If one went Carnivore for a year, would Diabetes be gone at the end?

[Admiral Benbow]

Ok, everyone, here is a hypothetical question. Let's assume person A is diagnosed with diabetes. They know that fats and meats tend not to spike blood sugars. So they just eat meats and eggs for the year with water beverage only.

Now assume they do this for a full year and get tested for A1C, and fasting glucose. Would you think think that their A1C and fasting glucose would be really low?

Also, at the end of that year, what foods would you think could re-incorporate safely?

 

[Drummer]

@Admiral Benbow From my own experience, starting off with a Hba1c of 91 my glucose levels went down to normal in a couple of months, and at 6 months Hba1c was 41, and has stayed top end of normal for years now.
I eat meat fish eggs cheese, have cream in my coffee and make desserts with high fat yoghurt and frozen berries.
I suspect that an ordinary uncomplicated type 2 would not need to do carnivore or really be all that strict to get back to normal numbers.
During that first year I lost quite a lot of weight - I'd been pushed to eat low fat high carb for almost 2 years and gained a lot of weight no matter how much I tried to control it. On low carb it was no effort at all, and my shape has changed so I need smaller clothes almost every year.
Low carb veges and berries seem perfectly OK right from diagnosis.

 

[Docb]

In my view it is an unanswerable question. It implies that everybody is the same and they are not. Also, whatever opinion is put forward it cannot be checked by experiment and so all you will end up with is rather pointless argument. The curse of the internet.

Interesting game, but not one I would want to join. Ever played the "crashed spaceship" game as a management training exercise?

 

[Lucyr]

They’d probably have new illnesses like scurvy and whatever else from not eating any fruit or veg for a year. Going low carb can reduce your tolerance for carbs so they might find they could only reintroduce low carb veg

 

[Admiral Benbow]

In my view it is an unanswerable question. It implies that everybody is the same and they are not. Also, whatever opinion is put forward it cannot be checked by experiment and so all you will end up with is rather pointless argument. The curse of the internet.

Interesting game, but not one I would want to join. Ever played the "crashed spaceship" game as a management training exercise?

I see your point, but by the same logic, everybody who gets diagnosed with diabetes gets diagnosed the same way, implying everyone is the same. So why is everyone the same for becoming diabetic, but not for reversing it?

 

[Deleted member 21371]

In my view it is an unanswerable question. It implies that everybody is the same and they are not. Also, whatever opinion is put forward it cannot be checked by experiment and so all you will end up with is rather pointless argument. The curse of the internet.

Interesting game, but not one I would want to join. Ever played the "crashed spaceship" game as a management training exercise?

That game was a long time ago!

 

[Deleted member 21371]

I see your point, but by the same logic, everybody who gets diagnosed with diabetes gets diagnosed the same way, implying everyone is the same. So why is everyone the same for becoming diabetic, but not for reversing it?

Not a diet I would consider.
Your Hba1c may well be low, but I like my cholesterol, BP, and every other test to be in the right place as well.

And if you do believe you have reversed you diabetes, surely the answer would be that you could re introduce any food.
If you can't, you are still diet controlled.

 

[Docb]

I see your point, but by the same logic, everybody who gets diagnosed with diabetes gets diagnosed the same way, implying everyone is the same. So why is everyone the same for becoming diabetic, but not for reversing it?

Now that is a thought I can engage with.

I have thought from the beginning of my encounter with diabetes that the idea of calling everybody with blood glucose control problems that were not blindingly obviously caused by an autoimmune attack on the pancreas as having T2 diabetes, implying that their problems all had the same underlying cause, was not a good idea. I can see why one might want to simplify things but doing so has its downsides as you observe in your final question.

Can't help but think that DUK could do the world a big favour by promoting a move to break down the T2 label into sub categories to reflect root causes and promote treatment protocols that were better targeted to those causes.

 

[Eddy Edson]

Every played the "crashed spaceship" game as a management training exercise?

I only remember the one where we were supposed to get an egg from side of the room to the other. It seemed pretty bogus so my group went out the back and smoked cigarettes instead.

Anyway, sometimes I get the impression that you sepnt most of yr work day playing management games. I hope *somebody* was keeping an eye on the control panel???

 

[Docb]

That game was a long time ago!

But like most good games, it stands the test of time! I have seen it drive board level managers into fits of rage over trying to sustain their position on the solution to what is a daft, and totally unanswerable question.

Interestingly it fails if you try it on children! Tried it on my scout troop. Left them to it, only to find that they decided that if the two nerdy, non sporty, scouts (who were good at that sort of thing) sorted it out, the rest would accept their answer. In the meantime they would do something more interesting and went out for a game of football.

I learned a salutary lesson from that.

 

[Docb]

Anyway, sometimes I get the impression that you sepnt most of yr work day playing management games. I hope *somebody* was keeping an eye on the control panel???

We left that sort of stuff to people who knew what they were doing.

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

I don't think we are designed to be carnivorous on the whole. Just as I don't think we are designed to live off a very carb-heavy virtually-no-fat diet either.

