Reversing Diabetes (Type 2)

[chiang mai]

Reducing their intake of sugar is one of the first things that newly diagnosed people think of and of course it helps to some degree, but the bigger problem of course is refined carbs, high glycemic carbs and portion size.

In the first instance it's useful to avoid starch and carbs such as bread, rice and potato because for many westerners those items contribute heavily to the problem, avoiding those items in the first instance also aids the weight loss process. But longer term the body needs starch hence those dropped items need to be added back into the diet, albeit in smaller quantities thus I can understand why Diabetes UK recommends those things as a part of a balanced diet.

The body has no requirement for starch in the short or long term. It needs a certain amount of glucose but this can be made by the liver from amino acids and possibly from triglycerides.

Much of the UK gets large ammounts of carbs from potato's, it's nearly the national dish, unfortunately potato's also contain starch, fortunately they also contain lots of vitamins, potasium and dietary fibre. When Diabetes UK recommends potatoes and starchy food as part of a normal diet, it's not because they want us to eat starch it's because they want us to eat normal foods that happen to contain starch, case in point the national dish!

[mommysboy]

I tend towards high blood sugar and have needed second tests before now. I notice my all round health, perhaps not mental well being, improves when I fast and slim down.

I wonder what effect this would have on diabetes. Would fasting provoke a crisis? Otherwise I am sure it would be beneficial.

Dieting fails generally because it is such a matter of will that sooner or later the most determined relapse. So it strikes me a policy of denial followed by moderate indulgence of all that we find worthwhile would be better.

Once or twice a week I simply do not eat for ages and perhaps then just have a bowl of cornflakes. It is a bit uncomfortable but also strangely elevating.

I guess diabetics need to pay attention to types of food, and maybe fasting alone would not work, but I can see how the age old rule of starving out the bad if you like could fit and am not surprised the experimental treatment worked.

I guess science has the answers but Doubt anybody would be able to stick to a regimented solution, moderation it seems is the most immoderate thing in the world, and many like myself chaif under its constraints.

Fasting may have a number of benefits, but is not an easy path to follow for most of us. Intermittent fasting seems to make you feel better and is now becoming a popular way to lose/maintain weight. Your choice of cornflakes is an interesting one. It is a high carb meal with very little nutrition apart from the milk. Maybe a boiled egg????

I'm not diabetic you see, not yet anyway.

But are cornflakes that bad?. I eat wholegrain topped with soy milk or bio yoghurt. Just a pet fancy at the moment. I thought it was also about portion size,ie, you don't need to knock out foods but just cut down on portion sizes, and slim down generally.

But getting back to the original study, my understanding is it was a cure without medication for some people. This was unequivocal, and I remember reading in the Telegraph and listening on Radio 4 Inside health. I recollect the explanation was that some of the participants unclogged organs which started functioning properly again. perhaps only a specific group of diabetics would benefit and they had a sort of pseudo-diabetes.

Sounds like CM has done a similar thing on a more gentle basis.

This not withstanding I agree with Sheryl's definition.

[chiang mai]

I tend towards high blood sugar and have needed second tests before now. I notice my all round health, perhaps not mental well being, improves when I fast and slim down.

I wonder what effect this would have on diabetes. Would fasting provoke a crisis? Otherwise I am sure it would be beneficial.

Dieting fails generally because it is such a matter of will that sooner or later the most determined relapse. So it strikes me a policy of denial followed by moderate indulgence of all that we find worthwhile would be better.

Once or twice a week I simply do not eat for ages and perhaps then just have a bowl of cornflakes. It is a bit uncomfortable but also strangely elevating.

I guess diabetics need to pay attention to types of food, and maybe fasting alone would not work, but I can see how the age old rule of starving out the bad if you like could fit and am not surprised the experimental treatment worked.

I guess science has the answers but Doubt anybody would be able to stick to a regimented solution, moderation it seems is the most immoderate thing in the world, and many like myself chaif under its constraints.

Fasting may have a number of benefits, but is not an easy path to follow for most of us. Intermittent fasting seems to make you feel better and is now becoming a popular way to lose/maintain weight. Your choice of cornflakes is an interesting one. It is a high carb meal with very little nutrition apart from the milk. Maybe a boiled egg????

I'm not diabetic you see, not yet anyway.

But are cornflakes that bad?. I eat wholegrain topped with soy milk or bio yoghurt. Just a pet fancy at the moment. I thought it was also about portion size,ie, you don't need to knock out foods but just cut down on portion sizes, and slim down generally.

But getting back to the original study, my understanding is it was a cure without medication for some people. This was unequivocal, and I remember reading in the Telegraph and listening on Radio 4 Inside health. I recollect the explanation was that some of the participants unclogged organs which started functioning properly again. perhaps only a specific group of diabetics would benefit and they had a sort of pseudo-diabetes.

Sounds like CM has done a similar thing on a more gentle basis.

This not withstanding I agree with Sheryl's definition.

There's cornflakes and there's cornflakes and the difference in content and manufacture can be vast. Try using this: http://www.glycemicindex.com/, punch in the word cornflakes and see what comes out, you can likely pick the brand that you eat and that will make a big difference. Generally speaking a high GI food is bad for you, anything less than 50 is great (UK cornflakes are 93!). Also, if you look at the sugar content of breakfast cereals it will make most diabetics shudder!

But yes, portion size is also very important, better to eat five small meals spread throughout the day than three large meals.

As a general rule of thumb, two actually, ditch all the whites (potato, rice and bread) and all refined carbs also (including pastries and soft drinks)..

[SinglePot]

Paper is here for people who want to read it:

http://www.diabetologia-journal.org/Lim.pdf

I hadn't seen this - thanks for pointing it out. It does look extremely interesting, but the size of cohort in the trial is really, really really, small. With so few subjects it is hard to know if it's something of a fluke. And they do point out that all their patients had diabetes for 4 years or less, so there's no guarantee the same effect would occur in people with more advanced disease.

Still, if it proves to be repeatable in a much larger group it's very exciting, raising the possibility that, in principle, the condition is really reversible.

Practically, though 600 calories a day is an extraordinarily low intake (7or 8 slices of white bread say), and most people would find it almost impossible to sustain for two months at a stretch.

It seems to be important to be in a state of negative energy balance for the entire period of the diet, i.e. you must be eating fewer calories than you use in energy every day, so that you are forced to use stored body fat to make up the shortfall.

For that reason I'm guessing a moderate diet or intermittent fasting just won't be effective.

Looks like this was published in 2011.

What is the current medical opinion on this issue?

There must have been a lot of discussion about this already.

Bump

Paleodoc is a scientific troller.

[paleodoc]

I tend towards high blood sugar and have needed second tests before now. I notice my all round health, perhaps not mental well being, improves when I fast and slim down.

I wonder what effect this would have on diabetes. Would fasting provoke a crisis? Otherwise I am sure it would be beneficial.

Dieting fails generally because it is such a matter of will that sooner or later the most determined relapse. So it strikes me a policy of denial followed by moderate indulgence of all that we find worthwhile would be better.

Once or twice a week I simply do not eat for ages and perhaps then just have a bowl of cornflakes. It is a bit uncomfortable but also strangely elevating.

I guess diabetics need to pay attention to types of food, and maybe fasting alone would not work, but I can see how the age old rule of starving out the bad if you like could fit and am not surprised the experimental treatment worked.

I guess science has the answers but Doubt anybody would be able to stick to a regimented solution, moderation it seems is the most immoderate thing in the world, and many like myself chaif under its constraints.

Fasting may have a number of benefits, but is not an easy path to follow for most of us. Intermittent fasting seems to make you feel better and is now becoming a popular way to lose/maintain weight. Your choice of cornflakes is an interesting one. It is a high carb meal with very little nutrition apart from the milk. Maybe a boiled egg????

I'm not diabetic you see, not yet anyway.

But are cornflakes that bad?. I eat wholegrain topped with soy milk or bio yoghurt. Just a pet fancy at the moment. I thought it was also about portion size,ie, you don't need to knock out foods but just cut down on portion sizes, and slim down generally.

But getting back to the original study, my understanding is it was a cure without medication for some people. This was unequivocal, and I remember reading in the Telegraph and listening on Radio 4 Inside health. I recollect the explanation was that some of the participants unclogged organs which started functioning properly again. perhaps only a specific group of diabetics would benefit and they had a sort of pseudo-diabetes.

Sounds like CM has done a similar thing on a more gentle basis.

This not withstanding I agree with Sheryl's definition.

If you are not diabetic and don't have metabolic syndrome (waist bigger than hips: hypertension; high triglycerides and low LDL-cholesterol), I don't think there is any problem with cornflakes. But even wholegrain cornflakes are about 70 on the glycaemic index (standard cornflakes: GI ~ 80). Portion size is very important as the Glycaemic load is determined not only by how fast the particular food spikes the blood glucose level but also on the amount of carbohydrate in the portion. Soy milk has a GI of around 40 whereas cow's milk is around 12 to 20 depending on how much fat is in it.

