'The Obesity Code: Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss' by Jason Fung

albertabeefy

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

I'm not great at interpreting most studies but this one shows a vegetarian diet improves diabetes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4221319/

Full disclosure I'm a pescatarian - I don't eat meat for various reasons. I'm not advocating or against any particular diet but I see in these forums that Keto is the key for diabetes but if I'm reading this study right a vegetarian diet is also beneficial.

Am I missing something? It seems Fung is revered for Keto/diabetes but it looks as if there are other options just as good.

You're missing a lot. First, it wasn't a study - it was a review. A review of six studies they cherry-picked out of 477 they looked at ...

Here's their results:

"Consumption of vegetarian diets was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c [−0.39 percentage point; 95% confidence interval (CI), −0.62 to −0.15; P=0.001; I2=3.0; P for heterogeneity =0.389], and a non-significant reduction in fasting blood glucose concentration (−0.36 mmol/L; 95% CI, −1.04 to 0.32; P=0.301; I2=0; P for heterogeneity =0.710), compared with consumption of comparator diets."

First, the reduction in HbA1c was - in a word - pathetic. -.39 percentage points for a diabetic isn't much, especially when you see that LCHF diets show significantly higher reductions in addition to reduction or elimination of medication.

The science is quite clear on this - dietary carbohydrate restriction has the greatest effect on reducing blood glucose levels.

http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(14)00332-3/fulltext
https://nutritionandmetabolism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-7075-2-16

There's dozens more studies and reviews on the research.

What I wish that proponents of vegetarian diets would do is at-least acknowledge that you CAN significantly improve diabetes if you eat a low-carb/high-fat vegetarian diet - it's especially easy if ovo-, lacto- and/or pesco-tarian.

canadjineh

BTW Dr. Fung only quotes studies from human testing, not studies based on animal experiments.

leanjogreen18

Thanks for the explanation.

Just throwing out a different option not advocating vegetarianism.

GaleHawkins

albertabeefy wrote: »

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

I'm not great at interpreting most studies but this one shows a vegetarian diet improves diabetes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4221319/

Full disclosure I'm a pescatarian - I don't eat meat for various reasons. I'm not advocating or against any particular diet but I see in these forums that Keto is the key for diabetes but if I'm reading this study right a vegetarian diet is also beneficial.

Am I missing something? It seems Fung is revered for Keto/diabetes but it looks as if there are other options just as good.

You're missing a lot. First, it wasn't a study - it was a review. A review of six studies they cherry-picked out of 477 they looked at ...

Here's their results:

"Consumption of vegetarian diets was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c [−0.39 percentage point; 95% confidence interval (CI), −0.62 to −0.15; P=0.001; I2=3.0; P for heterogeneity =0.389], and a non-significant reduction in fasting blood glucose concentration (−0.36 mmol/L; 95% CI, −1.04 to 0.32; P=0.301; I2=0; P for heterogeneity =0.710), compared with consumption of comparator diets."

First, the reduction in HbA1c was - in a word - pathetic. -.39 percentage points for a diabetic isn't much, especially when you see that LCHF diets show significantly higher reductions in addition to reduction or elimination of medication.

The science is quite clear on this - dietary carbohydrate restriction has the greatest effect on reducing blood glucose levels.

http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(14)00332-3/fulltext
https://nutritionandmetabolism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-7075-2-16

There's dozens more studies and reviews on the research.

What I wish that proponents of vegetarian diets would do is at-least acknowledge that you CAN significantly improve diabetes if you eat a low-carb/high-fat vegetarian diet - it's especially easy if ovo-, lacto- and/or pesco-tarian.

After eating LCHF for over two years I have found my love for red meat has really crashed because it no longer tastes desirable for some reason.

albertabeefy

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation.

Just throwing out a different option not advocating vegetarianism.

I wasn't suggesting you were advocating it ... but the authors of your article certainly do - they're all PCRM/PETA funded.

albertabeefy

canadjineh wrote: »

BTW Dr. Fung only quotes studies from human testing, not studies based on animal experiments.

Which, when dealing with humans - is the best option. But it *does* possibly miss some things that should be looked at.

Animal studies can be valuable depending on the methodology, and the animals used. Too often though people cling to study results that can't be extrapolated to humans for various reasons.

