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.
Intermittent fasting - Dr Jason Fung
Options
Replies
-
if you do 5:2 which means 5 days of maintenance calories and 2 days of like 500 calories you are creating a deficit whether you realize that or not. Ive done IF all my life and I have gained weight,lost weight and now Im maintaining all still doing IF. I at one point stopped doing IF and was told eating breakfast would boost my metabolism. nope didnt lose any more fat or weight compared to fasting. no one is saying that IF doesnt work for insulin resistance. but you still need a deficit of calories to lose weight. IF works for weight loss IF you are in a deficit of calories, I am living proof that you can gain weight and maintain weight by fasting. all due to intake of calories.
and a plateau is 6-8 weeks of no weight so did you go that long without any weight loss? you didnt lose weight eating more calories than you burned. you created a deficit. if you didnt eat at all those 5 days (which is not how 5:2 is normally done) that means you had NO calories for those 2 days and had calories the next 5 which means deficit. you may have ate more the 5 days but the 2 days with little to no calories means you were in deficit wich means weight loss happens.
if you were in a true plateau and lost doing IF then you were eating more than you thought before you started if and eating less.
I obviously did not communicate well, since there is so much you asked about - I ate MORE calories overall during a WEEK once I started IF. I was previously on 1200 calories/day (8400/week). I went on IF 5/2 - fasted 2 days (ate 500 calories dinner), on the non fast days I ate up to 2000 calories (11,000 calories/week). Did not change anything else. Broke my plateau. During that time I was weighing and logging ALL my food very carefully. I was discouraged to say the lease.
you ate more overall but the deficit was still there. many people go by a weekly deficit instead of a daily one. they eat more on some days and less on others. its still creating a deficit so thats why it worked. if you didnt lose weight before IF and keto then you had no deficit happening1 -
oh and then there is this saying that hyperglycemia may cause ketoacidosis not that its a symptom Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a serious condition that can lead to diabetic coma. May be caused by hyperglycemia (high blood glucose) or hypoglycemia (low blood glucose) in people with diabetes http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html0
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »oh and then there is this saying that hyperglycemia may cause ketoacidosis not that its a symptom Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a serious condition that can lead to diabetic coma. May be caused by hyperglycemia (high blood glucose) or hypoglycemia (low blood glucose) in people with diabetes http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html
That link doesn’t say anywhere that hyperglycaemia can cause DKA. In fact that link has a section actually titled “what causes DKA” which says the following:Here are three basic reasons for moderate or large amounts of ketones:
Not enough insulin
Maybe you did not inject enough insulin. Or your body could need more insulin than usual because of illness.
Not enough food
When you're sick, you often don't feel like eating, sometimes resulting in high ketone levels. High levels may also occur when you miss a meal.
Insulin reaction (low blood glucose)
If testing shows high ketone levels in the morning, you may have had an insulin reaction while asleep.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Even if you're insulin resistant, insulin isn't evil. That's like testing someone for a virus by looking for antibodies to the virus, and then blaming the antibodies for the illness. It's IR that's the problem, and consuming more carbs than your body, with its particular degree IR, can handle. The insulin response to blood glucose levels is not evil.
I never said insulin is evil. I said it can seem Fung is saying IR is evil - mainly because he is constantly preaching about how to reduce it.
2 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »if you do 5:2 which means 5 days of maintenance calories and 2 days of like 500 calories you are creating a deficit whether you realize that or not. Ive done IF all my life and I have gained weight,lost weight and now Im maintaining all still doing IF. I at one point stopped doing IF and was told eating breakfast would boost my metabolism. nope didnt lose any more fat or weight compared to fasting. no one is saying that IF doesnt work for insulin resistance. but you still need a deficit of calories to lose weight. IF works for weight loss IF you are in a deficit of calories, I am living proof that you can gain weight and maintain weight by fasting. all due to intake of calories.
and a plateau is 6-8 weeks of no weight so did you go that long without any weight loss? you didnt lose weight eating more calories than you burned. you created a deficit. if you didnt eat at all those 5 days (which is not how 5:2 is normally done) that means you had NO calories for those 2 days and had calories the next 5 which means deficit. you may have ate more the 5 days but the 2 days with little to no calories means you were in deficit wich means weight loss happens.
if you were in a true plateau and lost doing IF then you were eating more than you thought before you started if and eating less.
