Log in
Weight Loss NHS
80,651 members43,098 posts

watched an interesting programme with dr mosely about food/diet which not only lost weight but had major impact on sugars and cholesterol

mosely was looking into diets some extreme like fasting which brought all those levels down but was very hard to keep up then he tried the 5/2 regime which he as stuck to and the results were very good so its five days normal 2 days fasting but not total fasting thebloodsugardiet.com/the-5... iam using fasting to diet but this really looks easier once weight gets down

49 Replies
oldestnewest

pauluk60 , do you want to lock your post?

1 like
Reply

not bothered bridge had no probs so far just thought it was good for all

Reply

I agree, this is of interest generally.

However, plenty of people don't reply to unlocked posts as their replies can be shared around the internet without their knowledge or permission. That's why I mentioned it

3 likes
Reply

well they must be desperate to hack me bridge but thanks for warning me

1 like
Reply

Hello, I tried this to bring my insulin down, I've read a couple of his books and I was also able to buy a recipe book for the 5:2 with the kcal count so I could keep check if things😊

1 like
Reply

so you are useing it jo

1 like
Reply

No, once my insulin got reduced doctors wanted me on a Mediterranean diet. But when I was I did the fasting in Tuesday & Thursdays and made sure I was doing very little on those days. Had a few hypos at the start, I won't lie, but got use to it. 😊

Reply

Hi pauluk60,

I'm back of holiday tomorrow and I'm going back on the 5/2 bsd.

It worked for me before .

Gary

1 like
Reply

I like the 5:2 eating as well, and reviewed it here if anyone is interested 😊

healthunlocked.com/nhsweigh...

1 like
Reply

i like fasting but it can get to much so i could fall back to 5/2 as both days got to be togethere

Reply

really good indigo liked review and on the five days you can still eat to a diet if you want like it

1 like
Reply

So many beliefs about the effects of sugar. Here some reading that may be of interest.

cowseatgrass.org/2016/03/26...

1 like
Reply

Quite a complex report. I wonder if IvanTheHorrible or Concerned could help us with any comments on it

Reply

Whenever I write something long and detailed, someone invariably comments that it's complicated, and keeping it simple is sometimes a challenge. That said, some people just try to blind others with science.

We can cut to the chase about sugar on this one. There is no biological need for refined sugar in our diet. We can get all the sugar we need from real food that provides other nutrients.

The point about PUFAs is largely right, but that isn't an excuse to keep overdosing on sugar; there are healthy replacements, if we eat natural fat in the proportions of body-fat (57% MUFA, 40% SFA, 3% EFAs), and again eat non-starchy vegetables.

The argument about insulin resistance being due to low carbohydrate intake is counter to the claims about low carbohydrate being a quick fix to hyperglycaemia in many respects. Let me explain. We eat less carbohydrate and blood glucose comes down, but we are meant to have concerns that insulin levels become too low. Well, having low insulin levels is the last thing someone with insulin resistance needs to worry about, because it was high insulin levels that caused them to produce too much visceral fat. However, not to be totally dismissive, there is some truth in that the body conserves sugar when there is a dearth, but hyperglycaemia implies an excess of sugar by definition. The simplistic solution, and I would say this, is to provide the right amount of glucose the body needs. What is that? If there is insufficient carbohydrate in the diet the body attempts to make up the deficit from fat and/or protein. When the intake of carbohydrate is too high the body converts the excess to fat.

The point about fructose shows a bit of bias or naivity. No, it doesn't directly raise blood glucose or insulin, but what it does do is thicken the blood seven times as much as glucose does which raises the risk of blood clotting. The telling thing is that the body has no purpose for fructose, and transports it straight to the liver for conversion; that's why the Gi is low, because any glucose that is made has to go through that process first, and often in today's society where excess carbohydrate consumption is the norm, much of it is converted to fat. This fat contributes to non-alcoholic fatty liver, and emanates as visceral fat causing insulin resistance by blocking insulin receptors.

I hope this helps.

4 likes
Reply

Thank you, and I hope I haven't opened you to comments about giving too complicated an explanation. I agree, it has to be complicated.

I couldn't make much sense of that article; it seemed contradictory in places and the fructose argument seemed odd but I had no way of querying it.

Simba1992 , do you have anything to add?

Reply

TBH, reading back there are elements of what I've put about blood glucose that may not be clear, and that's because it is in a constant state of flux. The blood glucose responds to the hormones, then the hormones respond to the blood glucose. I find it easier if you try to visualise it with pictures :-)

From my biased point of view, if you follow the ICS-NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme dietary approaches of Mediterranean, Low-Carb and Intermittent Fasting tailored to your individual need, you will be eating healthily.