But for those with type 2 diabetes...cornflakes of any description is not a good choice if they seriously want to manage their blood glucose better.

[SinglePot]

better do some posting on the Kellog's FB page then paleo

[partington]

For those who want to know the correct lipid abnormalities associated with metabolic syndrome they are:

high triglycerides

low HDL (not low LDL)

Hint: LDL is bad for you, so low LDL is good. HDL is good for you, so low HDL is bad.

He must have been sick the day they covered that at Oxford and Cambridge.

Edited July 1, 2013 by partington

[chiang mai]

Bad doctor, bad!

[paleodoc]

Bad doctor, bad!

my bad, my bad, my really bad.

Thanks for the correction. Couldn't have been a typo. Definitely missed the lecture.

But...why are TGs so elevated in DM2????????...could it be the carbs???

Of Course!!!

[paleodoc]

For those who want to know the correct lipid abnormalities associated with metabolic syndrome they are:

high triglycerides

low HDL (not low LDL)

Hint: LDL is bad for you, so low LDL is good. HDL is good for you, so low HDL is bad.

He must have been sick the day they covered that at Oxford and Cambridge.

Yes I did (typos are carrion for the crows...such is life); was watching Dr Thomas Dayspring lectures on utube...lipidologist. Interesting lecture, easy watching...take a look...he's not selling anything either!!!

[sustento]

For those who want to know the correct lipid abnormalities associated with metabolic syndrome they are:

high triglycerides

low HDL (not low LDL)

Hint: LDL is bad for you, so low LDL is good. HDL is good for you, so low HDL is bad.

He must have been sick the day they covered that at Oxford and Cambridge.

Yes I did (typos are carrion for the crows...such is life); was watching Dr Thomas Dayspring lectures on utube...lipidologist. Interesting lecture, easy watching...take a look...he's not selling anything either!!!

What's your GMC number?

[chiang mai]

Bad doctor, bad!

my bad, my bad, my really bad.

Thanks for the correction. Couldn't have been a typo. Definitely missed the lecture.

But...why are TGs so elevated in DM2????????...could it be the carbs???

Of Course!!!

Elevated Triglycerides are typically a function of raised fat intake (and various other reasons including alcohol intake). And sorry, but TG's are not necessarily elevated in T2 whilst they nearly always are in Metabolic Syndrome. But look, let me not get into any form of debate with you, instead let me point out a couple of things.

You continue to get a very hostile reception here even though you continue to comment on the posts of others although nobody really wants to debate with you, why is that. Well mostly it's because you've broken the trust agreement by lying at the outset, not once but twice and after that nobody is going to believe anything you have to say, no matter how hard you try. You lied about being a doctor and you lied about a cure for Type II Diabetes, people tend not to want to talk to people let alone debate with them after they hear porkies such as those - LDL thing may well have been just a slip of the finger but it will never be seen as that, it will be seen as another lie and yet another attempt by you to express knowledge that you don't really have.

So you see, it's not really me who is stiffling the debate, it's your precence in this debate that stiffling it, until you sling your hook posters will be unlikely to have any meaningful discussion on the OP and instead will focus on trying to kick and discredit you. Sadly, the powers that be who marshal such things seem unconcerned that their rules continue to be broken but since it's low season here and business is kinda slow, it's understandable to a miniscule degree! So, why not do us all a favour and either post your GMC number or just go away?

Edited July 1, 2013 by chiang mai

[tropo]

From the OP:

"Some people can tolerate a BMI of 40 or more without getting diabetes. Others cannot tolerate a BMI of 22 without diabetes appearing, as their bodies are set to function normally at a BMI of, say 19."

You'd think by now they would finally discontinue using this archaic, ridiculous measurement system (BMI).

My BMI is about 34 at 12% bodyfat... which means I'm rather lean compared to the average diabetic Joe. There's a lot of muscular or athletic people about who are in the same boat.

A friend of mine couldn't get health insurance because they said he had to reduce down to 90kg based solely on his BMI. This is absurd.

Edited July 2, 2013 by tropo

[Tolley]

From the OP:

"Some people can tolerate a BMI of 40 or more without getting diabetes. Others cannot tolerate a BMI of 22 without diabetes appearing, as their bodies are set to function normally at a BMI of, say 19."