There are examples that demonstrate it can be done, by some people. But I just don't see the need, the appeal, or the necessity. Plus the planet can't sustain our population if we are all carnivores, unless perhaps we start eating each other.

I've seen one of those frustrating 'twin Dr' nonsense documentaries that had one on all meat and the other on all carb, both ended up miserable iirc, and the carnivorous twin had terrible constipation.

 

[Robin]

They’d probably have new illnesses like scurvy and whatever else from not eating any fruit or veg for a year. Going low carb can reduce your tolerance for carbs so they might find they could only reintroduce low carb veg

I agree with you, but I said the same in a post a few months ago and was roundly told off by the carnivore brigade, and informed that the only reason sailors got scurvy in the past was that they weren’t eating their meat fresh. 🙄
Personally, I think cutting all fruit and veg from the diet is a recipe for disaster, and certainly a recipe for chronic constipation, but apparently because one man did an experiment for a year and didn’t die, it’s perfectly Ok for the rest of us!😉

 

[bulkbiker]

They’d probably have new illnesses like scurvy

Nope.
Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilhjalmur_Stefansson

 

[bulkbiker]

Ok, everyone, here is a hypothetical question. Let's assume person A is diagnosed with diabetes. They know that fats and meats tend not to spike blood sugars. So they just eat meats and eggs for the year with water beverage only.

Now assume they do this for a full year and get tested for A1C, and fasting glucose. Would you think think that their A1C and fasting glucose would be really low?

Also, at the end of that year, what foods would you think could re-incorporate safely?

I don't even eat purely carnivore and my glucose is very low with sub 30 mmol/mol Hba1c's regularly.

If you had eaten like that for a year and experienced the benefits why would you want to re-incorporate "bad" foods?

 

[bulkbiker]

Can't help but think that DUK could do the world a big favour by promoting a move to break down the T2 label into sub categories to reflect root causes and promote treatment protocols that were better targeted to those causes.

Agree completely and start by recommending the testing of insulin production or c-peptide to determine over and under producers.

 

[AndBreathe]

I don't think we are designed to be carnivorous on the whole. Just as I don't think we are designed to live off a very carb-heavy virtually-no-fat diet either.

There are examples that demonstrate it can be done, by some people. But I just don't see the need, the appeal, or the necessity. Plus the planet can't sustain our population if we are all carnivores, unless perhaps we start eating each other.

I've seen one of those frustrating 'twin Dr' nonsense documentaries that had one on all meat and the other on all carb, both ended up miserable iirc, and the carnivorous twin had terrible constipation.

Frankly, most of those twinny "experiments" are nothing more than TV entertainment.

We all know that big changes to diet can bring unwanted consequences, which may or may not resolve. Just one example would be those who reduce their carbs and find themselves with a period of keto flu.

As someone who lives with "bowel challenges", there are two simple ways I can get moving if required - one is increase my fat intake, and the second is to mainline on chillies.

In my experience the sustainability of any given change (whether diet or almost anything else) is how much the person making the change wants to maintain it, coupled with whether they are moving towards whatever their objective is.

 

[Leadinglights]

A chap at work in the name of research started drinking 2 litres a day of a probiotic and made himself so ill he nearly died. Any of these things should be viewed with caution as there can be unintended consequences.

 

[Dragonheart]

Now that is a thought I can engage with.

I have thought from the beginning of my encounter with diabetes that the idea of calling everybody with blood glucose control problems that were not blindingly obviously caused by an autoimmune attack on the pancreas as having T2 diabetes, implying that their problems all had the same underlying cause, was not a good idea. I can see why one might want to simplify things but doing so has its downsides as you observe in your final question.

Can't help but think that DUK could do the world a big favour by promoting a move to break down the T2 label into sub categories to reflect root causes and promote treatment protocols that were better targeted to those causes.

It has been looked at and proposed before but unfortunately didn’t take off. https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/diabetes-care/the-5-groups-of-diabetes.html is just one article with a link to the study concerned.

Personally I agree it would be a huge step forward. Watching a lot of type 2 over the years I’ve seen at least two definite groupings. For example for some straightforward weight loss and some moderate restriction of carbs/sugars, often when medically obese, solves pretty much everything and numbers go from very high to totally normal in the mid 30’s relatively easily and stay there so long as the weight stays off. Whereas others less obese still reduce their weight, their calories, their carbs etc etc doing the same and more than the first group and still hugely struggle to even reach low 40’s without some serious dietary restrictions. There must be a significant difference in the cause of their issues to have such different responses to similar treatment.

Maybe it’s about insulin resistance or insulin production but it’s certainly looks genetic (outside of dietary causes) in some way imo. It also seems ones who mock and deride the second group’s more drastic efforts come from successes of the first group (who fit the NHS and Prof Taylor’s model so much better)

 

[Callista]

I wonder if any of the difference can be attributed to just how long someone has been overweight/obese? If it's chronic for years, then any T2 that develops may be harder to reverse, as the body has reset the glucose/insulin 'thermostat' etc?

Then there is the factor of age at DX as well, I guess (which is also interplaying with the 'how long have you been obese?' factor too)

Maybe too many potential variations to test easily.