Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Keto diet = good or bad
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
A person choosing to attempt low carb for T2D reversal, that is on diabetes medications would simply need to work with their own doctor so that medication adjustments can be made as needed.
Which is just another reason that working with a doctor experienced with such a thing could be a great benefit.3 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
It could be very meaningful if people were quitting because they were not seeing the results they were expecting or because the plan was too difficult for them to follow. More reliable studies typically let you know how many people didn't make it to the end of the study due to various issues.
Adherence is certainly important in the context of evaluating what health management options are better than others, especially if people are paying a huge amount of money.9 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
A person choosing to attempt low carb for T2D reversal, that is on diabetes medications would simply need to work with their own doctor so that medication adjustments can be made as needed.
Which is just another reason that working with a doctor experienced with such a thing could be a great benefit.
Not according to that site.4 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
Well if I can set adherence criteria myself, I can cure nearly 100% of T2D. My study only counts people that adhered to the plan of losing 10% of their body weight and maintaining that loss.
It is also incredibly, incredibly compounded by the fact that there is no control group.13 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
Well if I can set adherence criteria myself, I can cure nearly 100% of T2D. My study only counts people that adhered to the plan of losing 10% of their body weight and maintaining that loss.
It is also incredibly, incredibly compounded by the fact that there is no control group.
The benefit of vetting sources and critical thinking.6 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
Well if I can set adherence criteria myself, I can cure nearly 100% of T2D. My study only counts people that adhered to the plan of losing 10% of their body weight and maintaining that loss.
It is also incredibly, incredibly compounded by the fact that there is no control group.
The benefit of vetting sources and critical thinking.
"Caveat emptor" is in a language that died before the internet era. Just sayin'.
6 -
What is keto
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet
Above is one medical reason for doing keto. I have been doing it for pain manage for 4.5 years with good pain management. Others do it for other health reasons that can often lead to a weight loss naturally as it did in my case for the first year and I have maintained that loss for over 3 years now which is a first in my 68 years of eating.
Short answer is eating at or below 50 grams of carbs daily for nutritional ketosis for any reason.3 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
Well if I can set adherence criteria myself, I can cure nearly 100% of T2D. My study only counts people that adhered to the plan of losing 10% of their body weight and maintaining that loss.
It is also incredibly, incredibly compounded by the fact that there is no control group.
The benefit of vetting sources and critical thinking.
"Caveat emptor" is in a language that died before the internet era. Just sayin'.
I prefer cave canem, some studies go to the dogs.
I think even granting it is possible to find a study to support any position, the chances of finding equally well done studies with conflicting results is low.3 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
But why do these internet doctors need to do this? For altruistic reasons? Or to make a lot money? They are in it for the money. Honestly
I find it funny you don’t question the motivations of the people that buy the service. The 60% of them that are reversing their diabetes by following the guidance the service provides. It’s information that is readily available by all of the same doctors in their podcast interviews, websites, Ted talks, blogs and by reading their published papers. A person, and many do, can apply the same lifestyle changes on their own from the free information these same doctors provide but plenty of people are overwhelmed and don’t fully know how to start or more than likely, don’t have the support of a knowledgeable, local doctor to help them along the way.
This service exists because of need. It should be commended because they are literally doing what has been thought to be impossible. Reversing diabetes at a rate of 60% in one year.
You ask why these doctors do it? I don’t know each of their specific motives but I don’t think it’s solely money driven. There’s too much free information on that very website that you never need to pay a dime for to suggest they’re greedy. It’s full of tips, recipes and resources a person can use to live a low carb life without a cost at all. Then they publish their study progress and tell exactly what they are doing to achieve the results they are. I think that pretty much clears greed as a motivator.
There are thousands of other services, programs, websites designed as a membership or for pay to guide people choosing a multitude of dietary options. That’s because people often need help making positive, long term change no matter what their focus or dietary choice is.
Groups like this one and a million others are available for free and prove to be very helpful for many people. Some people need more help than this and that’s ok.
Do you know these doctors? I'm asking because you seem super-invested in validating their business model and their personal motives.
I don’t know them. Not at all. I think it’s great work they are doing. If I were T2D I would be very motivated to do whatever I could to normalize blood sugar and avoid the complications of diabetes. My own Type 1 diabetic daughter works to be as healthy as she is able to be even with no possibility of reversal of the disease. I think the more resources available to people, the better. Especially if it’s proven to work so well.
It would be a shame for someone to discount the possible help a service like that could offer because someone online made uninformed, negative comments about the doctors simply because it’s a pay service that’s easily available to people everywhere. Ie: online...
But there are ways to potentially do that without paying $2,400 a year (plus $500 initially) to someone who will never even examine you in person. I may have missed it, but when was it proven to work well? Has a third party not involved with the business examined their work and their success rate? Do we know how many people pay for a while and then quit because they don't see results? The figure of 60% success is based on information they're providing, correct?
Edit: It's actually $4,440 per year because the first year is $370 a month. The $199 is the monthly price after the first year. That their business model is structured to get more money early is interesting, perhaps they know something we don't about how motivated people are to continue after 12 months or so.
Edit 2: Although you said earlier in the thread that people could get this information for free and apply it on their own, the website itself specifically cautions people against doing that, claiming that it is a safety risk. https://www.virtahealth.com/faq
The 60% success rate seems to be based on criteria for reversing T2D the researchers set. It is also based on the results of people that completed the program - people that dropped out of the program don't count against them.
Thanks for looking that up. That's a very convenient way to measure it!
The criteria is based on diagnostic requirement for T2D. Not something they made up.
I don’t see any issue with saying that 60% reversal for the people that followed the plan... not sure why people that failed to adhere should be counted. They aren’t measuring adherence. They wanted to see what results were gained from those that followed it. Anyone not following it, added no data.
There are at least two ways to diagnose diabetes that I know of hba1c and fasting glucose challenge. I recall criticism that A1C has been pushed because it is one draw instead of a patient being with a doctor's office for hours doing multiple samples.
I'm not even saying I necessarily disagree with the metric. I do have some basis for thinking that a glucose challenge would be worse for a low carb diet group. It is worth keeping in mind diabetes is more an instrumental diagnosis than a true pathology.2 -
There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.22 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »I think even granting it is possible to find a study to support any position, the chances of finding equally well done studies with conflicting results is low.
And even if two well done studies appear to conflict, they might not after all once you dig deep into the details and find out that there are differences between the studies that would lead to the seeming conflict. like differences between the study populations that were difficult to account for or find.
4 -
Well, if I was spending of thousands of dollars to reverse my diabetes for a program that cost arm and a leg(lol), I sure as hell wouldn’t quit, and I bet these 60% of participants feel like I do.7
-
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.14 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh25 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »I couldn’t care less if there is a study proving any one thing or another.
I tried keto and I liked it. It changed my behavior regarding food and changed my level of hunger and satiety and I even felt better and more energy pretty much immediately. My blood work is stellar, I’ve reduced meds for ADHD and eliminated all of my IBS symptoms once I eventually began a carnivore diet after my first year of keto.
I have lost weight to my current weight in the past and spent my entire adult life constantly swinging up and down 30 pounds. I could never maintain the weight loss and could only lose the weight if I worked out and spent a lot of time being hungry.
At the same weight as I had previously achieved, I am 2 pant sizes smaller now and have maintained this size without effort for 4 years now simply by remaining keto, and now carnivore. I eat until I’m satisfied and I do not work out and I do not have to cycle in and out of dieting to maintain the weight. I do not have to spend time being hungry in order to not overeat. I simply do not overeat without trying.
I have never maintained a consistent weight for 4 years ever before and I certainly didn’t expect to find this kind of stability going into my 40’s.
So I don’t care what any study says or doesn’t say. I don’t care about yours or anyone’s belief regarding calories or hormones.
All I care about is my results and how I’m doing and that’s damn good!
Did/do you count calories though? That would help you maintain right?0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.18 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »nationalvillage3215 wrote: »For me, getting a good amount of fiber is difficult on Keto. High fiber is pretty essential for digestive health. It is possible I guess to reach 30 grams/per day without fruit, lequmes, grains but I would have to eat an enormous amount of vegetables. I have been doing the Med. diet which also reduces inflammation and has helped my spinal arthritis.
May be of interest
https://blog.virtahealth.com/fiber-colon-health-ketogenic-diet/
I stopped reading once I realized that site is selling a $199 a month subscription (plus a $500 sign up fee).
And someone above thread said people weren't cashing in on keto
They are doctors. The service is for them to be your doctor if you’re T2D. Do you know any doctors that work for free?
They have published some very impressive studies showing a 60% reversal of T2D in one year. I don’t know many diabetics that wouldn’t save money reversing their diabetes even if using a private service like this.
I pay $75 to meet face to face with my doctor. That also includes getting health markers checked (blood pressure etc). No way would I pay $200 a month (plus a $500 sign up fee), for an internet doctor on some website.
It’s nice to have many options based upon your goals.
Those “internet doctors” have real offices where they see patients in person as well. They are actually running a long term study right now. The internet option brings their expertise to a much larger population. It’s a choice for anyone to use their service.
Sad that a team of doctors doing what has been thought to be impossible, gets reduced to being called “internet doctors” just because they make their services more widely available.
I guess you think it’s better for them to stay only minimally available for some reason? That’s weird.
Soo...why should I put their study findings above all others? How do I know that their results aren't biased?
