People that have T2 don't get worse over time and become T1. Two completely different diseases.
SOME do. I saw my father inlaw die from it. His condition progressed, and the last year or so he needed insulin. I've also read many similar posts.
In terms of the definitions/nuances I'm no expert either. My impression is that T1 = lack of insulin, while T2 = enough insulin but resistant cells.
So my impression is that once a T2 starts insulin they're getting pretty close to the definition of T1 regardless if the cells are still insulin resistant. After all they're having to compensate for a lack of insulin (T1 condition). View Thread
I don't comprehend where there's any need for any apologizing "non-diabetics sugar". I assure you I'm not intending any negatives toward anyone here. Where i quoted "A non-diabetic's sugar does not rise no matter what they eat." - I was challenging that statement as false (maybe it was confusing, and yea it is more stable than a T2) .
As far as Type 1.5 as you ask/mention, well there does appear wide range to how sever someone has diabetes, and multi causes (insuline resistance, insuline lack, food, etc). Worse, there are people with T2 that get worse over time and become T1 late in life - and my hope is that could happen way-less-often if people paid more attention to diets.
Speculating where I may have been off in communicating... I think I expressed an idea that the BG has to come from somewhere... like if there's ISNT any any fat in the body and no food there'd be no way for the BG to stay elevated (starvation), and from there one could control by eating very small non-glucose-blasting things. When I was at 165 lbs it felt that way too - like no food hurt via low BG. Hope that helps.View Thread
Have you read the leading books like McCulley's and Bersteins? It does sound like your diet approach is recovering your heath to the point where you're over-drugging yourself to feel the low BG sensations. Even diet alone can get that sensation without the BG being low other than relatively low to your average.
I remember my 1st 6 months reducing my BG from 350 to 100 average via diet only. There were times I felt nauseous and yuck sensations --- tested my BG and well it wasn't "low" as in below 80 but it was "low for me". And further...
After getting to average 90's for my BG, and taking my weight from 180 down to 165... while having always been a meal-skipper and gorging type of person... I would feel the same effect with BG readings in the high 70s to low 80s, and that was when I took my weight back up... and easy meal skipping again. Ideal for me seems to be about 175, or if I reduce toward 165 again maybe doing it slower I'll get used to it better. And THAT was the same while using diet to reverse for me.
Some go for the 100% shock treatments with juicers, etc... Well when I first was T2 at an average of 350, and fasted for 2 or 3 days, my BG could get as low as 300 or so - but I did feel that same sensation and ate then. Pushing myself hard enough to reduce BG and going further loosing weight I was burning more fat than food for a long time (6 months or more). Without medical supervision I think that pace of change is about right too.
I did try those keytone sticks and things like that. When I fasted and perfect-fooded too much, I could feel the starvation-sense and see minimal (still safe) keytones...
So I also have the impression that those juicer diets and biggest looser sort of crash programs are only wise when watching closely for dangerous lows, dizziness, and on and on... and at some intensity IDK medical supervision would seem wise.
IDK the mix of extreme regiments a-la-cold-turkey vs the gradualists of which I'm surely extreme...but surly, improvement in BG via diet too fast will get you some low BG sensations even if your BG is never "dangerously low". Then again if you feel it who knows, that could be dangerous - and thus not knowing your meds can only speculate caution on things like insulin (too much?).View Thread
If you are thin without any substantial fat, then there is no fat for your liver to make into BG, and thus your BG should come down when you fast long enough.
I'm relating to the concept in the movie where sugar is processed into either fat or cancer... but twisting the idea for my speculation... that you can't get BG#s going high without the glucose comming from somewhere.
This idea sorta-fits with the experience being at 165 lbs where I my BG started going lower between meals (80s was lowst I ever saw). Someone said I should have tried harder to get used to it and that I would have --- I think they were right - I should have tried longer/harder keeping that wt.
Anyway, minimum weight where can the gloucose come from? and once there wouldn't a feeding schedule be better than insuline pumps and crazy stuff like that...
"A non-diabetic's sugar does not rise no matter what they eat." They do get a BG rise for an hour or so from a large sugar blast (eg: glucose tolerance test). My glucose tolerance curve is normal (self tests via bg tester every 10 minutes). There are some nice diagrams of that in McCulley's work.View Thread
Sorry to hear your challenges are more severe than mine. I do believe its curable for some - and believe I'm living that, while I also recognize that some are stuck with more severe restrictions. I look forward to your posts in response to mine also - don't hold back - my skin is quite think and I don't have to be right. All I have to offer is my own experience and POV. So do you.
It appears that in my case I had been T2 for about 15 years while peeing off excess sugar and still producing insulin. I think that because that's when I started getting mild rashes and it aligns with my then-vegetarian diet shifting to pizza when (GF moved out).
Thankfully in my case, it appears so-far-so-good for a full recovery. As far as a "cure", I like the analogy of recovering from obeasity. After a few years the INDIVIDUAL can be the one to claim victory/cure. I waiting 3 years post reversal before blogging about it and claiming "cure". Like you say - I can't eat those 5K calories/day again but I don't want to either.
On weight I'm less cured. At 5'8", my weight has gone from 245 to 180 and stayed at 180 for 3 years. Last summer I reduced further to 165 and OUCH! I notice hunger pangs and light-headedness of low blood-pressure. I had to consume salt on purpose (I still eat lots and lots of it) and skip[ed meals nauseated me.
So I went for some intentional gain aiming at 180 but overshot to 205 before the end of August. Right now in the 190s and except for the holiday have been inching it downward for a while, confidently (and THANK GOD FOR THAT).
Hope that helps our perspectives, I value the others here greatly - and sometimes learn things here myself too (though mostly intent here is to "give back" to the alternative sources of success such as Bernstein, McCulley, and especially here, Dansinger). Cool that recent adjacent health alturnatives are pointing the same directions too (eg: Fat, Sick & NearDead).
So for me I've "reversed" Type 2 and am "winning" against obesity - where more of my struggles are staying fit.
Of course there are risks that T2 could return, and there are risks that too many BG blasters could get ahead of me as I'm aging. However, I have noticed the "drift" of BG numbers above 100 is driectly related to my weight and recent behavior. Like yesterday I tested 115(am), (111 noon still no food), and 99 (evening couple hours after food). I personally attribute those 11 to 15 points above 100 as results from thanksgiving indulgences.
In your case, I do still believe that the BG blasters are important to your health - and that you have way less tolerance for them than I have. Still you have some - like a Dr might have you take a BG tolerance test which involves consuming sugar.
As you report a 393 average while alreayd "eathing healthy", and exceed the things I know to try/do... my best recomendation is the Death To Diabetes (DTD) book and resources of DeWayne McCulley.
Their facebook community is imho cultish - though for severe challenges, that author claims he's personally reversed T2 from a 1300 BG initial condition. HOWEVER, I fell out of favor over there. My sense that I was the only one talking about being "reversed" and "engineering my own program". That's what the author did - but the followers are there now. No more engineering allowed (hmmm yuck). They've turned it into more of an infomercial for a Biggest Looser style crash-course thing. Those can be good for people but then what? Well in a severe case like you'rs that's fine anyway, but not me. Nice to see this site open across multiple authors discussed and analyzed.
Similarly, its nice Mike and the "experts" here don't enforce a mainstreme medical view while they contribute those views. Go Mike!. BTW, have you seen his thread/article on reversal? I commented there but my impression is you might do so very well too - from yet another perspective than mine.View Thread
Gosh I misread a post... but yea sure labels... not available when 99% of your food is prepared for you, and shopped for you... .
Most of my sense of nutrition is intuitive based upon the 1st 6 months looking up the calories of food choices via the internet. I've not spent much time differentiating the carbs/starches/sugars - but rather learning to recognize them by the approximate consistency and taste. Vegies aren't like that. Neither is lean venison.
What used to be a mental daily calorie-tally has shifted over the last couple of years to a doing good/bad sense of need to improve or double-down or relax already. Better priorities via better knowledge.
BTW, for the intuitive based pictorial, the I do like the medeteranian pyramid . Anyone else think there's a more better one that's getting popular (for longer term rather than short term like the juicers)? Thanks.View Thread
Hi Mike, sorry if this is late - I just saw it here. Here's my input, and good work! The show makes a health contribution!
I consider it a "cold turkey" style transition method - and while its weight I applies to Type 2, Heart Disease and Cancer too. While that works for many people, there are many others who are more naturally "gradualists", like me.
Also, as a side-note, I would not tolerate a coach screaming at me like I've seen on that show - that would be a coach-ender for me (not others, my wife likes that in the show).
I see diet as more important than all that exercise too. And the way the gave that woman a hard time about chewing and spitting the candy? Why not just say hmmm ok how good was that? So that reflects that it's often annoying to me when it appears the contestents are sometimes treated with disrespect. The idea is to teach not direct and control (imho). If a person is unable to do more exercise that's not necessarily a failure, etc.
So basically its nice to see an approach to getting healthy that works for some people in extreme need. In that deep of a state of need, that drastic of an effort seems appropriate but brings on a completely different challenge - MAINTENANCE. It also begs the question what about the contestants who wont do that exercise or don't have that psychology?
In contrast the moderation/procrastination/gradualist approach that I represent here is another method that works but way slower (some can't wait that long). Its advantage is SUSTAINABILITY. Like gradual changes are sustainable.
All that said I'm wondering if post crash-diet (eg: that 600 calorie T2 reversal study, or Fat Sick and Nearly Dead)... Is there an easy way to start from a 1500 or less wt-loss diet and relax into a 2500 calorie diet without the changes being gradual?
I would think so, like people can cold turkey stopping smoking. Like if they can keep 1500 to 2000 calories "good nutrition" while allowing themselves a couple beers or a snack or whatever for the other 500. That's 80% or better "good nutrition" and with the certainty and blessing of another chance most should be able - I hope (while still 35 lbs above my desired wt, and 3 years after loosing 75, regained 30).View Thread
For me the worst part was needing to see a Dr, and then having to fend off the Dr's insistence that I take drugs or die. I reversed it in 3 months via diet, and cured it with another 3. During that time I experienced better and better health and have ever since. I figured out my theory about "glucose blasters" and haven't yet heard that phrase used by others.
And the food choices have become more preferences that sacrifices. So rather than there being a worst thing about dealing with the BG#s, there was only the experiences of being told what to do while that didn't jive with my own sense of truth, followed by a very sparse set of data available in the public domain (free), and the cost of books (I bought 6).
Thankfully, home-test-meters were available 4 years ago (they weren't 10 years ago). IDK about 5 years ago (hmmm most of this way old thread). 4 years ago buying 1500 test strips in bulk was about $500 if I remember right - that sucked too, but seems it was worth it (I still have a few but don't need them any more).View Thread