The most-recent ridiculous study conclusions I looked at, a blogger was vehemently opposed to artificial sweeteners, saying they destroyed 50% of your gut flora ... and the study he linked fed up-to 1000mg/kg of body weight per day of Splenda to rats. The researchers noticed gut flora issues at "moderate" intakes of 300mg/kg of body weight per day. FYI, for humans that use Splenda frequently, the average intake is between 1.6 and 5mg/kg of body weight/day (depending on source) - so we're talking of Splenda intake of between 60x and 625x the average human use here. Extrapolating any study on rats to humans should be done with caution, but extrapolating this study to humans is insane.

leanjogreen18

albertabeefy wrote: »

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation.

Just throwing out a different option not advocating vegetarianism.

I wasn't suggesting you were advocating it ... but the authors of your article certainly do - they're all PCRM/PETA funded.

I linked a study I didn't think there was any PETA involvement. Hum I must read again.

albertabeefy

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

I linked a study I didn't think there was any PETA involvement. Hum I must read again.

Again, what you linked wasn't a study - it was a review / article. To suggest there was no PETA involvement shows a lack of understanding of what the PCRM (who authored the study) is ...

About some of the authors:

Yoko Yokoyama: Researcher, PCRM
Susan M. Levin: Director of Nutrition, PCRM
Neal Barnard: Founder & President, PCRM

Neal Barnard founded the PCRM with PETA money, and the PCRM maintains that close PETA relationship ... https://www.consumerfreedom.com/press-releases/188-consumer-group-calls-on-vegan-diet-doctor-neal-barnard-to-come-clean-about-his-animal-rights-agenda/
https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/23-physicians-committee-for-responsible-medicine/

leanjogreen18

Ok gotcha. I know not what I talk about:).

I have a friend who is managing her diabetes with a vegan low fat diet ( I erroneously thought vegetarian) and that's why I linked that article. I've since talked to her a little more about it. She hated Keto and switched to vegan low fat based off this...

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/8/1777

She was not a vegetarian/vegan prior, she is doing this only for health.

What I tried to say is there are other options out there that seem to work for some folks. Perhaps my wording and article I linked was not the best but I stated in my OP I don't advocate any diet and I'm not the best at interpreting studies, nor articles on studies.

I'm not a member of PETA! I don't eat meat for various reasons ethical not being one of them.

I just think options are nice as a one size doesn't fit all.

albertabeefy

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

Ok gotcha. I know not what I talk about:).

I have a friend who is managing her diabetes with a vegan low fat diet ( I erroneously thought vegetarian) and that's why I linked that article. I've since talked to her a little more about it. She hated Keto and switched to vegan low fat based off this...

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/8/1777

She was not a vegetarian/vegan prior, she is doing this only for health.

Many people, especially vegans, link to that study. What many fail to consider is the source (Neal Barnard again), and the methodology.

My problem with the methodology is it was only with moderate diabetics (none with high HbA1c) and only comparing to the ADA recommended diet - which is low-fat/high-carb and terrible for diabetics.

The problem with the results are that ... sure, the vegan diet (which eliminated refined/processed carbs) performed better than the ADA diet, but only reduced HbA1c from 8.0% baseline at start to 7.1%. A -0.9% change . FYI, being above 7.0% still isn't even CONTROLLED, let alone reversed (which is what his book claims his diet does).

A Japanese outpatient study testing a 30% carbohydrate diet (which is reduced, but not really low-carb at all) reduced patients from a baseline of 10.9% HbA1c to 7.4%HbA1c ... a -3.5% change.

A 2 year study of a diet "loosely restricting carbohydrates" (simple carbohydrate reduction) vs. a conventional diet for Type2 diabetics is here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17980451 ... they found that even though the CARD (carbohydrate-reduced diet) group started with higher HbA1c (7.4% vs 7.1%) than the CD (conventional diet group), after 2 years the CARD group had improved to 6.7% whereas the CD group HbA1c INCREASED to 7.5%.

Barnard will never conduct a study comparing his diet to a low-carb/high-fat diet. To date no studies on very-low-carbohydrate diets has shown them to be anything but superior in virtually every way to a 'conventional' low-fat or even vegan diet.

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

What I tried to say is there are other options out there that seem to work for some folks. Perhaps my wording and article I linked was not the best but I stated in my OP I don't advocate any diet and I'm not the best at interpreting studies, nor articles on studies.

There are other options, absolutely! Including not eating red meat if that's what you want ... For diabetics that don't eat red meat - it's proven that one can improve glycemic control as well as CV risk markers by adopting a carbohydrate-restricted low-carb vegetarian (of ovo- lacto- pesco- varieties) diet. Or even a low-carb vegan one (but that's more difficult).

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

I'm not a member of PETA! I don't eat meat for various reasons ethical not being one of them.

I just think options are nice as a one size doesn't fit all.

You're correct. I just don't like Barnards animal-activist propaganda.

Honestly, if vegans and vegetarians WANT to show their diet healthy for diabetes, they should create a carbohydrate-restricted veg diet and then formulate a study that tests a carbohydrate-restricted vegetarian diet against both a 'conventional' (ie: American Diabetes Assoc.) diet AND a standard LCHF diet. The vegetarian diet would look much-more promising, and give people a real option for those that want it. A low-fat vegetarian diet, however, will never be that great at improving diabetes.

carolyn000000

rankinsect wrote: »

Well, I will say I haven't read the book, but in general my thoughts on the "insulin hypothesis":

1. CICO always applies. A diet may help you lose weight without actively monitoring your calories, but any successful diet does so by helping you create a calorie deficit. The way of eating may make it easier or harder for you to stick to a deficit, but in the end it's the deficit that creates loss.

2. There's nothing wrong with trying low carb, or low fat, or whatever other way of eating you like. But realize there is no single "right answer". Low carb works very well for some people - there are many testimonials here that can show that. Low carb works very poorly for others - I think it was my single worst diet attempt ever.

3. I don't think it's actually demonstrated that low carb leads to decreased hunger in the population at large. In studies that looked at hunger and satiety, while there was a definite link between protein and satiety, there was no real correlation between either fat or carbohydrate and satiety. In fact the single most sating food in one study was a baked potato. Satiety is a lot more complex than just a macronutrient, or one macronutrient and one hormone.

4. Even if there was a real link between low carb and hunger, hunger is only one of the reasons we want to eat. If we were eating purely to satisfy hunger, you'd expect that we'd all be okay with eating exactly the same thing every day, a prospect that most of us actually find very unappealing. Besides hunger, there are cravings and preferences to consider, and then there are the social and pleasurable aspects of food. A way of eating that you will stick to for your whole life needs to be something you are comfortable doing forever, and not just tolerate but enjoy. That means it needs to do more than just keep your hunger down.

You should write a book!

Tacklewasher

carolyn000000 wrote: »

rankinsect wrote: »

Well, I will say I haven't read the book, but in general my thoughts on the "insulin hypothesis":

1. CICO always applies. A diet may help you lose weight without actively monitoring your calories, but any successful diet does so by helping you create a calorie deficit. The way of eating may make it easier or harder for you to stick to a deficit, but in the end it's the deficit that creates loss.

2. There's nothing wrong with trying low carb, or low fat, or whatever other way of eating you like. But realize there is no single "right answer". Low carb works very well for some people - there are many testimonials here that can show that. Low carb works very poorly for others - I think it was my single worst diet attempt ever.

3. I don't think it's actually demonstrated that low carb leads to decreased hunger in the population at large. In studies that looked at hunger and satiety, while there was a definite link between protein and satiety, there was no real correlation between either fat or carbohydrate and satiety. In fact the single most sating food in one study was a baked potato. Satiety is a lot more complex than just a macronutrient, or one macronutrient and one hormone.

4. Even if there was a real link between low carb and hunger, hunger is only one of the reasons we want to eat. If we were eating purely to satisfy hunger, you'd expect that we'd all be okay with eating exactly the same thing every day, a prospect that most of us actually find very unappealing. Besides hunger, there are cravings and preferences to consider, and then there are the social and pleasurable aspects of food. A way of eating that you will stick to for your whole life needs to be something you are comfortable doing forever, and not just tolerate but enjoy. That means it needs to do more than just keep your hunger down.

You should write a book!

Nah. All the info is reasonable so it would never sell. Can't compete with the whackjobs out there.