First off, I’ve got a very important announcement to make for those of you that don’t frequent a ghetto supermarket like the one in my town. It’s National Doughnut Month! Yes, there is such a thing and we are in the throes of it right now comrades! Get out there and getcha self some.
Secondly, I am now requiring everyone, for at least the next two weeks and perhaps a little longer, to refer to me by my temporary name: ?Sunshine. Let me explain.
I’m currently immersed in type II diabetes research. All the information on diets to treat and sometimes cure type II diabetes fall into 3 basic categories as far as I can tell.
Category 1 is the garden variety diabetes info. that is basically the same as the American Heart Association guidelines. This information is passed out to diabetics because they are at a tremendously elevated risk of getting heart disease. It differs little from the food pyramid hoo-ha, stressing lean meats, starchy carbohydrates, fruits, vegetables, and a low intake of dietary cholesterol and saturated fat. It doesn’t work for shit of course, prompting the medical world to deem diabetes an ?incurable? ailment. It doesn’t stave off heart disease either. It is treatment, but certainly no cure for anything.
Category II is the low-carb stance of things. Richard Bernstein, Barry Groves ? these guys advocate treating the symptom of high blood sugars by keeping carbohydrates at a minimum in an attempt to keep blood sugars low. Diabetes isn’t really a disease of high blood sugar though. That’s just the primary complication that comes at the end of a stew that’s been gurgling for quite some time. Diabetes is a disease of insulin resistance, where the body doesn’t respond to the insulin it produces, and the typical low-carb, high-protein, high-fat approach helps in the short-term. But it’s far from reliable as a cure for insulin resistance. People overcoming insulin resistance via low-carb diets are a rarity for sure. Plus, as reduced-carbohydrate advocate Diana Schwarzbein has noted, it has taken her years to get diabetic patients off of insulin and living a good, healthy life again.
Category III is where the name ?Sunshine? comes into play. Neal Barnard, author of Dr. Neal Barnard’s Program for Reversing Diabetes, is one of a handful of authors/health advisors that advocate a pretty strict vegetarian diet for diabetes. This diet consists of virtually no fat, low to moderate levels of protein ? all plant-derived, and more or less unlimited amounts of carbohydrates. Gary Taubes would have a conniption over such advice, but much to his carb-phobic dismay, the general consensus is that an extremely high-carbohydrate vegan diet is, without a doubt, the quickest and most expedient way to get diabetics off of medication, undoing insulin resistance completely, and making them ?undiabetic.
The low-carb enthusiasts would of course have a diabetic feeling like such a diet is utter suicide. This is just about as idiotic as the low-fat vegan knobs having the world believe that eating meat and saturated fat is utter suicide. One side has a blind eye to the other. Fortunately, there are some folks out there with two eyes and the intellectual flexibility to use them both. I won’t name any names.
Anyway, Neal Barnard got me with a line on page 65 describing the health food shopping experience of the good ol? days, in which ‘the cashier was wearing a tie-dyed shirt, his name was Sunshine, and folk music was playing in the background. In an otherwise dry-as-toast-without-butter encyclopedia of vegan propaganda, this line was about the only thing that kept me reading it till the end.
So to cut to the chase, I’m leaning towards highlighting an approach similar to that of Dr. Joel Fuhrman’s in overcoming insulin resistance and becoming ?undiabetic? in my next eBook on type II diabetes ? due by the end of November. But I wanted to give it a little trial myself. So here I go for the next two weeks or more, while taking daily glucose readings first thing in the morning to track my progress. The glucose testing, by the way, sucks. It would be miserable enough just to have to do such a thing, but your wallet gets crushed on top of the annoying finger-pricking. The cashier said it all as I bought a $54 pack of test strips (50 count) ? ?Whoa those things are expensive! Trust me, you don’t want to be diabetic.
Because it’s a full-on low-fat, damn near close to total vegan affair ? I’m left with little choice but to force everyone to refer to me by the name ?Sunshine,? in all comments and correspondence during this dietary experiment. I’m already on day 2 and feeling my muscles dissolve. It’s okay though man, who needs muscles when I’ve got nothing but love to give? Just hope I don’t crack a rib or something while I’m running around all over town giving out hugs to strangers on the street.
Yep, you got it. I’m going to eat nothing with fins, fur, feathers, faces, or feelings a la Fuhrman. It’ll be roughly 80% carb, 10-15% protein, and 5-10% fat.
To add an interesting twist ? something that I’ve found extremely compelling since Sista Pooti (her blog is no longer available, sorry) went pure carnivore (zero carb/FUMP) and had higher blood sugars than when carbs were in her diet?
…My girlfriend will be simultaneously eating an extremely low-carb diet and testing her blood sugars along the journey as well. We test at the same time, before breakfast every morning. After the first day in which I ate several cups of brown rice, 2 quarts of starchy vegetable soup, five pieces of fruit, and a huge bowl of oatmeal (at least 600 grams of carbs), I’ve got her beat by a whopping 15 mg/dl. (Keep in mind she’s been eating low-carb for over 3 years now – but is now dropping them to near zero).
High carb = 84 mg/dl
Low carb = 99 mg/dl
I, Sunshine Stone, will be posting almost daily like I did with my infamous FUMP extravaganza. The only question now is, what should I call it?
You vote! (in the upper right hand corner of the page until 8:30pm MST on October 14th)
Option 1 ? The F.U.D.A. Diet (DA stands for Dr. Atkins, FU stands for, well, you know)
Option 2 ? The New SCD (SCD usually refers to Specific Carbohydrate Diet. In this case it stands for Sunshine’s Cardboard Diet)
Option 3 ? A name, provided by you guys, that has been left in the comments section that you like better
Maybe 'Moonlight' may be more appropriate. I have no doubt there are exceptions, but every vegan I've ever encountered appear washed out, pale, lethargic and look like they need a good dose of sunshine.