3 likes
Reply

I am pleased to read this! I didn't know about the ICS Diabetes prevention programme but have found Low carb, high fat, Mediterranean and intermittent fasting the best diet for me just generally from trying things out :)

2 likes
Reply

same here i use fasting or when that gets to much the 5/2 diet

1 like
Reply

well i will have to do 5 years at uni to get to grips with all that lot but thanks but simbas my consultant from other posts but you all know your stuff

2 likes
Reply

Great explanation Concerned 😊. Thank you

Reply

I'm probably just going to add more confusion here, but I'll give it a go.

First, a general observation. The root of the problem with this endless diabetes/obesity/insulin debate is this: most of the physicians, dieticians, researchers etc who comment on the subject are not aware of the field of mathematics that describes dynamic systems with feedback (of which the body's energy-management system is an example). Without a coherent framework to hang their thoughts upon, they end up inventing ad-hoc explanations. The linked article is a classic example of someone who really doesn't grasp the fundamental nature of the thing he's trying to describe: it's just a shopping-list of disparate observations with no apparent connection between them.

I'm going to attempt to describe my view of insulin resistance and diabetes within the context of established control-systems theory. I have never seen this attempted elsewhere (for the reasons mentioned above). However, it accords with empirical facts about the progression of diabetes and its reversal. This post is quite long, but I'm trying to compress a thick textbook's worth of stuff involving calculus into a few paragraphs.

A control loop has four aspects:

- The process variable: the thing being monitored and controlled.

- The setpoint: the desired state(s) of the thing being controlled.

- A control output: a signal computed from the error between the setpoint and the measured process variable.

- A control element (also called an actuator): it's the thing that, by some physical means, brings the process variable closer to the desired setpoint.

Human metabolism is a series of interlocking control loops, and control loops around control loops. There are multiple process variables, setpoints, control outputs and actuators. Technically, it's an adaptive multiple-input, multiple-output system. It's mind-bogglingly complicated. I'll try to describe only the bits involving insulin.

- There is a setpoint for blood glucose (one of the process variables). It's roughly 100mg/dL. That's the main constraint that drives the system: the body must maintain this value, or bad things happen.

- insulin and glucagon, taken together, are the control output, computed by the pancreas on the basis of glucose measurement (and a whole bunch of other stuff, it seems).

- The actuators are primarily your muscles, liver, red blood cells, and fat cells. They can respond to the insulin/glucogon signal by absorbing energy (typically glucose) and transforming it into something else.

The actuators will only respond to insulin/glucagon if they have some ultimate use for the available energy. Your muscles can store it as glycogen or burn it; your RBCs, fat cells, and liver can store it in various forms. Any or all of them can "reject" glucose by becoming insulin resistant. This sort of feature is called adaptive control. It's basically another control loop monitoring the operation of the "inner" loop and optimizing its performance.

There are other setpoints other than just blood glucose: for example your muscles have a certain energy demand, depending on what they're doing.

So where do "sugar spikes" and "insulin spikes" come from?

Remember: blood sugar is a process variable and insulin is the control output. They are mathematically related, but I'm not even going to attempt to explain how. To grasp how this works, imagine a bathtub with water flowing in (glucose) and water flowing out (muscles etc doing their jobs). It's a weird bathtub. The incoming water is controlled by some mysterious person elsewhere: it might be a torrent or a trickle. The outflow is under your control. Your aim is to keep the water level at a certain mark on the tub. You can eyeball the water level, and you can turn an outflow tap by hand.

To determine a mismatch between inflow and outflow, you'd have to take a guess how far the water level is above (or below) the setpoint mark, and perhaps how fast or slowly it's rising (or falling). Then you'd have to nudge the outflow tap a little more open or closed. Here's the point: in order to make a judgement about opening or closing the tap, you'd have to actually see the water level change. Depending on how good you are at eyeballing things, it might be quite a lot of change, or a little. When you see a change, you'll have to guess whether to open the tap a lot, or a little. The hand movement resulting from your judgement is the control output, and the tap is the actuator.

Imagine you've got inflow and outflow nicely matched, and then suddenly the inflow increases [a carb-heavy meal]. You'll see two things: the flow rate itself changing, and the water level changing.

The water level change that you observe is a "sugar spike", and it's inevitable. Even if you were able to make a very clever prediction about the exact tap setting to match the inflow, there would be some transient change in the water level.

You'd initially want to open the tap quite a bit, and then close it off to some steady-state position as the water level approached the setpoint again. There's your "insulin spike".

To recap: modest sugar spikes and insulin spikes are completely normal.

Here's where it goes wrong. Imagine the inflow becomes extremely large. You open the outlet to its maximum extent, but you can't match the inflow. This is actuator saturation. All you can do is watch helplessly as the level rises waaaay above the setpoint, and hope that the inflow slows down. Eventually it does. You leave the tap open to let the level drop, and you can start to close the tap again. Notice: you have both a very large "sugar spike" and a very large (yet inadequate) "insulin response". The insulin response shuts down long after the actual flow surge has abated.

Now, let's crank this up somewhere close to the level of complexity of a human body.

- The water flowing out can go to one of three places: a big bucket [fat], a small bucket [glycogen], or a smallish drain [muscles]. You now have three taps instead of one. Not only do all three taps have certain maximum flow rates, you've also got buckets with certain capacities.

- The water in the buckets can be pumped back up to the tub.

- The buckets all have a highwater mark that needs to be obeyed, although the highwater mark can change.

- The size of the small bucket and the drain can change [changes in muscle size/efficiency]

- The size of the big bucket can be increased [fat cell expansion and proliferation].

- If the buckets overflow, a bunch of other little buckets can be added [visceral fat].

...and that doesn't even cover the half of it.

Hopefully, by this point, you appreciate there's a bit more to the human body than "calorie balance".

Anyway, here's a few important points:

- The glucose control signal (insulin) will look pretty busy if it sees a lot of glucose on a regular basis.

- If the actuators aren't able to consistently accommodate the glucose flowing in, the blood-sugar constraint will be regularly violated.

- If that happens, the body must attempt to re-tune the control system to improve the situation. One sensible way to do this would be to force the most flexible bucket [bodyfat] to accept more energy as other receptacles refuse to accept it.

- If the adaptation mechanism runs out of possible adaptations, the whole thing breaks catastrophically. This is Diabetes Type 2. To be clear: diabetes is nothing to do with high levels of this or that. It's what happens when an adaptation process is pushed to a position that has no mathematical solution.

The crux of the matter is this: everything the body does with its glucose management system is an optimization operation. Its overriding priority is to stay alive. Therefore, any theory that posits behaviour that makes no sense in that context is probably wrong. The body is not at war with itself.

Example: the article suggests that excessive PUFAs and low glucose inputs can cause insulin resistance in the liver, ie., the liver starts to reject glucose. Now, one needs to ask: why would this happen? Well, one answer might be that because there is so little glucose around (and an excess of fats than can be burned for energy) the liver's storage services are not really required: it's better to let other systems have first dibs on available glucose, and the liver will perform its other role instead, which is gluconeogenesis (synthesis of glucose from fats). So all we have here is an adaptive response to diet, not a malfunction.

What's the PUFA connection? Absolutely no idea. PUFAs may well have something to do with inflammation, but I fail to see how or why the body would want to use them to modulate its glucose response.

Let's go back to T2Diabetes. There are some who suggest you can fix this by giving the patient a diet with very low calories but very high carbohydrates (in % terms). How would you expect the control system to respond to this? Well, all of the actuators are refusing to respond to insulin - in other words, the outflow is blocked. Under those conditions, the blood-glucose constraint will still be violated: the system can see no meaningful change in its inputs, and will remain "pinned" at its dysfunctional extreme. It can only adapt back to a more sensible position if the outflow is (by pure chance) larger than the (reduced-calorie) inflow. This is exactly what happens in experimental therapies of this kind: some people see a dramatic positive result, and some people see no change at all.

-

2 likes
Reply

I'm afraid there is still a lot of things you need to learn about the biochemistry and metabolism in us. Here is a link that may be useful.

raypeatforum.com/community/...

Reply

i need an asprin what have i started all this for a round of toast

2 likes
Reply

>> Keep in mind that this actually is NOT a high fat diet, and is close to what most people eat on a daily basis.

So how does this study tell us anything at all about high fat diets?

>> Insulin sensitivity was measured only at baseline (day −3) by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (19) before HFD.

This sort of thing drives me nuts, and it's exactly what I was railing against above. The only useful test for characterizing a control system is its impulse response or its step response. The glucose clamp test is fundamentally meaningless (as well as pointlessly complex).

>> Excess dietary fat has also been implicated in the development of obesity and diabetes

No it hasn't. The overwhelming majority of people eating LCHF diets are neither obese nor diabetic, while Metabolic Syndrome skyrockets out of control in populations eating low-fat diets. QED.

Although an increase in free fatty acid concentrations was not seen in this cohort, fatty acid flux through the muscle is by necessity increased in these subjects as demonstrated by a decrease in 24-h respiratory quotient (data not shown) to match fat intake in this experimental paradigm

In other words, their bodies were working just fine and adapting very fast to a change in input calories (reduced carbs, more fat). The precise nature of that adaptation is neither here nor there; the important fact is that it occurred.

Reply

Thank you Toad - I really appreciate your explanation of insulin resistance. I can't pretend I can get my simple brain around everything you wrote but the bath analogy was brilliant and clear and really helpful - thanks!

1 like
Reply

I'm just happy to hear someone read to the end of my post without losing interest ;)

2 likes
Reply

will do

Reply

Understanding the effects of PUFAs. Perhaps this text clarifies this better.

patriotdirectfm.com/2017/12...

Reply

scared to put anything on me plate now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 like
Reply

Just keep away from PUFAs ( processed foods) eat starches sparingly, use coconut oil and olive oil, keep away from seeds and grains ( gluten) and seed oils as well as vegetable oils. Eat good carbs, fruits berries and sugar is ok do not restrict carbs too much. Dairy is good if you tolerate it. Keep this in mind and you'll be fine and lose pounds. You can do the 5/2 following these principles too. 😊👍🏻Good luck

1 like
Reply

thanks simba

Reply

Just to be clear: I suspect we are all eating way too many PUFAs. No human in the planet's history has ever consumed them in such quantities, so it's as well to be wary.

However, I doubt they have anything to do with diabetes except as an incidental or aggravating factor. We are also eating enormous amounts of refined carbohydrates, which again is something no human has ever done. Since diabetes is a disease of carbohydrate metabolism, it's logical to expect excessive carbohydrates to be at the root of the problem.

Reply

i agree with you with all the supermarkets and food outlets but how do we stop the kids from eating it all everywhere you go its food food food then we all stand up and wobbly away well i do but having said that very rarely eat out i went to MacDonalds once whatever we got it wasnt food never again but i have mates who can eat for england and all bad stuff if were out but stay the same weight could kill em

Reply

Isn't it also to do with decuded potassium salt intake reduction

1 like
Reply

i will have to look at that one also

Reply

Hi Paul

I just saw your message from 14 days ago about your nick name & my Mottsie. I am 70 ... when l was little my babysitters last name was Motts. I loved them like Grandparents and years later named my beautiful Chocolate Lab Mottsie. Mystery solved...

1 like
Reply

i am just mott not many of us

Reply

I was little so it may have been Mott. Charlie lived in Illinois but had family around Elkhart Indiana. He was my Hero.

1 like
Reply

i think there is quite a few mott families in usa mott st in new york and big company mott macdonald bridge builders

Reply

Have you tried whole body cryotherapy. Apparently one session can help lose up to 800 calories and it can also increase metabolic rate. Someone was promoting in the Leicester town centre. It's suppose to be very good for fibromyalgia

1 like
Reply

i will have to look that up

Reply

You'll be surprised by the benefits

Here's some information there's links to journals as well selfhacked.com/blog/whole-b...

It will most definitely help you because from my own experience it promotes release of natural endorphins, reduces muscular fatigue and helps blood flowm obviously this is on top of what I was saying about burning the extra calories but the truth is I was feeling a lot better because of it to push myself to exercise more. You got this, my friend.

1 like
Reply

opposite of a sauna a big freeze box or stand in yard for 20 mins i could agree but dont think it will go down well with a lot of peeps

Reply

Sometimes we need to be out the ordinary to mirror our situation. Why do you think it wouldn't go down very well. The temperature is - 85. I understand but there's a guy by the name wim hof who swears by the cold and his methods are becoming world renowned. Just explain why a 3 minute treatment wouldn't go down well.

Reply

85 where you are not here about 10c which is warm where would you get this treatment in uk and how much

Reply

No doubt its daring but the benefits outweigh everything. It's often used by people who suffer auto immune diseases. I've witnessed unbelievable results on psoriasis.

Reply

From what I've researched the costs varies but it's very popular with athletes who swear by it for the combination of benefits I've told you

Reply

The journala back up how it's can alleviate mild depression anxiety and stress as long as it's the whole body cryotherapy and not the cryo sauna

Reply

The journals*

Reply

You may also like...