My story of Type 2 reversal

[wallycorker]

Dear whally,

I find your situation fastinating, and so very much like my own. To answer your question I have no complications whatsoever beyond a small loss of sensation in my left foot. My DSN has made the statement "Sorry but there is nothing that can be done -just keep doing whatever you are doing now" Well I don't accept that, there are people who have reversed complications -at least in the early stages - Dr. Bernstein is a good example, and I am working on a solution to the problem as we speak. Now, from my earlier posts you may think that I am against oral antidiabetic drugs - nothing could be further from from my position - it's just that I believe, that in the long term, they do not work well. In your thread "Controlled carb approach to BG control", in my post, I point out that I have the results of UKPDS to back my viewpoint, but ofcourse I don't know if anyone has read it (including Northerner!) let alone agree or disagree with it!

I will certainly keep in touch, I have already noted that you, and a number of others post on other forums than this. BTW regarding your reserving judgment on points 1, 2 and 3 have you had a look at the video yet - it's only a minute or two long, but is, I believe, a devastating blow against the "high cholesterol causes heart disease" hypothesis! I value your opinions and would love to see your reaction.

Warmest Regards Dodger

Hi again Dodger,

Yes - I've taken a look at the video and I haven't seen it before. I have read similar stuff but not come acoss the Australian Aboriginal relationship before. It's another interesting point but I've seen so much conflicting advice that I find it hard sort out the wheat from the chaff. What it does say fits in with Dr Charles Clark's position and that is about where I have got to so far in my understanding what happened to me. I'll take a look for more info' on this aspect.

I really am still forming my opinions because I've read so many things that contradict each other. What I find simplest at this stage is to keep any views related to what I know has happened to me. I've plenty to go at just using that as my ammunition - and the medical people know it's factual because the information came from them.

What I can tell you is that my cholesterol levels always were high at a massive 9.74 the first time that I ever had it taken and in the 7s before and at the time of diagnosis of diabetes and before I started medication. Every medical person that I ever met told me that it was a certainty that I would die of a heart attack.

Then a few years ago I had need to have an angiogram and guess what the specialist told me? He said in his exact words "I had lovely arteries and would certainly not die of an heart attack so I better watch out for a bus getting me!". It's always been as though he was giving me someone else's result - i.e. the next bloke in the queue!

I suppose that little story from my first-hand experience fits in with your beliefs as regards cholesterol and heart disease. I must say that I'm still more of the opinion that the specialist was giving me someone else's result. However, I hope that it's you who is right.

Best wishes - John

 

[C*5_Dodger]

Hi again Dodger,

Yes - I've taken a look at the video and I haven't seen it before. I have read similar stuff but not come acoss the Australian Aboriginal relationship before. It's another interesting point but I've seen so much conflicting advice that I find it hard sort out the wheat from the chaff. What it does say fits in with Dr Charles Clark's position and that is about where I have got to so far in my understanding what happened to me. I'll take a look for more info' on this aspect.

I really am still forming my opinions because I've read so many things that contradict each other. What I find simplest at this stage is to keep any views related to what I know has happened to me. I've plenty to go at just using that as my ammunition - and the medical people know it's factual because the information came from them.

What I can tell you is that my cjholesterol levels always were high at a massive 9.74 the first time that I ever had it taken and in the 7s before and at the time of diagnosis of diabetes and before I started medication. Every medical person that I ever met told me that it was a certainty that I would die of a heart attack.

Then a few years ago I had need to have an angiogram and guess what the specialist told me? He said in his exact words "I had lovely arteries and would certainly not die of an heart attack so I better watch out for a bus getting me!". It's always been as though he was giving me someone else's result - i.e. the next bloke in the queue!

I suppose that little story from my first-hand experience fits in with your beliefs as regards cholesterol and heart disease. I must say that I'm still more of the opinion that the specialist was giving me someone else's result. However, I hope that it's you who is right.

Best wishes - John

Dear John,

I understand your position completely, but you may like to consider this:

When the graphs of two variables, say A and B, show a correlation there are 3 possibliities:

1. A causes B
2. B causes A
3. A and B are correlated because of some underlying common factor.

The trouble is epidemiology cannot say which of the above is true. However, when no correlation exists you can be sure that A is not related to B.

Regarding your search for more info' you may find this of interest.


Relation of aggressiveness of lipid-lowering treatment to changes in calcified plaque burden by electron beam tomography
The American Journal of Cardiology, Volume 92, Issue 3, 1 August 2003, Pages 334-336
Harvey S. Hecht MD, and S. Mitchell Harman MD, PhD.

Abstract: The comparative effects of more versus less aggressive low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol lowering (to ≤80 vs >80 mg/dl) on calcified coronary plaque progression by electron beam tomography were evaluated in 182 consecutive asymptomatic patients after 1.2 years of treatment with statins alone or in combination with niacin. Despite the greater improvement in lipids in the ≤80 versus >80 mg/dl groups, there were no differences in calcified plaque progression (9.3%/year vs 9.1%/year).

[My addition] Translated into European units LDL ≤ 2mmol/L: progression 9.3%/year vs LDL > 2mmol/L: progression 9.1%/year.

We conclude that, with respect to LDL cholesterol lowering, “lower is better” is not supported by changes in calcified plaque.

I guess we should end this thead for now, I know you will need to do your own research, rather than accept anything I can come up with!

Best Regards Dodger

 

[wallycorker]

thank you for all your explanations ...so much to take in... what are the low carb foods? after a short while of throwing caution to the wind and feeling crap i am determined to sort my self out...thanks to this forum i finally feel suported
cheers
am

Hi am,

Glad that you intend to sort yourself out. It really is worth doing especially in the long term.

It's not really a question of what are the low carb foods - it's more a cut out or down on a lot of the foods that are raising your blood glucose levels - i.e. cereals, bread, potatoes, rice, pasta, etc. Start there and gradually refine your diet until you have your blood glucose levels under control.

Good luck - John

 

[C*5_Dodger]

thank you for all your explanations ...so much to take in... what are the low carb foods? after a short while of throwing caution to the wind and feeling crap i am determined to sort my self out...thanks to this forum i finally feel suported
cheers
am

Dear am64,

In addition to whally's post I would like to add that adopting a controlled carbohydrate approach, although not easy, has some great benefits:

1. It is possible that you may be able to discontinue (with your Dr's agreement) your medications - no meds no side effects.

2. One can also obtain better control than is possible with oral meds, only insulin can match this approach - better control, delay or even avoid long-term complications.

3. There are good books out there which will enable you to adopt a formal approach to carbohydrate restriction - increases your chance of success. One I have used is by Jenny Ruhl (see books thread) but there's a choice.

Finally, some people question whether this approach works but consider this:
If you don't put glucose (i.e. carbohydrate) into your body - how can you have high blood sugar!

This ofcouse is just a slogan you actualy eat sufficient carbohydrate to keep your blood sugars on target!

Warmest Regards Dodger

 

[wallycorker]

Just to update on this thread - it's further great news for me! I've just received my latest HbA1c result and it is a further improvement to 5.1%.

Recently, I've been fine-tuning by cutting back further on the carbohydrate that I eat. I'm still eating quite a lot of carbohydrate - around 100g per day on average and quite often more - but most of the carbohydrate that I eat is now fruit.

I've been taking more and more of the starchy carbohydrate out of my diet and now eat hardly any cereal, bread or potatoes - and less pasta and rice too. When I do eat the latter I now only eat brown or wild rice and spelt or pulse pasta.

I've got the 4% Club within my sights now!

John

 

[Carina1962]

Wallycorker: i have just read your story and feel very inspired by it. I am fairly newly diagnosed Type 2 (Oct 2009) and i am taking every step possible to contol my diabetes ie losing weight (i am obese with a BMI of 37 but have already lost a stone and a half) doing lots more walking etc and i get the results of my first HbA1c next week. My DN also told me at the start that there is no such thing as a 'diabetic diet' and that i should follow a meal plan which was set out in a booklet she gave me and did not mention cutting back on carbs but i have learnt so much from this message board site and a couple of others too and am doing my own thing in controlling my BS levels. She too told me not to bother testing and just to use urine sticks but i have ignored her advice and bought myself a monitor just before i was diagnosed and unfortunately have to buy the expensive test strips. I was diagnosed at 7.8 fasting glucose level and also feel quite fortunate that i have been 'caught early' so to speak as only 12 months prior i was a 'non-diabetic' so within a year i became diabetic. I am reading the book you mention at the moment and am finding it very interesting. Yes, diabetes complications scare me (my late mother was diabetic) but i'm sure with the technology we have today (and improving all the time) we 'diabetics' have a better chance, i hope, of avoiding complications and leading a long, normal healthy life.