I obviously did not communicate well, since there is so much you asked about - I ate MORE calories overall during a WEEK once I started IF. I was previously on 1200 calories/day (8400/week). I went on IF 5/2 - fasted 2 days (ate 500 calories dinner), on the non fast days I ate up to 2000 calories (11,000 calories/week). Did not change anything else. Broke my plateau. During that time I was weighing and logging ALL my food very carefully. I was discouraged to say the lease.
you ate more overall but the deficit was still there. many people go by a weekly deficit instead of a daily one. they eat more on some days and less on others. its still creating a deficit so thats why it worked. if you didnt lose weight before IF and keto then you had no deficit happening
Good grief - it must be nice to know everything29 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »if you do 5:2 which means 5 days of maintenance calories and 2 days of like 500 calories you are creating a deficit whether you realize that or not. Ive done IF all my life and I have gained weight,lost weight and now Im maintaining all still doing IF. I at one point stopped doing IF and was told eating breakfast would boost my metabolism. nope didnt lose any more fat or weight compared to fasting. no one is saying that IF doesnt work for insulin resistance. but you still need a deficit of calories to lose weight. IF works for weight loss IF you are in a deficit of calories, I am living proof that you can gain weight and maintain weight by fasting. all due to intake of calories.
and a plateau is 6-8 weeks of no weight so did you go that long without any weight loss? you didnt lose weight eating more calories than you burned. you created a deficit. if you didnt eat at all those 5 days (which is not how 5:2 is normally done) that means you had NO calories for those 2 days and had calories the next 5 which means deficit. you may have ate more the 5 days but the 2 days with little to no calories means you were in deficit wich means weight loss happens.
if you were in a true plateau and lost doing IF then you were eating more than you thought before you started if and eating less.
I obviously did not communicate well, since there is so much you asked about - I ate MORE calories overall during a WEEK once I started IF. I was previously on 1200 calories/day (8400/week). I went on IF 5/2 - fasted 2 days (ate 500 calories dinner), on the non fast days I ate up to 2000 calories (11,000 calories/week). Did not change anything else. Broke my plateau. During that time I was weighing and logging ALL my food very carefully. I was discouraged to say the lease.
you ate more overall but the deficit was still there. many people go by a weekly deficit instead of a daily one. they eat more on some days and less on others. its still creating a deficit so thats why it worked. if you didnt lose weight before IF and keto then you had no deficit happening
Good grief - it must be nice to know everything
no its proven science ,its CICO even if you arent counting your body is. and being here long enough and doing enough research you learn things. but thanks for thinking I know everything. youre a peach19 -
janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
If it is significant, then it should be easy for Fung to present the evidence that supports his claim that obesity is due to IR and that weight loss is only possible if one understands how to manage it.
If numbers *don't* exist on this, I don't know why we should giving the claim any particular attention at all. If he's basing his claims on what he thinks could be true or what he wishes were true, he should be clear about that.
I don't think it is unreasonable for us to expect him to have some sort of evidence for his claims, especially given that we know people are capable of carrying excess weight while having completely normal blood sugar levels. I am one person who was in this category -- medically overweight, but with absolutely no issues in my blood tests. There are also people who may have problems related to IR, but manage them well *by losing weight* without following Fung's protocol. So on three counts -- that excess weight is always due to IR, that IR can only be resolved by following Fung's protocol, and that weight loss is impossible without following Fung's protocol -- seem to be very questionable. They're the kind of big claims that require evidence.
If he doesn't have evidence, his claims seem to be little more than a cynical cash grab.
I have no idea what "pre-IR" would be. What does that mean to you specifically?10 -
I know for me when I was obese I was neither pre diabetic or IR. my daughter is very obese(she has a thyroid condition) and she doesnt have IR,and she is not pre diabetic either. she is more than 100lbs overweight.all her other health markers except for the thyroid issue are fine. no high blood pressure. nothing like that .she tried doing low carb per the advice of her first endo. it did nothing for her at all. not saying it doesnt work for others.she also lost no weight but then with her thyroid still not under control that may be a big part of why.
my sisters are overweight and none of them are IR or have pre diabetes either.we were all thin as kids too and as we got older we started packing on the pounds. for me having my familial hypercholesterolemia,if I dont treat it with diet,exercise and meds I can develop type 2 and thats a route I do not want to go.many of the people on my moms side are heavy(even though my mom and brother were thin and my aunt was overweight,yet my granpa was thin and my grandma of a healthy weight) and only 1 or 2 of them are actually diabetic.I had a great uncle who was of normal weight and had type 2 but he didnt take care of himself so he was always"losing" body parts.
a friend of ours was over 500lbs and weirdly enough he was not IR or pre diabetic but many in his family were. he had WLS and not sure what he weighs now(I dont ask). so I would say its probably a split amount of people who are overweight/obese who have IR or are pre diabetic. and the other half who dont have it. as for the ones that dont know they are IR or prediabetic I would say that possibly is a small percent as most of the obese/overweight people I know all go to the dr for one thing or another at some point.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
Not as many as people think. According to the NIH, from 1980 to 2010 the obesity rate in the us rose from 13% to 35%. The diabetes rate increased from 2.5% to 7% over the same period and even those numbers are skewed because in 1998 the ADA changed the diabetes diagnostic threshold from 141 mg/dl to 126 mg/dl. If IR and diabetes are caused by obesity, the numbers would grow at the same rate.11 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.22 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.
If you know little about his message, I'm unsure why you are doubting those of us who have paid attention to what he is saying and have concerns.
What basis do you have for suspecting that those who have concerns *based on listening to and reading his own words* are wrong and you -- who haven't -- are right? I think at this point you're just have sympathies for someone you consider to be of "your tribe" and feel compelled to defend him even though you aren't quite sure what you're defending.
Before concluding that those who have been exposed to his message and have concerns are bullies having a "knee jerk reaction" and you're the only one acting rationally (despite your admission that you aren't even sure what you're defending), maybe you could actually expose yourself to what he is saying.
Because this last post of yours right here, it's just how you feel about *us*. It has nothing to do with Fung. It can't because you don't know anything more about him than "Well, doctors study a lot and he's a doctor, right?" and "I don't like it when I think people are calling Fung a liar."
Do you have a response to the specific concerns people have brought up about Fung's statements? Keep in mind that people can be right in a critique even if the manner in which they express it rubs you the wrong way. I don't understand why you think your "sense" about Fung should override what he actually says and does.
23 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Even if you're insulin resistant, insulin isn't evil. That's like testing someone for a virus by looking for antibodies to the virus, and then blaming the antibodies for the illness. It's IR that's the problem, and consuming more carbs than your body, with its particular degree IR, can handle. The insulin response to blood glucose levels is not evil.
I never said insulin is evil. I said it can seem Fung is saying IR is evil - mainly because he is constantly preaching about how to reduce it.
Well, you actually said it can seem like he is saying insulin (not IR) is evil "for everyone" if you ignore that he is aiming at an IR audience. That seemed to me to imply a suggestion that insulin is actually evil for those with IR, just not "for everyone." I'm sorry if that's not what you meant.I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.
If you know little about his message, I'm unsure why you are doubting those of us who have paid attention to what he is saying and have concerns.
What basis do you have for suspecting that those who have concerns *based on listening to and reading his own words* are wrong and you -- who haven't -- are right? I think at this point you're just have sympathies for someone you consider to be of "your tribe" and feel compelled to defend him even though you aren't quite sure what you're defending.
Before concluding that those who have been exposed to his message and have concerns are bullies having a "knee jerk reaction" and you're the only one acting rationally (despite your admission that you aren't even sure what you're defending), maybe you could actually expose yourself to what he is saying.
Because this last post of yours right here, it's just how you feel about *us*. It has nothing to do with Fung. It can't because you don't know anything more about him than "Well, doctors study a lot and he's a doctor, right?" and "I don't like it when I think people are calling Fung a liar."
Do you have a response to the specific concerns people have brought up about Fung's statements? Keep in mind that people can be right in a critique even if the manner in which they express it rubs you the wrong way. I don't understand why you think your "sense" about Fung should override what he actually says and does.
I think I will check out more information on Dr. Fung. I didn't say that he should not be a topic of debate. It was when I saw the negativity that belittled his education and relied on derogatory names by some I became suspicious that anything he comments on is being taken in small parts to be bashed and not as a whole. I do not know him or his work but suspect he may not be getting treated fairly by people that are likely less educated in the medical field then his is. It is not his content I am talking about here but the way some choose to knock him down only by personal negativity. To agree with that I would have to believe he is doctor bent on destroying people to benefit his own wealth. Debate away and I will try to see how bad he really is.10 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.
If you know little about his message, I'm unsure why you are doubting those of us who have paid attention to what he is saying and have concerns.
What basis do you have for suspecting that those who have concerns *based on listening to and reading his own words* are wrong and you -- who haven't -- are right? I think at this point you're just have sympathies for someone you consider to be of "your tribe" and feel compelled to defend him even though you aren't quite sure what you're defending.
Before concluding that those who have been exposed to his message and have concerns are bullies having a "knee jerk reaction" and you're the only one acting rationally (despite your admission that you aren't even sure what you're defending), maybe you could actually expose yourself to what he is saying.
Because this last post of yours right here, it's just how you feel about *us*. It has nothing to do with Fung. It can't because you don't know anything more about him than "Well, doctors study a lot and he's a doctor, right?" and "I don't like it when I think people are calling Fung a liar."
Do you have a response to the specific concerns people have brought up about Fung's statements? Keep in mind that people can be right in a critique even if the manner in which they express it rubs you the wrong way. I don't understand why you think your "sense" about Fung should override what he actually says and does.
I think I will check out more information on Dr. Fung. I didn't say that he should not be a topic of debate. It was when I saw the negativity that belittled his education and relied on derogatory names by some I became suspicious that anything he comments on is being taken in small parts to be bashed and not as a whole. I do not know him or his work but suspect he may not be getting treated fairly by people that are likely less educated in the medical field then his is. It is not his content I am talking about here but the way some choose to knock him down only by personal negativity. To agree with that I would have to believe he is doctor bent on destroying people to benefit his own wealth. Debate away and I will try to see how bad he really is.
You don't have to believe that someone has to be "bent on destroying people" to be wrong. People make mistakes in good faith all the time. People often think they are right when they are not.
There isn't really a point in debating as long as you don't know what Fung has said.
It wouldn't really be fair if every single person who decided Fung was wrong was treating him poorly due to their own lack of understanding and education. It also isn't particularly fair for you to conclude that those who disagree with Fung are uneducated, unfair, or engaging in personal negativity when you don't even know what Fung is arguing. Stop and think about that for a minute. You're accusing other posters of some pretty negative behavior. Yet you can't even assess the basis of their arguments.
It's possible to debate ideas without debating personalities. Fung may be a wonderful person, but I disagree with him that everyone who is overweight has IR and that obesity is impossible to resolve without his specific plan. I don't have specific insight into why he is arguing this when there doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to support it. It could be that he is wanting to make money. It could also be that he is convinced he is right and that he alone can help these people. I will tell you what I have done: I have read what he said before making up my mind on his theories and debating them with other people. That's what I recommend to you.11 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.
If you know little about his message, I'm unsure why you are doubting those of us who have paid attention to what he is saying and have concerns.
What basis do you have for suspecting that those who have concerns *based on listening to and reading his own words* are wrong and you -- who haven't -- are right? I think at this point you're just have sympathies for someone you consider to be of "your tribe" and feel compelled to defend him even though you aren't quite sure what you're defending.
Before concluding that those who have been exposed to his message and have concerns are bullies having a "knee jerk reaction" and you're the only one acting rationally (despite your admission that you aren't even sure what you're defending), maybe you could actually expose yourself to what he is saying.
Because this last post of yours right here, it's just how you feel about *us*. It has nothing to do with Fung. It can't because you don't know anything more about him than "Well, doctors study a lot and he's a doctor, right?" and "I don't like it when I think people are calling Fung a liar."
Do you have a response to the specific concerns people have brought up about Fung's statements? Keep in mind that people can be right in a critique even if the manner in which they express it rubs you the wrong way. I don't understand why you think your "sense" about Fung should override what he actually says and does.
I think I will check out more information on Dr. Fung. I didn't say that he should not be a topic of debate. It was when I saw the negativity that belittled his education and relied on derogatory names by some I became suspicious that anything he comments on is being taken in small parts to be bashed and not as a whole. I do not know him or his work but suspect he may not be getting treated fairly by people that are likely less educated in the medical field then his is. It is not his content I am talking about here but the way some choose to knock him down only by personal negativity. To agree with that I would have to believe he is doctor bent on destroying people to benefit his own wealth. Debate away and I will try to see how bad he really is.
You don't have to believe that someone has to be "bent on destroying people" to be wrong. People make mistakes in good faith all the time. People often think they are right when they are not.
There isn't really a point in debating as long as you don't know what Fung has said.
It wouldn't really be fair if every single person who decided Fung was wrong was treating him poorly due to their own lack of understanding and education. It also isn't particularly fair for you to conclude that those who disagree with Fung are uneducated, unfair, or engaging in personal negativity when you don't even know what Fung is arguing. Stop and think about that for a minute. You're accusing other posters of some pretty negative behavior. Yet you can't even assess the basis of their arguments.
It's possible to debate ideas without debating personalities. Fung may be a wonderful person, but I disagree with him that everyone who is overweight has IR and that obesity is impossible to resolve without his specific plan. I don't have specific insight into why he is arguing this when there doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to support it. It could be that he is wanting to make money. It could also be that he is convinced he is right and that he alone can help these people. I will tell you what I have done: I have read what he said before making up my mind on his theories and debating them with other people. That's what I recommend to you.
I could not agree more. Moreover, I don't see anyone attacking him personally. Yes, he being called a quack but that is justified by his writings and claims. He may truly be sincere but, based on the evidence, he is sincerely wrong. FTR, I have read one of his books and enough of his online writing to understand his hypothesis and approach and their flaws. Before someone want to defend him, it would be helpful of they actually knew what he claims and why.
12 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »he also states that using insulin makes your diabetes worse over time. hes made a lot of false claims he just needs to stick with being a nephrologist.
Glucose management is WELL within the interests of a nephrologist.
This is a curious line of attack. Fung isn't a bariatrician or an endocrinologist so he's not entitled to comment on those fields... well are YOU a bariatrician or endocrinologist by chance? If not, what right do you have to opine?
When someone who doesn't have credentials in a field claims that they know better than people who do have credentials in that field, I think anyone has a right to opine that that's shady.
Fung takes a kernel of something that's in his wheelhouse, extrapolates it out to the nth degree, over dramatizes the conclusion, and then uses his own "case studies" as "proof", or cherry picks research that seems to support his claims while flat out ignoring research that refutes it.
And I'd like to add, as others have, that none of this is a knock on IF. It is a great plan for many people to get their diets under control. There are some theories out there that it has other benefits, which may or may not hold up to the necessary further studying and testing. And then there's a lot of miracle cure, click-bait science fiction out there about IF trying to cash in on it's current popularity.
Dodging the whole qualification debate but if he is suggesting a type of diet combined with intermittent fasting to reduce medication to control T2D and it helps in any way, isn't this a good thing? I am assuming that the individual would either be under a doctors care or knowledgeable in how to monitor their insulin levels so they don't exceed levels that could cause harm. I am very anti medication so if I am told I need medication I will try any method possible to correct the need for it if possible.
I think some criticisms of Fung come because people tend to forget that people with IR are his audience. If you forget that, it can come off that he is saying that insulin = evil for everyone because the main focus on his diet is to reduce insulin levels (through diet, weightloss and IF).
Books like "The Obesity Code" seem to be marketed towards everyone with a concern about their weight, not people with a specific diagnosis of IR.
Obesity code is marketed more towards everyone than the book we were discussing in this thread, which is called Diabetes Code.
The point is that he's marketing his IR-specific strategy as if it's the only key to weight loss for *everyone*. That's what I have an issue with. Anyone claiming that people with IR are his audience are ignoring that he is attempting to expand the definition of "people with IR" to anyone who has weight they'd like to lose.
I wonder what percentage of the overweight population is pre- diabetic, IR or pre IR if there is such a term? If it is significant he may not be as far off as you suggest. I don't know if numbers exist on this but was just throwing it out there. I would also guess that there is a huge % that doesn't even know they have any of these issues.
But you are just guessing. As you said, you don't know. So, why speculate?
IIRC, nvketokom was IR without being substantially overweight. Possibly I'm mistaken. But there are those in whom this is the case. Its generally a bad idea to draw sweeping conclusions based on a guess.
