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
Options
Replies
-
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 -
You'll note I explicitly avoided the call for bias and critiqued the study's methodology at first. I brought financial bias into it because it looked like you held to bias as persuasive.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
I believe you said something about ignoring people.10 -
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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.13 -
diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....4 -
diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Well... what we perceive as blue is, in fact, black.
4 -
diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s8 -
ladyreva78 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Well... what we perceive as blue is, in fact, black.
Not since I quit drinking
6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s
I might buy this...everyone knows it's azure we see, unless we had eggs for breakfast.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »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.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s
Pretty sure it's said that keto improves all functioning. (As does any other special diet of preference.)3 -
This forum could be renamed to the mocking forum rather than debate. Remove any confusion...11
This discussion has been closed.
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
- 390 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
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions