Sunday, April 22, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #429: WebMD Nov/Dec 2017 issue

The waiting room at my wife’s doctor’s office always has multiple copies of the latest WebMD magazine, with “Complimentary Waiting Room Copy” imprinted on the cover. Although I brought my own reading material to a recent visit, I picked up the current copy to look for news about type 2 diabetes.
The November/December 2017 issue had no such news, except for pets. There was, however, an ad from Big Pharma to treat type 2 diabetes. The ad said, “…when [their product was] used with diet and exercise,” it may help to lower your A1c. The placement of the ad was prognostic: it was in the middle of the food section.
Beginning on page 87, the “holiday” food section featured 5 content pieces. Nestled among the first sugar-choked three – on red grapefruit, sweet potatoes, and cranberry sauce – was this 3-page ad for a new injectable medication, “to help type 2 diabetics lower A1c’s.” The FDA had approved it to be used “with diet and exercise in people who are not controlled” with long-acting insulin (<60 units daily), or lixisenatide.” The new drug is made by the makers of Lantus, a popular long-acting, injectable insulin (insulin glargine). 
This new drug is a combination drug – mixing 100 units/ml of insulin glargine with 33mcg/ml of Lixisenatide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist. This is a serious medication regimen. Think about it. It is for the type 2 diabetic whose A1c, even after taking up to 3 classes of oral meds, then usually another “non-insulin” injectable (you’ve seen the ads), then usually long-acting (basal) insulin, has progressed over the years…and after all this, is still “not controlled”. That’s why has this new drug been introduced. Take a moment to ask yourself this:
What’s a doctor to do? A doctor is trained to treat symptoms. High blood sugar and high A1c’s are symptoms that the patient’s type 2 diabetes is “not controlled.” The doctor knows the medical protocol to treat these symptoms: prescribe drugs in increasing doses as the patient’s disease “progresses.” They are taught that type 2 diabetes will progress, and the only thing the doctor can do is prescribe higher doses, stronger medicines and, as the patient’s condition worsens, the latest combination drugs until…? You can’t blame them, can you?
But why is the patient’s disease “not controlled”? All the ads are required to say that the patient is supposed to participate in their own treatment with lifestyle modifications, specifically “with diet and exercise.” Well, that’s quickly become a worn out trope, hasn’t it? The only elucidation in the drug ad is, “Eating healthy foods and exercising regularly.” You can’t blame Big Pharma for not getting into the “healthy foods” debate, can you?
In the ad a woman holds a sign that says, “A1c, it’s time to take you down!” A man with a little pot belly holds another saying, “I’ve been good, so why is my A1c bad?” On the website, a “GET THE FACTS” link takes me to another smiling person whose sign says, “My diabetes changed – so I made a change,” and another, under the heading, “Diabetes is complex with factors beyond your control. Here the sign suggests, “Age? Metabolism? Family History? Well, you can’t blame the patient for things that are beyond the patient’s control, can you?
Wrong! Your metabolism IS within your control. You’re a type 2 diabetic because of what you eat. If your type 2 diabetes is not controlled, or getting worse, it is because of what you eat NOW. That is THE CAUSE of your type 2 diabetes, and that is NOT a factor beyond your control; It is ENTIRELY within your control, and you have only yourself to blame (in spite of your doctor’s treatment protocol and Big Pharma’s slick ads) if you don’t understand that. CARBs become glucose in your blood. They RAISE your A1c and CAUSE you to gain weight.
Contrary to what Big Pharma and your doctor would have you believe, you have NOT been “good” and that’s why your A1c is “BAD.” If you want to lower your A1c and control your type 2 diabetes, you’re going to have to change what you eat. You’ll need to learn about carbohydrates and eat fewer of them. If you do, you will stabilize your type 2 diabetes and could even reverse it and put it in remission, to the point where, by diet alone, you could eliminate most, or even in some cases, all diabetes medications, including insulin. 

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #428: Portion Control?