You made this comment earlier in the thread regarding other studies.. "They are never biased, misprepresented or bought and paid for either I suppose?
Unfortunately, many are indeed nothing more than opinion with a bunch of misleading data carefully crafted to appear to support said opinion.
In any given reputable journal you can find a study to support both sides of the same argument. Are we to believe both are 100% accurate?
Please!"
A slight contradiction yes?
11 -
If you do it, watch your cholesterol. When you do your yearly check-up ask your Dr to check your fasting labs and lipids.1
-
Daisy_Girl2019 wrote: »If you do it, watch your cholesterol. When you do your yearly check-up ask your Dr to check your fasting labs and lipids.
I've been doing Keto for a few years, my cholesterol is perfect, I have to have it checked every year because the State of Utah demands it. All I know is this, people have been preaching low fat, high carb, calorie restricted diets for the past 50-years, and we, American's have never been fatter. LCHF Keto solves all of that.20 -
JusticejamesbMBA wrote: »Daisy_Girl2019 wrote: »If you do it, watch your cholesterol. When you do your yearly check-up ask your Dr to check your fasting labs and lipids.
I've been doing Keto for a few years, my cholesterol is perfect, I have to have it checked every year because the State of Utah demands it. All I know is this, people have been preaching low fat, high carb, calorie restricted diets for the past 50-years, and we, American's have never been fatter. LCHF Keto solves all of that.
I'm a firm believer of moderation and variety. People shouldn't completely stop eating carbs. Our brain takes most of it's energy from carbs and starches, keto diet makes our body work extra to convert fat into something our brain can absorb. Our body needs carbs, protein and a lil bit of fat. I think keto will only work if you get fat from good resources like avocado and fish.
13 -
I'm glad for you as a human being that keto is working for you.JusticejamesbMBA wrote: »Daisy_Girl2019 wrote: »If you do it, watch your cholesterol. When you do your yearly check-up ask your Dr to check your fasting labs and lipids.
I've been doing Keto for a few years, my cholesterol is perfect, I have to have it checked every year because the State of Utah demands it. All I know is this, people have been preaching low fat, high carb, calorie restricted diets for the past 50-years, and we, American's have never been fatter. LCHF Keto solves all of that.
However, let's be fair here. Yeah, the message may have been about "low fat, high carb, calorie restricted diets for the past 50-years" and people have been getting fatter, but have they got fat while following that advice?
17 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting14 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here. 21 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
Yep. Pretty much anything is fair game for a challenge. And I've said it before. This is literally the most peaceful debate forum I've ever seen.9 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
You can't fight faith with facts...9 -
JusticejamesbMBA wrote: »Daisy_Girl2019 wrote: »If you do it, watch your cholesterol. When you do your yearly check-up ask your Dr to check your fasting labs and lipids.
I've been doing Keto for a few years, my cholesterol is perfect, I have to have it checked every year because the State of Utah demands it. All I know is this, people have been preaching low fat, high carb, calorie restricted diets for the past 50-years, and we, American's have never been fatter. LCHF Keto solves all of that.
Preaching it and actually doing it are two different things...13 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
It's weird how that works. It's almost like it's not actually personal and you sometimes even get someone playing devil's advocate, because... debate.7 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
If you don't like or can't handle being debated, post in a group forum instead...9 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
A well constructed study will account for the fact that people will drop out and be clear about how that impacts the results. This isn't "nit picking," it's getting to the very heart of how we access the claims of this company.
The study wasn't designed simply to "test the efficacy of a low carb diet," it was designed to validate the treatment plan devised by this company. Their website makes it sound like the treatment plan is more than just a "low carb diet," it apparently includes monitoring of some vital signs (and other services that they think justify the steep cost). If you're now claiming that this plan is simply a low carbohydrate diet, that means the company is lying on their website.12 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »
Isn't interesting that people saying it is possible to analyze studies and draw conclusions about them can point out potential issues in this study?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
In case you don't understand the false balance fallacy, consider if a physicist were discussing the shape of Earth: Oblate spheroid or flat four-corners on a turtle's back. I'm guessing you would not expect the physicist to be balanced about the subject, right? Perhaps, even there, you'd acknowledge personal experience isn't going to resolve the issue, that "I don't experience seeing a curve" is probably not going to hold weight.
What would be problematic is if I denied, rather than ignored things. I don't deny the results - that 60% of people saw an A1C improvement. I deny the explanatory power of the ketogenic diet to be sufficiently demonstrated by the study. I don't even deny that it could be possible for ketogenic diets to treat T2D at a better rate than other diets. I am, in fact, incredibly balanced, but the scale I balance on is the weight of evidence, which is a little more sophisticated than "this select group of people got better".
If all we cared about was the time we had results, we'd still be sacrificing people to ensure the crop spirits give a bountiful harvest.15
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions