Answers & info – how & why

We have not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you are have any health related symptoms or concerns, you should contact your doctor who will be able to give you advice specific to your situation.

  • posted by Eureka
    on
    permalink

    Carbs = blood glucose. Insulin controls carbs. Not enough insulin production or it isn’t working properly = too many carbs for a diabetic to control unaided.

    I need to know how & why things do or don’t work. I found these companion sites helpful

    Google : prof Roy Taylor 800 calorie diet
    Look at : diabetes uk = The Direct Study
    : ncl.ac.uk. = Newcastle uni Magnetic Resonance Centre
    : nhslothian.scot.nhs.uk
    : http://www.phlaunt.com. = Diet 101 the truth about low carb diets. (Jenny Ruhl)

    We have personal FAT thresholds in our livers & pancreas. Too much in each = diabetes!
    The 800 calorie a day over 8 weeks diet is designed to rid the liver & pancreas of this FAT. We should then be able, if we are fortunate, to use our insulin properly again & deal with carbs for energy

    However, if we can unblock the drain be very careful not to overload the pipes again.

    Find out what your own personal threshold of carb toleration is.

    These sites & book have the info & recipes. Use them.
    Keep going. Good luck

  • posted by pmshrink
    on
    permalink

    Hi Eureka
    Thanks for the info really helpful.
    Penny

  • posted by Eureka
    on
    permalink

    Eureka : Hi all Type 2 Diabetics

    Re: broadcast Public Lecture by Prof Roy Taylor. To find :
    Go to ncl.ac.uk Reversing Type 2 Diabetes. See, Information for people with Diabetes. Public Lecture on reversing type 2 diabetes ( 4 th November 2014 ). Can be viewed ( press) here

    This is how to find this really important information for type 2 diabetics. Listen to the whole thing including Q&A’s at the end. I also took mob pics of the slides off my iPad Don’t know why I missed this from my first posting!

    Anyone not type 2 would find this helpful too. It’s’ all about his first trial & findings , which has inspired this BSD diet we are all now on!
    Eureka

  • posted by Eureka
    on
    permalink

    Hi hashimoto

    The sites on this thread are very informing. If you want to compare the original diet & shakes with our real food 8-week BSD. It gives you the carbs, protein & fats info in the Optifast shakes. I know some people want to get as close to Optifast shakes as poss. Global newbies might be able to get Optifast shakes that we can’t. Beware of the veg type & calorie count in the original diet. It’s strict.
    Watch the lecture Prof Taylor gave

    Jenny Ruhl has written a second updated edition of BLOOD SUGAR 101. It includes info on current drugs. And Diet 101 — the truth about Low Carb Diets, is full of very good advice too. Get them on Amazon etc. You won’t be sorry.

    Thought you could pull this info off ? For FAQS
    EUREKA

  • posted by neohdiver
    on
    permalink

    Just a word of caution.

    Dr. Taylor’s work is what inspired me to start this diet – so I am here because of his work.

    Unfortunately, I believe he is now extending his declarations about reversing diabetes beyond the strength of his studies. His studies (2 of them completed and one ongoing) were based on 600-800 calorie diets consisting of shakes + up to 200 grams of real food (primarily low carb veggies). He constructed that diet based on a 97% remission rate for diabetics post-bariatric surgery. The theory had to do with a dramatic decrease in calories to a level far below maintenance being key to losing the fat around the liver and pancreas.

    He now talks about personal fat thresholds, and weight loss being the key -at whatever rate is convenient for you. This is the really old (successful for only a very few) theory (10% loss should bring your blood glucose under control) – beefed up to make it personal (i.e. failures are explained because you just haven’t lost enough weight to get to your PFT), and a more significant weight loss (he suggests generally 15% – again, you just didn’t lose enough before). Nothing in his studies supports that – and since I’ve lost nearly double what he suggests is sufficient with no change in insulin resistance I am a huge skeptic of his new (unsupported) insights.

    That triggered me to do more research. What I have found supports his studies – that there is something in the 800 calorie diet (and/or fasting) that triggers reversing the diabetic spiral, in part by decreasing the glycogen stores in the liver. That same effect is not achieved (for most) by merely reducing weight.

    That research is why I am losing the last 19 lbs using the fast 800 diet. It is consistent with Dr. Taylor’s actual studies, not his current theories (unsupported by quality data).

    Prior to shifting to the fast 800 diet, combined with 16:8 fasting, I could not tolerate more than 20 grams of carb in a sitting and maintain normal blood glucose. I’ve been regularly testing my limits. This past week (nearly 2 weeks into the changed diet) I was able to eat 33 grams in a sitting with a normal BG response. My fasting BG levels have been dropping, and I’ve even had a couple of days where I stayed below 5.8 the entire day. Either I coincidentally hit my PFT at the exact time I changed my diet OR it is the severe calorie restriction and/or fasting that is shifting something. I believe the latter.

  • posted by Eureka
    on
    permalink

    Hi neohdiver
    Great news for you after all your hard work to reverse your diabetes. I’m not there yet, maybe I won’t ever be! But I’m trying.
    Inspired by Prof Taylor’s work & Dr Michael Mosley I’ve clung on to the only hope I personally have been given. My Drs were quite useless.
    I know there is no guarantee of reversing my type 2 diabetes. Both my parents were type 2, mine is probably genetic. If the best I get is really good control I’ll be happy. I know well the worst diabetes can get

    I do think (having read widely about diabetes) that I have a personal fat threshold. I may not be able to reach & maintain that goal. The sylph-like figure trapped in my memory of youth may stay there forever?

    The original diet with shakes was done for speed of weight loss in a monitored trial. Essential control of & consumption of calculated calories was key to that diet trial

    We are eating real food in real time. This is experimental stuff on willing volunteers. We have nothing to lose except weight! I’m a happy Guinea-pig. But I can’t wait five years for results. I want, need CHANGE.
    I believe excess CARBOHYDRATES are TOXIC TO ME. How low do I go? I don’t yet know. If it’s a ketogenic diet I need then fat for fuel is what I will do

    This is a huge learning curve for us all. Medics ( who are willing to learn too) are trying to get this right. Some , maybe most, will have to eat crow!

    The experiment continues. May we all benefit & see a victorious end

    Knowledge IS power. Power of CHOICE & CHANGE.
    Eureka

  • posted by Eureka
    on
    permalink

    Hi orchid
    Many thanks , you just did
    Eureka

  • posted by captainlynne
    on
    permalink

    As Bill said, we don’t need to over think things.

    In the past I’ve tried to reconcile differing food related theories without success.

    This time, following the BSD I’m not only losing weight, but have stabilised my fasting bloods between 4 and 4.9. I am my own experiment and am recording everything accordingly.

  • posted by lauren
    on
    permalink

    Fantastic results neohdiver, it’s great that all the hard work you’ve put in has had such a dramatic positive improvement on your health.

    I agree with you Eureka about people having a personal fat threshold. If it was simply a case of excess weight leading to diabetes then incidence would correlate perfectly with obesity, whereas what you actually find is that some people can be type II diabetic at a BMI of 20 and other can have a BMI of over 40 with no problems. What Taylor showed in his studies through MRI imaging was that they key to reversal of diabetes seemed to be patients losing about a gram of fat from their pancreas. I think it’s perfectly logical that this gram will be lost in different ways by different people, ie some won’t need to lose as much as other to get to this point.

    However, as far as I’m aware, there has been no evidence from his studies that this fat has to be lost quickly, it’s just the amount of weight loss that correlates with clinical outcome. The problem with the slow and steady weight loss approach is not that it doesn’t work in theory, it’s that in reality we get bored and unmotivated by the lack of progress and slip back into old bad habits. With a rapid approach like this by the time you get to the point you’d normally be giving in to temptation, you’ve seen a dramatic enough change in you health / wellbeing that you have enough drive to stick to it.

    Metabolically speaking there are going to be huge differences between people, and personally I think the most important thing is people finding a way that works for them, and that they can stick to long term. Hopefully by the time Taylor’s large clinical trial ends we’ll have more info that we do right now, but in reality it will probably raise just as many new questions as it answers old ones – that’s just the way science progresses. In the meantime, I think a bit of individual trial and error style testing within the rough guidelines he’s laid out is the only real way people will find their own personal solution. And I sincerely hope that everyone here does find something that works for them – whether it’s 20 or 100g of carbs a day, calorie counting or not, and a rapid or more gradual weight loss.

  • posted by neohdiver
    on
    permalink

    Laruen

    Thanks!

    Just to clarify what seems to be a misunderstanding, though, Taylor’s three studies all were done EXCLUSIVELY with people who were on the 600 or 800 calorie diet. Their reversals (except for one) came within the first week or two of the diet – long before any significant weight had been lost. (Success in his studies correlates with age (younger is better) and duration of diabetes (<4 years since diagnosis is better). It is his extension to weight loss, in general, that is without evidentiary support. (He has gathered anecdotal reports of people whose reversal correlates to weight loss – but because that is self-reported, accomplished without the controls of a study, and does not even include anecdotal reports from an entire population – merely the portion that chooses to self-report, it is interesting, but not scientifically valid.)

    His ongoing clinical trial (the third one) is STILL using the 800 calorie diet, so any additional information from that study will still only be directly applicable to a severely calorie restricted diet. I had hoped that he had modified it to test his new theory, but he did not.

    There may well be a personal fat threshold – although my personal experience, and decades of people trying to reverse diabetes merely by losing weight tends to suggest otherwise. He certainly now theorizes a PFT. But it is purely untested theory. Nothing in the data gathered from his studies so far (or the data he is currently gathering) provides (or can provide) evidentiary support for his personal fat threshold idea.

    That is precisely what troubles me – and why I have chosen to follow his original theory (the one he actually tested) which is dependent on a severe caloric restriction. I don’t always demand proof before I start on a new health care protocol – but someone testing one thing and then suggests something entirely different is proven by his tests, I tend not to pay much attention. I also try to point it out, particularly if someone seems to take it as true and to be basing health care decisions on it.

Please log in or register to post a reply.