are not built the same way. Some of us on low carb or keto lose body fat and reduce BG: others do one but not the other. It is not as simple as it is sometimes suggested. For me, my BG was back in normal range in four months at 20g/day, and over the next three years I lost around 90lbs. BG first, substantial weight loss some long way behind. So the "lose 10% of body weight first" requirement doesn't work with me.

It's possible perhaps that we may have slightly different conditions, so we respond differently to low carb/keto depending on what part of the very complex body system is broken or impaired. We may all have the same raised blood glucose symptom, but it's possible that it doesn't always have the same exact cause - if your car's mileage suddenly goes down it might not have the same cause as my poor mileage: you've got ten bags of cement in the boot: I'm driving everywhere in second gear: Bob down the road hasn't had his car serviced for five years.

There are a couple of interesting papers on lean diabetics. The first one suggests that the rising cases of lean diabetes maybe down to a different form of diabetes completely and not a subset of T2 as lean diabetics do not respond to the tried and tested means of lowering blood sugars.
The second paper (PDF available in the link) concludes that lean diabetes , within the control group, show features of “reduced pancreatic beta cell secretory capacity predominates with little contribution from increased total body and visceral adiposity and insulin resistance.”
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4434081/

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00125-021-05644-8.pdf

 

[Parsnipbun]

I've just had a telephone conversation with GP.
Since sept my cholesterol has come down 6.5 from 7
The biggest disappointment is blood sugar hba1c has gone from 47 to 45
I've dropped carbs and changed diet so much and remained active I was expecting it to be in 30s lol
Anyone else expecting bigger drops
GP said no further action ,read cholesterol info she's sending, blood test in another 6 months
Thank you for reading

same here - I was hbac1 42 when diagnosed PD 6 months ago. I immediately went no carb at first (as much as you can) and then maintained very low carb; exercised like crazy (4km indoor row, 4km run, 4km walk and 20 mins weight every day - even though it really impacted my work as a freelancer as work time substantially reduced so I could fit in exercise!), I dropped 6kilos from 50 kilos to 44 kilos (now underweight at BMI 16.5), and on re-test last week- after 6 months of walking the dark lanes after dinner every night to reduce any spikes after eating . . . . . . had dropped one measly point to 41!!! In addition, I was on the Second Nature programme which the NHS provided for 11 weeks - and its left me with anxiety issues around food which I never had before, and a related inability to actually gain back any weight. Beginning to wonder if its really worth the effort. PS also eat very very very healthily . all fresh veg, kefir, seeds, nuts, home made always, own seed and nut bread, etc etc no processed foods, no bought ins, no eat outs, no juices. FRustrated and disappointed!

 

[Chris24Main]

Just something to consider - when we talk about low-carb, that can mean one of two things:

1. Reducing calories from carbs, (and may also involve doing lots of exercise).
2. Switching your energy intake from carbs (ie, cutting sugar and starch) to fat. (could also involve more exercise)

Particularly if you are being told to reduce cholesterol, it is tempting to think in terms of keeping fat low, though if you do, you should be aware that even the father of the saturated fat hypothesis said this in 1954 - "The evidence – both from experiments and from field surveys – indicates that cholesterol content, per se, of all natural diets has no significant effect on either the cholesterol level or the development of atherosclerosis in man".

The bold "no" is there in the original for emphasis.

So - bearing that in mind - if you head down path 1. - the overwhelming science is that your body will react by dialing down your metabolism, and go into protective storage - you are reducing the energy available, and it needs to protect you. Low carb + Low fat = starvation.

If you head down path 2. - the science is that your body responds by lowering insulin, and allowing your body to switch to burning more fat as energy instead of glucose. Also - you don't feel hungry.

When I was getting serious about changing my diet about a year ago, the key thing I had to focus on was eating more fat, as least as much as reducing carbs (though clearly you need to do that too - mainly sugars and starches). There is so much of a sense that fat is bad, that it's difficult to feel like it can be the right thing.

Where your fat comes from is up to you (though personally I would avoid seed / vegetable oils) - and of course some people have real reasons for not tolerating fats - for me it was more a personal objection I had to overcome.

 

[Antje77]

There are a couple of interesting papers on lean diabetics. The first one suggests that the rising cases of lean diabetes maybe down to a different form of diabetes completely and not a subset of T2 as lean diabetics do not respond to the tried and tested means of lowering blood sugars. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4434081/

Fascinating article!
However, it's 10 years old, and it includes diabetics who by current standards would be classified as T1 (LADA specifically).
Still worth reading and pondering, but good to keep in mind that a lot happens in science in 10 years, so not everything in this article is still up to date.

The second article focuses on people with reduced pancreatic beta cell secretory capacity right on diagnosis and no insulin resistance.
They call it T2, but it does look to me like we're looking at a different type of diabetes. No idea what type but it doesn't seem to fit the current definitions of T2, unless T2 is used to classify everyone who has a type of diabetes not being a very clear T1, MODY, LADA etc.
I'm also missing even a mention of T3C in both articles.

 

[Badger09]

I've just had a telephone conversation with GP.
Since sept my cholesterol has come down 6.5 from 7
The biggest disappointment is blood sugar hba1c has gone from 47 to 45
I've dropped carbs and changed diet so much and remained active I was expecting it to be in 30s lol
Anyone else expecting bigger drops
GP said no further action ,read cholesterol info she's sending, blood test in another 6 months
Thank you for reading

Hi

Saw a recent TV show that has some new ideas on shifting sugar levels in your diet, it's Eat Smart - secrets of the Glucose Goddess on channel 4. She has lots of new concepts but the one that stood out was to eat your food in the correct order to avoid post meal sugar spikes. In short eat your vegetables and salad first , then the proteins followed by fats and lastly carbs. This order clogs your digestive system with hard to convert to sugar stuff hence no sugar spikes, hence a low HBA1C. It makes sense and the show produced blood sugar charts over aweek or so that backed up the theory. Take a look, I'm convinced that such a small change possibly making such a huge effect is definately worth trying.

 

[Parsnipbun]

Hi

Saw a recent TV show that has some new ideas on shifting sugar levels in your diet, it's Eat Smart - secrets of the Glucose Goddess on channel 4. She has lots of new concepts but the one that stood out was to eat your food in the correct order to avoid post meal sugar spikes. In short eat your vegetables and salad first , then the proteins followed by fats and lastly carbs. This order clogs your digestive system with hard to convert to sugar stuff hence no sugar spikes, hence a low HBA1C. It makes sense and the show produced blood sugar charts over aweek or so that backed up the theory. Take a look, I'm convinced that such a small change possibly making such a huge effect is definately worth trying.

Tried that didnt do anything for me. Tried the other 'hacks' as well . .

 

[Chris24Main]

As much as I dislike the work "hacks" - it's all about appealing to the insta generation, so I guess I have to let it slide - but for example Apple Cider Vinegar has been used throughout the middle east for centuries - none of these tips are especially new; go for a walk after a meal - it's only common sense... and while you should take from this the things that work for you and fit into your lifestyle... this kind of advice can be enormously helpful for people who have little idea about blood glucose control and don't know insulin from their elbow - none of it can do any harm; I'm all for it.. and I have to say, I've drunk a glass of Apple Cider Vinegar every day since reading her book, though I definitely do not follow all of her hacks - mostly I don't need to because I almost never eat any sugar or starch.

And - you know; a meal with no pasta will result in less glucose in the blood than a meal where you ate the pasta last, but all of this is widely known as good science - it isn't stuff someone just made up...