If Fung is saying it is true (and he is), then pointing out that it could be true and we just have no way of knowing for sure isn't a very good defense of Fung.
I have seen him in an interview on YouTube but I must admit I was not riveted to the screen. I know very little about his message but I get the sense that there is a knee jerk reaction around here to basically describe him as a unqualified liar intent on deception, practicing outside of his field and offering dangerous advice. He may not be the best doctor for all people but I suspect he has more redeeming qualities than most here are willing admit. Disagreeing with him is fine but when a group starts looking more like bullies using derogatory adjectives like quack, money grabber, unqualified, outside his field I get suspicious. MD's must study a great deal of medical information both in their specialty and outside of it. It is not unreasonable for his research to go outside of his narrow specialty especially if it may be related. I think it may be a bit much for a bunch of MFP armchair quarterbacks with a lesser degree to rip apart a MD and his qualification's because they dislike the message.
If you know little about his message, I'm unsure why you are doubting those of us who have paid attention to what he is saying and have concerns.
What basis do you have for suspecting that those who have concerns *based on listening to and reading his own words* are wrong and you -- who haven't -- are right? I think at this point you're just have sympathies for someone you consider to be of "your tribe" and feel compelled to defend him even though you aren't quite sure what you're defending.
Before concluding that those who have been exposed to his message and have concerns are bullies having a "knee jerk reaction" and you're the only one acting rationally (despite your admission that you aren't even sure what you're defending), maybe you could actually expose yourself to what he is saying.
Because this last post of yours right here, it's just how you feel about *us*. It has nothing to do with Fung. It can't because you don't know anything more about him than "Well, doctors study a lot and he's a doctor, right?" and "I don't like it when I think people are calling Fung a liar."
Do you have a response to the specific concerns people have brought up about Fung's statements? Keep in mind that people can be right in a critique even if the manner in which they express it rubs you the wrong way. I don't understand why you think your "sense" about Fung should override what he actually says and does.
I think I will check out more information on Dr. Fung. I didn't say that he should not be a topic of debate. It was when I saw the negativity that belittled his education and relied on derogatory names by some I became suspicious that anything he comments on is being taken in small parts to be bashed and not as a whole. I do not know him or his work but suspect he may not be getting treated fairly by people that are likely less educated in the medical field then his is. It is not his content I am talking about here but the way some choose to knock him down only by personal negativity. To agree with that I would have to believe he is doctor bent on destroying people to benefit his own wealth. Debate away and I will try to see how bad he really is.
You don't have to believe that someone has to be "bent on destroying people" to be wrong. People make mistakes in good faith all the time. People often think they are right when they are not.
There isn't really a point in debating as long as you don't know what Fung has said.
It wouldn't really be fair if every single person who decided Fung was wrong was treating him poorly due to their own lack of understanding and education. It also isn't particularly fair for you to conclude that those who disagree with Fung are uneducated, unfair, or engaging in personal negativity when you don't even know what Fung is arguing. Stop and think about that for a minute. You're accusing other posters of some pretty negative behavior. Yet you can't even assess the basis of their arguments.
It's possible to debate ideas without debating personalities. Fung may be a wonderful person, but I disagree with him that everyone who is overweight has IR and that obesity is impossible to resolve without his specific plan. I don't have specific insight into why he is arguing this when there doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to support it. It could be that he is wanting to make money. It could also be that he is convinced he is right and that he alone can help these people. I will tell you what I have done: I have read what he said before making up my mind on his theories and debating them with other people. That's what I recommend to you.
I could not agree more. Moreover, I don't see anyone attacking him personally. Yes, he being called a quack but that is justified by his writings and claims. He may truly be sincere but, based on the evidence, he is sincerely wrong. FTR, I have read one of his books and enough of his online writing to understand his hypothesis and approach and their flaws. Before someone want to defend him, it would be helpful of they actually knew what he claims and why.
I wasn't so much defending him but pointing out that he, in my opinion may be getting some harsh treatment. I don't have to know you to determine that people are treating you harshly or disrespecting you. You are justifying classifying him as a quack because you disagree with his opinion or research. I will take your challenge to understand what he is about and see if I can find where according to him all obesity has IR and how it is impossible to resolve without his specific plan. It sounds narrow and far fetched but I will try.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions