D
Deleted member 21371
Guest
Well, it'll certainly be an interesting experiment.
You'll have to let us know how the review goes.
-
Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
-
Learn more about joining the Diabetes UK Support Forum team here: https://forum.diabetes.org.uk/boards/threads/volunteering-opportunities-why-dont-you-join-us.112862/
Type 2 and insulin resistance - what I don't understand is...
- Thread starter Callista
- Start date
- Status
Well, it'll certainly be an interesting experiment.
You'll have to let us know how the review goes.
Why do you think a 48 hour fast would raise glucose levels?
That's Prof Taylors theory.
It's still not proven.
We see that over time his method starts to fail and fewer people can remain in a pre-diabetic state (which is what his "remission " is).
That why my trigs were elevated not my blood glucose..
Windy
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
True enough. Time will tell. I don't really know what you mean with "his method starts to fail"? Can you clarify please as it's been a long day at work and I'm not getting what you're saying there.
Do you mean people put weight on over time, which pushes them from not actively diabetic (in remission) into pre-diabetes and actual diabetes? He addressed weight gain in his original paper, and in another clinical trial, which said:
"The DiRECT programme sustained remissions at 24 months for more than a third of people with type 2 diabetes. Sustained remission was linked to the extent of sustained weight loss. "
I'm not aware of a longer term study regarding weight loss and diabetes remission, but I haven't looked tbh. If you've read one and can send me the link, I'd be interested to read it.
You seem to be mixing together "pre-diabetic", which is defined as having an HbA1c of between 42 and 47 and "remission":
"An HbA1c < 48 mmol/mol (<6.5%) and/or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 5.6–6.9 mmol/l (100–125 mg/dl) were used to define a partial remission, while ‘normal’ levels of HbA1c and FPG (<5.6 mmol/l [100 mg/dl]) were required for a complete remission." They're not exactly the same.
The reason I ask is because if you think T2s are doomed to failure, is there any point in losing weight? Should I put the 40Kg I lost back on, and get my HbA1c back to the 83mmol/mol it was when I was diagnosed, or should I try and maintain the 34mmol/mol I had a couple of weeks ago when I got my blood test results?
I know which I'd prefer to do, I travel hopefully, and hope that T2 stays away for the foreseeable future.
1 year after the trial 46% had achieved "remission" HbA1c levels of sub 48 mmol/mol (so still possibly pre diabetic)
After 2 years 36% of the trial group were in remission so it seems that the results were not sustainable for the trial arm participants who had achieved remission after 12 months.
I'm not mixing up anything.. Taylor's definition of "remission" is sub 48 mmol/mol HbA1c which could mean that all the trial successful trial participants could still be pre diabetic.
I haven't said they are doomed to failure just that DiRECT wasn't as great as many people make out.
I'm still in remission by my definition (unmedicated sub 40 mmol/mol HbA1c after 7 years).
But I didn't use a crash diet to achieve it. I followed an ultra low carb time restricted eating method which for me seems to have been far more effective.
Obviously this will be far better for you... I'm just questioning the starvation method of achieving it.
D
Deleted member 21371
Guest
Bulkbiker's weight variences are in his signature.
Not everyone goes down the rabbit hole.
Weight loss works, stay in the place you are.
Don't be dissuaded.
I don't rely on diet control.
I just had an eat all you can Chinese buffet, a monster of twelve starters and eight mains, between two of us.
I can do that today, I'll suck it back in tomorrow.
it's well worth staying with what works for you.
We are all different, we all need to do what we can do, to the level we can manage.
Keep doing what you are doing.
Enjoy travelling, I certainly do, and I just hoover up local foods , (sometimes in a limit, sometimes not) 🙂
Last edited by a moderator:
trophywench
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 1
Good grief!!! -
This is the first time in ...... got to be about 20 years? I have ever even seen the word hyperinsulinemia used. However ISTR that it was previous to then considered one of the reasons why some people became fat and then morbidly obese but by then all sorts of other reasons eg more carb than could be tolerated by some humans so needed reducing for progress to be made on weight loss and also glycosylated haemoglobin, were well in progress of being discovered so were being discussed and passed on literally by the online version of word of mouth on the only specific diabetes News Group that then existed, and Oooh look - that works!
This is the first time in ...... got to be about 20 years? I have ever even seen the word hyperinsulinemia used. However ISTR that it was previous to then considered one of the reasons why some people became fat and then morbidly obese but by then all sorts of other reasons eg more carb than could be tolerated by some humans so needed reducing for progress to be made on weight loss and also glycosylated haemoglobin, were well in progress of being discovered so were being discussed and passed on literally by the online version of word of mouth on the only specific diabetes News Group that then existed, and Oooh look - that works!
Admiral Benbow
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- At risk of diabetes
Did you have any beverage with this meal? If so, what was it? Also, did you eat much rice, sweet and sour chicken or noodles?
Windy
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
I see, you don't agree with the methods of losing weight quickly. As a former 6 stone overweight fat person, I didn't manage to stay on a diet for more than a couple of months, so the quickness of the weightloss was part of the reason I did my own version of the ultra-low calorie diet, as I didn't think I'd be able to stay on a diet for very long. As it was, I managed 3 months on 830 cals/day, and then moved to 1,500 cal/day. Interestingly, it was easier to stay on the 830 cals than it has been on the 1,500, as my food cravings stopped.
I don't think either the 46% after 1 year and 36% remission rates after 2 are too shoddy - I read somewhere that the remission rate for traditional diabetes education courses was 5% [I'll try and find a link to where I read it, but it's evading me atm].
Previously, I'd thought T2 was a life long illness, and it said so in the booklet I got on my diabetes course, so having the opportunity to try for remission was a revelation to me. I came away from the diabetes course feeling quite down, whereas after reading Prof Taylor's book, I was quite chipper, as I knew I could make changes that might help, via weightloss. Hope is important, and Taylor offers that, but with no guarantees. And his "crash diet" is cost effective to the NHS.
As long as people find some way to put the brakes on their T2, I don't mind how they do it, whether it's a Newcastle diet, a regular long term diet, low carb, exercise or anything else that works for them. The important this is to try.
Saying stuff like "his methods start to fail" gives the message that it's a bit hopeless to try, and I'm pretty sure that's not what you're really meaning to say.
Because I'm happy to share my results....
Still well in remission after 7 years.. maybe it's not all about 'weight" per se?
Windy
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
Results - Me too, though I haven't got round to putting my cholesterol on there yet.
I notice that you've gone from 143kg to 106.8kg, so I would imagine weight loss played some factor in your remission. I'm aware it's not at all easy to lose weight for multiple reasons, you've done so well to lose the weight. More power to your elbow there Bulkbiker.
D
Deleted member 21371
Guest
Wine and beer.
A bowl of rice each, prawn toast, a lot of crispy things, sweet and sour, soup, desert, it's going to be a restrained week ahead.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was in remission within 4 months.. most of the weight loss came after that so.... and the maintenance of the majority of the loss certainly came much later.
I've found a study that discusses this:
https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-020-01688-6
D
Deleted member 21371
Guest
As I say, that's the beauty of not being diet controlled 24/7.
Life carries on the way I want it to, not the way diabetes forces it to.
"
Successfully reversed type 2 in 2014 with weight loss and the Newcastle Diet
Still eating a normal healthy Mediterranean diet nine years later"
Diet mentioned twice in your signature... so are you diet controlled or not?
Last edited by a moderator:
Spathiphyllum
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 1
This academic article by Prof Taylor, from 2021, gives a good overview of his work, including the idea of the 'personal fat threshold': https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8247294/ .
From this and other academic articles, I gather the idea is as follows:
Subcutaneous fat does not cause Type 2; but each of us only has so much subcutaneous fat capacity. Picture it as a bucket; some people have a huge bucket, others only have a small bucket. People get T2 when their own personal bucket spills over! Because, once your body starts storing a lot of fat in and around your liver and pancreas, rather than subcutaneously-- that's when you get T2.
Take two people, Ann and Bill. They both start off with a BMI of 22. Then both of them start eating too much and being very sedentary, so they both start gaining weight in the form of fat.
Ann has a HUGE amount of subcutaneous fat capacity. She becomes vastly, morbidly obese, and still doesn't get Type 2-- because her body continues to store more and more fat subcutaneously and doesn't store it as 'ectopic' or 'visceral' fat, fat in and around the liver and pancreas. She will have a lot of other health problems, but not T2.
Bill, however, has very little subcutaneous fat capacity. So his body very quickly starts storing fat in and around his liver and pancreas-- his small bucket overflows into the bad places very quickly. So, by the time Bill's BMI is 23, he has T2.
This would explain why many obese people don't develop T2, whereas some people with BMIs of 23-25-- which is not even classed as overweight, let alone obese, in official terms-- do develop T2. (Note however that it seems to be very rare for people with a BMI under 22 to get T2.)
Very low calorie diets work because, with severe calorie restriction, your body 'eats' ectopic or visceral fat first, before it starts 'eating' subcutaneous fat. So people who are obese and have T2 may remain obese yet still reverse their T2, because they've lost their ectopic fat.
Oh wow - thank you all SO much for all your posts and replies! I shall work my way slowly and assiduously through them. There is a LOT to take in!
So glad I asked the question - so much to learn and know!
Thank you all again.
Cheers, Callista
So glad I asked the question - so much to learn and know!
Thank you all again.
Cheers, Callista
- Status