I followed his progress.Hi @Richard1234 and welcome to the forum.
Reducing the carbohydrates that you eat has already been mentioned as a way to reduce Blood Glucose.
But there may be a downside to that because low carb is often known for reversing Obesity - thus there may be a tendency for you to lose a little weight.
I'm a little shorter than you and was a little heavier when I had heart surgery (before my Type 2 Diabetes diagnosis), however when I started eating Low Carb I increased the calories I was eating by replacing the starches and sugars with more protein (eggs, meat, fish, cheese) and this made my weight loss slow and steady - down to a BMI of 22 (I 'd got up to a BMI of 25 at diagnosis). Since then I have remained Low Carb but have increased protein and fats a little more and am now a BMI of 23.
I understand your concern about fat and cholesterol even though many say that all the studies which show a link only do so because of flaws in the study. Dr David Unwin a UK GP with a practice in Southport has (currently) 101 (= 50%) of his Type 2 diabetic patients in remission using Low Crab way of eating (i.e. not restricting calories). His figures actually show that despite them eating more saturated fat on Low Carb, their Lipid ratios have improved (HDL up, Triglycerides down) and even their LDL is lower than before. Thus I see no reason why you shouldn't relax a bit about natural traditional fats in butter, eggs, meat, cheese etc.
He is sometimes hard to work out exactly what he is advising his patients because in mush of his he has to downplay the higher fat (particularly the higher saturated fats) aspect so as not to aggravate his bosses and the Royal College of GPs etc. So it's usually only in his appearances at foreign low carb events (in USA and Australia) that he opens up more.I followed his progress.
Initially he suggested reduced carbs, and possibly an increase in some fats, such as a small amount of cheese.
Do you have a link to his new diet, with the emphasis on hight saturated fats and his published results on changes in his patients lipid profiles.
All I've ever found is for me, saturated fats push up cholesterol, particularly the bad one, so I'm interested in his results.
He is sometimes hard to work out exactly what he is advising his patients because in mush of his he has to downplay the higher fat (particularly the higher saturated fats) aspect so as not to aggravate his bosses and the Royal College of GPs etc. So it's usually only in his appearances at foreign low carb events (in USA and Australia) that he opens up more.
I came across the lowered LDL raised HDL and lowered Triglycerides in his patients from a fairly recent Tweet. Before that I only knew about the improved HbA1C, weight loss, improved liver function , normalised Blood Pressure and reduction in water retention problems.
However here (take off the double quotes at each end for the link) is a recent video from Zoe Harcombe Phd which includes a section on Lowest and highest Sat fat intakes countries in Europe and corresponding deaths from CHD :
"" huge discrepancy from what the average person would expect.
I will keep looking for Dr Unwin's data on LDL (which by the way neither he, nor Zoe , nor I consider to be 'bad' until it is oxidized or glycated).
A Low Carb way of eating not only controls blood glucose and blood pressure, weight loss etc. But it increases HDL and reduces Triglycerides. In a few it even reduces LDL, but even if LDL increases (as in my case) the overall ratios are often better (as mine are).
My view is that if HDL is higher (approaching 2.0) and Triglycerides are lower (approaching 1.0) then it really doesn't matter what the LDL is. But even in those for whom Low Carb reduces their LDL (and it doesn't do so by huge amounts - not like halving Trigs or doubling HDL) the Total Cholesterol figure isn't much changed.Just seems an odd discrepancy, when many people report LDL actually seems to rise, it only reduces LDL in a few cases, even including yours it seems?
Why did his cohort of patients have even their LDL lower than before?
And you seen to be a keen fan of the theory high cholesterol is better than lower, doesn't this finding worry you over these particular patients?
I'll remind you of the post.
So does BG, but I like that in the normal range as well.My view is that if HDL is higher (approaching 2.0) and Triglycerides are lower (approaching 1.0) then it really doesn't matter what the LDL is. But even in those for whom Low Carb reduces their LDL (and it doesn't do so by huge amounts - not like halving Trigs or doubling HDL) the Total Cholesterol figure isn't much changed.
What many feel matter most about LDL is the quality of it rather than the quantity. However you are correct that I feel it's counter productive to drive LDL down to very low levels because it has so many important functions within the body.