Weight loss strategies are full of advice to control portion size…but nobody wants to measure! So, instead of a scale, we are counseled to use a clenched fist to estimate a protein portion. We are told to use a small plate so that a full plate makes the serving look bigger. Both devices work, but if you continue to eat a “balanced” diet loaded with nutrient-poor, high-carbohydrate, “processed” foods, you’re still going to be hungry.
Alternatively, if you are eating a Low Carbohydrate diet, you can fill your small plate with energy-dense protein and fat, and a few low-glycemic veggies, and you will feel full and remain sated for a longer time.
And if you are eating a Very Low Carb diet, you can eat these same healthy foods…or not. That is, you can skip a meal without hunger and save both time and money. Case in point: I am never hungry at “breakfast.”
Eating three meals a day is a social construct and a cultural habit. We’ve been told (by the cereal makers) that it’s important to “start the day off well with a big breakfast” and “breakfast is the most important meal of the day.” And guess what? It’s usually all carbohydrates, like fruit juice, cereals with milk and added sugar, and sugar-laden yogurt or bread with jelly or tea with honey.
Result: our blood sugar spikes, then crashes and it’s snack time or lunchtime, so we scarf down more carbs. By mid-afternoon, our blood sugar has crashed again and we’re ready for a nap…or a snack (candy bar, anyone?).
Do you see a pattern here? Einstein said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.” Well, maybe a diet of 3 meals a day, plus snacks, that is 55% – 60% carbs, or higher, is the problem! Maybe a change in what and when we eat, or even why we eat, would fix that problem. D’ya think?
For me, diet and portion control begin with 3 precepts (H/T to Diet Doctor): 1) Eat strictly a Low Carb Diet, 2) Eat only when hungry and 3) Use Intermittent Fasting as needed to reach and maintain a stable weight.
Here are a few practical tips that I use that you might consider:
1) For “Breakfast,” I have “downsized” and just drink a medium-sized mug of coffee to take my pills. Thus, I need a smaller pour of heavy cream to color and flavor the brew. I now get 3 weeks from a quart, at about 1½ oz/pour (150kcal). If you eat them (I don’t anymore), eggs & bacon are portion controlled. Cereals are not.
2) For “Lunch,” if I eat lunch, I eat from tins:  a tin of kippered herring in brine, or squid parts in its own ink, or Brisling sardines in olive oil or water. The small tin limits the meal, and it is all protein and healthy fats.
3) During the day I only drink a beverage that will not raise my blood sugar. I drink cold-brewed iced tea, “sweetened” with liquid stevia. I have tested this drink multiple times and it does not raise my blood sugar.
4) For “Supper,” if I am not fasting, I eat two small, pasture-raised lamb chops (an 8-rib rack provides 2 meals for 2 people), or half an 8oz Sam’s Club filet, or some similar premeasured portion of protein. We also share a low-glycemic vegetable, either tossed in butter or roasted in olive oil, or a salad with my homemade dressing.
5) For a supper beverage, I prefer one or two 5oz portions of red wine in a glass filled with seltzer. I know it’s only 5oz because I always get 5 pours from a 750ml (25.36oz) bottle. Sometimes I have iced tea instead.
6) If I have a “nervous eating urge” after supper, I use the wine glass for a Braggs Apple Cider Vinegar Cocktail: 1 Tbs of vinegar, a few dashes of bitters, and several drops of liquid stevia; add ice, swirl and fill with seltzer.
If you’re not hungry most or virtually all the time, as you are NOT when you eat Very Low Carb, portion control is…ahem, a piece of cake. BECAUSE YOU DON’T THINK ABOUT EATING OR PORTION CONTROL WHEN YOU’RE NOT THINKING ABOUT FOOD. And, about that piece of cake, you won’t crave it. You can enjoy it on special occasions, but you won’t NEED that carb snack to keep from falling asleep. You’re full of pep and “vinegar.” ;-)

Sunday, April 8, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #427: The Fasting Biohack, Trending in Silicon Valley

A TV story I saw peripherally described the latest trend in Silicon Valley as a “fasting biohack,” so I did a Google search. The first hit I got wasfrom an old Time magazine story about longevity; however, it was the lasttrend in that articleI found the story I was looking for in this piece from the September 2017 Guardian
The fasting that the Guardian wrote about has been variously calledExtended Fasting, Intermittent Fasting, or consecutive full-daywater fasting. It is not my namby-pamby, modified 300kcal/day regimen. And it is not One-Meal-a-Day (OMAD) fasting, as I did unsuccessfully for a year. In fact, I now use OMAD for MAINTENANCE ON NON-FASTINGdays, and my 2 or 3-consecutive day 300kcal fasts to drop a few pounds when I gain a few.
The Guardian piece is well written and worth reading. It starts off telling about a Silicon Valley CEO who has just eaten a small dinner and will next eat four days later at a fancy sushi restaurant. “In the intervening days it’s just water, coffee and black tea,” they relate. Over the last eight months this CEO has shunned food for periods of from two to eight days and lost almost 90lbs. He describes getting into fasting as transformative.”
How is it “transformative”? The Guardian story quotes the CEO as saying,There’s a mild euphoria. I’m in a much better mood, my focus is better, and there’s a constant supply of energy. I just feel a lot better.” “Getting into fasting is definitely one of the top two or three most important things I’ve done in my life. WOW!!!
The Guardian relates that Intermittent Fasting first gained popularity in recent times with the 5:2 diet, where people eat normally for five days a week and then eat a dramatically reduced number of calories (around 500) on the remaining two days.” However, they say, this CEO and others like him are pushing that idea further and with a focus on performance over weight loss.” It’s very significant that the Guardian picked up on that.
I can also relate to another comment: “Proponents combine fasting with obsessive tracking of vitals including body composition, blood glucose and ketones – compounds produced when the body raids its own fat stores, rather than relying on ingested carbohydrates for energy. This, they insist, is not dieting. It’s biohacking.”
Ketones are a super-fuel for the brain,” says another, “so a lot of the subjective benefits to fasting, including mental clarity, are from…the ketones in the system. I’m focused on longevity and cognitive performance,” he says. This CEO doesn’t need to lose weight, so he does a weekly 36-hour fast and a quarterly three-day fast. 
Another exec says, “The first day I felt so hungry I was going to die. The second day I was starving. But I woke up on the third day feeling better than I had in 20 years.” In my caseI have no hunger while transitioning from fed to fasting because I have been Very Low Carb for years, and thus transition easily from fed to fasting.
The Guardian says, “There is a mounting body of scientific research exploring the effects of fasting. Each year dozens of papers are published showing how fasting can help boost the immune system, fight pre-diabetes, and even, at least in mice, slow aging.” Dominic D'Agostino describes other benefits of fasting here (#421).
The Guardian, though, ends on a cynical note. One of the Silicon Valley execs says, “He doesn’t think it will ever be mainstream.” It seems too extreme. Everyone grew up hearing fasting was dangerous and super-difficult. Furthermore, no one makes money when people don’t eat. In this society, usually things that work against every entrenched economic interest are hard to take off,” he said. Alas, how true! And how sad, really.
This CEO concluded, It sound(s) crazy. You need to be a weirdo like me to get into this.” I know what he means. My readership has fallen off since I took up Ketogenic 2 and 3-day Fasting. I guess I’ll just have to be content with the 75 pounds I lost with my 300kcal/day fasts and mytransformative state of mild euphoria.

Sunday, April 1, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #426: Extend Bars, for diabetes management

The other day, while standing in the checkout line at my local supermarket, I saw a slightly overweight, middle aged man put some real food on the conveyor belt, and then a passel of Extend Bars. The previous day I had seen a TV ad for Extend Bars that made some bold claims.  So, since we are all influenced by marketing efforts for manufactured “foods,” and as a long-time type 2 and unofficial diabetes educator, I decided to take a look.
Extend Bars come in 8 delicious sounding varieties, all 150 calories. The first four have from 5 to 6 grams of fat, half of it saturated. These bars also have from 9 to 10 grams of protein. The balance of the calories (22 to 24 grams) is from carbs. Translating the grams to calorie percentages, fat percentages range from 30 to 36%, protein percentages from 24 to 27%, and carb percentages 59 to 64%, except…wait a minute, that >100%.
Keeping the fat and protein calories as fully metabolized, and subtracting from 100%, the carbohydrate percentages in the energy calculation for these 4 bars are reduced to from 59/64% to between 40/46%. How?
Extend explains: “How to Count the Carbs: Fiber, Maltitol, and *Non-Factor Other Carbs (5 grams uncooked cornstarch and 4 grams glycerin) convert slowly, thus have a minimal impact on blood sugar.” So, in their large print calculation on the Extend Bar, they subtract all but 1 gram of carbs (e.g.: 22g - 4g - 8g - 9g = 1 net gram).
However, in their energy calculation of 150 calories per bar, Extend subtracts only some of the carbs, leaving the uncooked corn starch and the glycerin, plus a little soluble fiber and some sugar alcohol (Maltitol) -- from 15g (40%) to 17.25g (46%) of carbs total -- to “convert slowly, thus have a minimal impact on blood sugar.” Nota bene: carbs that “convert slowly” are still AUC, i.e., Area Under the Curve, i.e., still fully-metabolized.
So, ignoring that they taste like candy bars, what’s the “virtuous rationale” of eating Extend Bars for diabetes management? The Extend website provides 4: 1) Minimize Spikes and Avoid Blood Sugar Swings, 2) Avoid Low Blood Sugar (Hypoglycemia), even Overnight, 3) Reduce Hyperglycemia in the Morning, and 4) Comfortably Bridge Gaps between Meals. Do you see anything in common in these 4 mechanisms? How do they do that?
You eat one bar in mid-morning, then one in mid-afternoon, then one before going to bed… and behold, you will “minimize spikes and avoid blood sugar spikes, avoid low blood sugar, even overnight, reduce hyperglycemia in the morning, and comfortably bridge gaps between meals” (because you ate a slowly converting, carb-loaded, candy bar between meals). By eating 3 “balanced” meals, and 3 carb-loaded “snacks” a day, 6 high carb "meals" a day, you will remain a carb-addicted, type 2 diabetic…even as you thought you were eating just 1 net gram. 
The mechanism, then, is to “juice” your body with CARBS, even with the Extend bar's reduced 40% - 46% carb content, perhaps because it is slowly converting to glucose in your blood. Uncooked corn starch and glycerin, from 3 Extend bars a day as recommended, is giving you a continuous infusion of carbs, sort of like being on a glucose drip.
Extend Nutrition describes their bars as “sweet,” with “rich (sugar-free) chocolate” and “creamy peanut butter.” I’m sure they taste good, if you have a sweet tooth (and who doesn’t). But just to be clear: when you double down from eating 3 “balanced” (carb-filled) meals a day to eating 6 times a day, supplementing the carb-laden meals with “snacks” that intentionally mislead you into thinking you are eating just 1 gram of carbs when they are, in fact, from 40% to 46% carbs with 15 to 17.25 grams of carbs that “convert slowly,” you are not really managing your diabetes wisely. But that’s up to you.
I put my food on the conveyor belt and checked out: eggs, heavy cream, grated cheese, green olives, fresh cod, beef short ribs, celery, yellow onions and garlic. I was tempted to buy crackers and some Macadamia nuts, but I know that if I have them in the house, I will eat them, and my diabetes management plan doesn’t allow for snacks between meals. When I avoid eating carbohydrates, I don’t need snacks. I’m not hungry.

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #425: “Ensure Original,” the “meal replacement”

Ensure Original, sold as a meal replacement, is available in grocery stores everywhere. But caveat emptor! Buyer Beware! Why? Because it is advertised as “complete, balanced nutrition for everyday health.” What does that mean? Well, it’s clever marketing, as I’ll explain. They go on to say that each can contains 9 grams of protein, 220 calories, and 26 essential vitamins and minerals. So far, so good, right? But let’s take a closer look.
As a nutritional claim, the word “complete” is not legally defined, but we know that a healthy diet requires complete protein, meaning a combination of essential amino acids (the things proteins are made of). A healthy diet also requires essential “micronutrients,” so presumably the 26 included in a can of Ensure Original covers those that are generally accepted as essential. The calorie count (220) is also okay, so I’d say, “So far, so good.”
So why then do I say caveat emptor, i.e. let the buyer beware? Because the term means: be careful because the seller knows more than the buyer. Our purpose then is to balance the information so that the buyer (you) knows more than the Ensure Original advertising reveals.
Real foods, and manufactured “foods” like Ensure Original, are composed of proportionate amounts of the three macronutrients: fat, protein and carbohydrate, plus assorted micronutrients (e.g., vitamins and minerals). The ratio of the “macros” in each food varies, as does the combined total for all foods in a meal. Recommendations for what the ideal ratio is also vary, and have changed dramatically in the last half century.
Back in the 1950s and 1960s, in the mistaken belief that saturated fat and cholesterol were harmful to cardiovascular health, U. S. public health officials and the American Heart Association, recommended that we should try to eat less than 30% of our calories from fat, just 10% from protein (in part because the best complete protein comes from animal products), and the remaining 60% from carbohydrates.
In 1977 the McGovern Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human needs institutionalized these 30/10/60 percentages in the Dietary Goals of the U. S. In 1980 and every 5 years thereafter the U. S. has published the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. A little later all manufactured foods in boxes, cans and bags included a “Nutrition Facts” panel in which each macronutrient was given in grams and then the percent of the “Minimum Daily Value” of that macro was given, using the 30%, 10%, 60% government recommendations.
These macronutrient recommendations persist to this day, even with the recently enacted “reforms.” So, when Ensure Original touts that it is “balanced nutrition for everyday health,” what does that mean? It means that Ensure Original is balanced the way the government recommends. Let’s look at the Ensure Original label.
A 220 calorie can of Ensure Original contains 6 grams of fat, 9 grams of protein, and 33 grams of carbs. Since fat has 9 calories per gram, that’s 54 calories of fat. Protein has 4 calories per gram so that’s 36 calories, and carbohydrate has 4 calories per gram, so that’s 132 calories. 54 + 36 + 132 = 222 calories, so let’s say 220.
Now, what are the macronutrient ratios in this can of “balanced nutrition for everyday health”? Fat: 54/220 = 24%; Protein: 36/220 = 16%; Carbs: 132/220 = 60%. Voila! Less than 30% fat, higher in healthy protein (as advertised) and exactly 60% carbohydrate. That’s almost exactly what the U. S. government recommended in 1980 and still recommends today. And coincidentally (?) in complete correspondence with the incidence and dramatic increase in obesity and type 2 diabetes in the United States. But, it’s “complete, balanced nutrition.”
So, ask yourself: Is this the kind of “complete, balanced nutrition” that you want to eat for your “everyday health”? Especially if eating this way for the last half century has caused you to put on unwanted pounds and become “pre-diabetic” or a diagnosed type 2 as more than half of us have? Or do you think that you can “ensure” your everyday health by eating a diet that is less than 60% carbs. What do you think? Can you?

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #424: Splenda Endulzante, ideal para toda la familia

You don’t have to be a Spanish student to know that this column concerns the artificial sweetener in the yellow packet. A bunch of them were brought to my table with a cup of coffee after lunch one day last winter in Medellín, Colombia. I didn’t use it, however, because I travel with my own little bottle of pure liquid sucralose, the chemical name for a “non-nutritive sweetener” identified with the commercial product Splenda.
What made this particular packet interesting to me was some information in the small print (in Spanish) that is not shown on otherwise identical packets in the U. S.: the percentages of each of the three ingredients, dextrose, maltodextrin, and sucralose, in order by weight, named on both the U. S. and Colombian products.
Just in case you didn’t know, dextrose and maltodextrin are just chemical names for compounds of the glucose molecule. Dextrose is the naturally occurring D-form of the monosaccharide glucose. Maltodextrin is a polysaccharide. That means it is a compound of between 3 and 17 attached glucose molecules. So, just to be absolutely clear, the two major ingredients of Splenda are both glucose.
But we already knew this. What’s new to me is that the Splenda packets in Colombia actually give the percent by weight of each ingredient: dextrose 95.8%, maltodextrin 3.0% and sucralose 1.2%. Wow, you say. That sucralose stuff must be a pretty powerful sweetener! Well, it is. But I say, wow, Splenda is almost 99%, glucose, the very thing that people who are trying to control their blood sugar should be trying to avoid!
So, now that you know, will you do anything differently? Will you carry a small bottle of liquid sucralose in your purse or pocket? I hope some of you will. I also hope that the others, who won’t, will at least know that you can’t trust anyone, who is invested in selling you something, to tell you the truth. We don’t sell anything on this site except an idea…the idea that good nutrition for type 2 diabetics means avoiding, as much as possible, eating carbohydrates, including glucose. And to do that, you must know where the carbs are.
With this in mind, I wrote a 16-page pamphlet in English, and a folleto en español, that describes, with a 20-part Q & A section, my personal transformation from drug-dependent type 2 diabetic to an almost drug-free type 2, in complete remission (A1c=5.1%). In the course of this transformation I lost 170 pounds and turned around a slew of blood markers including blood pressure, cholesterol, and inflammation. After my HDL-C doubled and my TGL dropped by two-thirds, my doctor took me off the statin drug that I took before I began to eat Very Low Carbohydrate (VLC). Did I mention this Very Low Carb way of eating transformed my health?
I wrote the “folleto en español” with the help of a professor in Bogotá who I also had to educate in this Way of Eating. As in so many countries, public health authorities in Colombia, and the compliant population, have followed the lead of the United States. Our governments have enlisted the population-at-large in a huge, catastrophic, failed public health experiment based solely on epidemiological evidence because, in the words of Senator McGovern, chairman of the 1977 U. S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, “Senators don't have the luxury the research scientist does of waiting until every last shred of evidence is in.”
As Jeff Ritterman, MD, says in this truly excellent 2015 Truthout article, “Senator McGovern's comment concerning ‘every last shred of evidence’ was widely off the mark. It was never a question of having supportive, but incomplete, evidence. There simply was no convincing scientific evidence at all in support of the commission's recommendations. There still isn't.” And there was and is lots of evidence to the contrary!
The next column will explore another product, one that is being sold as “balanced nutrition for every day health.” If you’re not careful, you might conclude this too is “ideal for all the family.” That product is “Ensure, Original,” sold as a “meal replacement,” and available in grocery stores everywhere. Caveat emptor!!!

Sunday, March 11, 2018

Type 2 Nutrition #423: Okay, I admit it; I’m not perfect

Earlier this winter I spent 6 weeks in Medellin, Colombia, studying Spanish and eating to my heart’s content. Actually, that’s not an apt expression…eating with abandonment would be more accurate. It was not doing my heart or my type 2 diabetes any good to eat “comida tipica,” but in the spirit of cultural discovery, I ate lots of “arepas” (corn cakes) and, just once, “ron con pasas” (rum raisin) supermarket ice cream. No excuses offered.
The container felt light when I took it from the freezer compartment, so my first thought was that it was loaded with air, like whipped butter. But when I got home I discovered it was really loaded with raisins and tasted quite good. It wasn’t until I had finished the container (naturally) that I looked at the ingredients. The first one listed was whole milk, then sugar of course, then “grasa vegetal,” or vegetable oil! “Incredible!”
Needless to say, I didn’t eat any more supermarket ice cream. Notice: I didn’t say that I didn’t eat any more ice cream. On a few occasions, in a fine dining restaurant, I had dessert with my coffee and once in a while it included ice cream – homemade, I assumed – with a wonderful dense chocolate cake (see photo). The supermarket I patronized also sold Haagen Dazs, but for a king’s ransom…by Colombian standards.
This is the second time that I have travelled to Colombia to study Spanish. Travel and study are things I can do in retirement, and I actually have an undergraduate degree in Spanish, so my studies are somewhat advanced and are made easier by having somewhere in the back of my brain all the irregular verbs conjugated in a dozen or so tenses. The hard part is not reading or writing or even speaking – but understanding the spoken word. I’m afraid it’s going to take more than a few weeks a year to improve that…so more travel and study.
Acquiring or re-acquiring a skill does take a lot of practice, and immersion is a well known way to do it. That’s how I came to eat Very Low Carb. I jumped in head first. The story has been told here many times but bears repeating. My doctor – who had been trying to get me to lose weight the conventional way – eat less on a balanced diet and exercise more – was desperate when he suggested I eat just 20 grams of carbs a day.
For my part I was motivated because, being unable to weigh in on his office scale (which only went to 350 lbs), I had gone to the Fulton Fish Market in NYC for a commercial scale and learned I weighed 375. Meanwhile, my doctor had read Gary Taubes’s seminal piece, “What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie,” in the NYT and tried the diet himself. He lost 17 pounds in a month, so he suggested that I try it too, to lose weight.
Well, I did. I lost sixty pounds in 9 months, and a few years later, on 30 carb grams a day, I lost a lot more. I then maintained a 170 pound weight loss until years later, fasting 2 or 3 days a week, I increased my total to 186 pounds. All of this without exercise and without hunger. But the really incredible part is that, from the first day, to avoid hypos, my cocktail of oral antidiabetic medication had to be greatly reduced, eliminating one altogether and cutting the other two in half, TWICE. And later I eliminated the sulfonyluria (glyburide) too.
My doctor was just as surprised as I was by this outcome. Not the weight loss, mind you, but the fact that my type 2 diabetes, from the first week, was thrown into remission. I still take Metformin (actually, with my doctor’s approval, I upped it to 750mg twice a day), and my latest A1c was 5.1%. Recently, several doctors that I have mentioned this to have told me that, clinically speaking, I am no longer a type 2 diabetic.
All of these outcomes – weight loss, A1c and blood sugar control, plus big lipid, blood pressure and inflammation improvements – were made possible only by what I don’t eat. But establishment medicine still refuses to accept that type 2 diabetes is a dietary disease and can be effectively treated this way. Maybe your doctor – or you – will have to be desperate to come to a similarly logical conclusion. I was, and my doctor was too, but it shouldn’t be that way. But they don’t burn heretics at the stake anymore; they just fade away…