You'd think by now they would finally discontinue using this archaic, ridiculous measurement system (BMI).

My BMI is about 34 at 12% bodyfat... which means I'm rather lean compared to the average diabetic Joe. There's a lot of muscular or athletic people about who are in the same boat.

A friend of mine couldn't get health insurance because they said he had to reduce down to 90kg based solely on his BMI. This is absurd.

Good point about BMI which is widely known but still we get articles talking about BMI as if it really means something.

Further the linkage to being overweight and getting type 2 diabetes is not even clear as there are many overweight people who dont get/have diabetes and there are many normal weight people who do.

[Sheryl]

Overweight/obesity increases the risk of diabetes. This does not mean that all obese people will get it nor that no non-obese people won't get it.

People seem to have trouble understanding that chronic non-infectious diseases like DM are multi-causal...and that increased risk is not the same as direct causality.

Everyone has a certain degree of susceptibility to diabetes to start with, genetic in origin. Quite a few -- but certainly not everyone -- fall into a sort of middle range whereby they will develop type II DM later in life is they have bad food habits and are obese but otherwise not.

Also need to not confuse DM Type I with Type II.

[ronz28]

Practice of medicine regarding diabetes type 2 is evolving worldwide and some research indicates the consequences can be reversed but the solution reduces profits for drug companies, etc. To me, whether or not that is a reversal of diabetes is a mute point if consequences of diabetes are reversed and medicines can be stopped safely. Here are some doctors discussing plant based diets reversing diabetes consequences.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xEWZN62Eyo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iosoXlr3ZVI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktQzM2IA-qU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBWedLw002g

I don't have any personal experience with diabetes but like plant based diets for longevity.

[partington]

Practice of medicine regarding diabetes type 2 is evolving worldwide and some research indicates the consequences can be reversed but the solution reduces profits for drug companies, etc. To me, whether or not that is a reversal of diabetes is a mute point if consequences of diabetes are reversed and medicines can be stopped safely. Here are some doctors discussing plant based diets reversing diabetes consequences.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xEWZN62Eyo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iosoXlr3ZVI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktQzM2IA-qU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBWedLw002g

I don't have any personal experience with diabetes but like plant based diets for longevity.

Incidentally, in case you're wondering: everything on youtube is the absolute truth!

How could it not be, with all the factual checks and validations you have to do to post a video?

[ronz28]

So do your own research, but you could go to McDougall's website and find references to supporting studies. It will take you a little time to navigate within his website and click on the tab called medical info and and then any of the subject areas and read the supporting note that provides specific references to the studies that you may Google and read. That's as much help as you can expect for free from a respected expert in his field sharing presentations to other medical professionals with supporting studies that makes sense.

There are no guarantees in life, so do you own research and eat whatever you want, its entirely up to you.

[jrtmedic]

Dr. McDougall is Chairman of Dr. McDougall's Right Food's Inc! The profit from that enterprise coupled with income from books,DVD's, videos and residential "courses" (a bargain at $5000+!) would seem to keep the good Dr. in funds !

Edited August 27, 2013 by jrtmedic

[ronz28]

You don't have to spend big bucks to benefit from plant based foods, and the knowledge is free on youtube and elsewhere from many other doctors as well that are just trying to heal as many people as they can. Here is a good presentation from Dr. Michael Klaper on plant based foods with plenty of visual support.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNCGkprGW_o

Edited August 27, 2013 by ronz28

[sustento]

Another man with things to sell:

http://www.drmcdougall.com/

[sustento]

Another man with things to sell:

http://doctorklaper.com/videos.html

[sustento]

If you want to read a real expert on diabetes you need to buy 'Dr Bernstein's Diabetes Solution'. He's been diabetic since 1946 when he was he was 12. He figured out what was going on but the medical profession wouldn't believe him so at the age of 45 he went back to college and became an MD. Now he is a man with something worth reading to sell:

http://www.diabetes-solution.net/about.php

[ronz28]

Youtube has presentations by even Bernstein's "truth" and its free. Also, Amazon and other books sites have customer reviews and comments on each of these methods. No need to spend a lot of time and money experimenting or risking your health with unhealthy eating if you comprehend those resources. Sounds to me like these doctors recommend: exercise like riding a bike in safe area, eating plant based whole (unprocessed) foods, testing, and seeing your doctor frequently as your diet changes to determine adjustments needed with any medications you take. If you don't exercise and clean up what you consume, then it appears doctors can only try to help you with meds. Up to you.