No problem with such an eating protocol as an answer to type 2 diabetes however but what you gain in one area, one is sure to lose somewhere else.
Ha! Great experiment. I hope you make it. :-)
I plan on doing the Kitava 30 day experiment, which as you know is high carb but is (thank goodness) not super low fat. Maybe we can compare notes when it is all over. :-)
Michael
Nutrition and Physical Regeneration
What the hell happened to resting? haha
I must say.. Pooti was a good example of why blood sugar ("it's effect on" insulin; and "it being effected by carbs only") is not the only factor in diabetes, with the diet she was on.
I think your Sunshine should be called Light bulb. I mean, since veganism seems like a pretty much artificial diet for people.
Good luck though; this is going to be interesting to follow.
FUDA!
Ha, thats interesting Matt that your doing this now, as I'm on day 4 of a 4 week "Liver Cleanse" that become basically Vegan during weeks 2-3. I'm not sure why I never see anything about the "ancient grains" on this blog, but I'd recommend eating some Quinoa and amaranth. Their gluten free and the amaranth is delicious nutty flavor that makes a great "cereal" with coconut milk. I havnt opened my Quinoa yet. They both are fairly high in protein(6-7gram) for a grain and the amaranth has 7gram fiber(i've had no problems with it). I think I'll be eating a lot of Lentils for weeks 2-3 as those seem to be the easiet beans/legumes to digest.
Aaron(plastic chicken/low testosteron Aaron).
PS-I had a suar binge(basically 4-5 servings of sugared drinks/foods that day….probably about what the average American eats daily) a few weeks ago(just one day) and my teeth hurt like mfers! I thought, could I have given myself a cavity in ONE day! It took about 5 days, but the pain gradually went down. It was almost unbearable to brush my teeth the first 2 days. I had went "low sugar for about a month before that so maybe that makes one more sensitive?
Aaron
Thanks for your blessings kind souls. May the earth mother bless thee humbly in return.
Of course vegans are washed out anemic bastards if they take it too long. Everyone knows that. You'd have to be an idiot not to have made this very simple observation. Even listening to guys like Fuhrman and Neil Barnard means that I have broken the first rule of FAT CLUB. Damn.
The problem is that vegan gurus believe that just because their diet is healing in the short term, that it is the ultimate human diet. It's no different from many dietary masters of the universe.
Drinking only lemonade or only water for a few weeks can cure the 'incurable' too, but no one would argue that it's sustainable to eat that way for the rest of one's life. That's the fatal flaw of the vegan freaks. It's an amazingly healing short-term fast. It's not meant to be continued for a decade unless you want to be emaciated, anemic, infertile (or close to it), emotionally unstable, and spacey.
But bless them. They are children of the earth mother just like me, Sunshine.
As for sacred grains, my favorite thing to eat so far is traditional chappati. I grind up wheat berries in my "coffee" grinder and cook them in a pan. Today I had a chappati with a half dozen or so tiny baked apples with cinnamon and like 5 raw carrots from my garden. Quinoa and Amaranth isn't a bad idea though.
Aaron – You mean to say that sugar causes cavities? It's not rocket science is it? It causes cavities because it causes insulin resistance and high blood sugars in the easily susceptible. When blood glucose is between 75 and 85 mg/dl, the teeth, and most of the bodily systems, are invincible.
I vote FUDA on account of the symmetry. I'm all about the symmetry lately.
I'm really curious to find out about the results. My father died of complications from Type II diabetes. The disease made is life pretty awful the last five years he was alive as well.
My question is are you eating refined flour, vegetable oils, sugar on FUDA? Most of the vegans I see at my co-op are really bread-a-tarians and they seem to eat a lot of sweets as well. At the end of the day "Cruelty free" marshmellow fluff is still marshmellow fluff-an entirely unnatural, chemical laden abomination. Chloe is right, this is a pretty artificial way to live.
I have witnessed ruddy-cheked Iowa farm boy types reduced to pale shadows of themselves by veganism. So I expect that by the end of a month on FUDA your girlfriend is not only going to be able to beat you at arm-wrestling, but bench press you as well.
Good luck, Sunshine. For some reason I can't get the song "One Night in Bangkok" out of my head now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RulnxJLmBrA&feature=related
One night in Bangkok and the world's your oyster…
Or in my case, the world's my goji berry Kombucha…
Yes, FUMP vs. FUDA sounds pretty sweet.
I'm sticking to Fuhrman guidelines for the most part (he's not a staunch vegan either, but I'm going full veggie for 2 weeks). Fuhrman hates refined grains, sugar, and vegetable oils almost as much as I do. We actually are in perfect agreement on that one.
The diet is simply raw and cooked vegetables, beans and legumes, fruits, and some cooked starch from whole grains, potatoes, corn, etc.
Good luck Sunshine. I admit all those gorgeous people on Furhman's blog posse are a siren song for the vegan way but I only had to read "soy milk" a couple of times before my reason took hold again. Your experiment has me curious too. Your diet kinda reminds me of the time I did WW Core program. Left me 10 #'s fatter and tired to the bone. Anyway, I'm fascinated!
Aaron,
Don't forget that there's not JUST sugars in all that stuff. If it's soda, there's corn syrup and acid (a lot of acid – that's important; especially the phosphoric stuff which will leach calcium in the body, which is needed to "build strong teeth"); if it's pastries and other kid things it's probably also got vegetable fat included.
Obviously all the extra stuff would make things worse, and extrapolate the situation as you said it only lasted a day.
Sunshine, I am unclear as to what you are attempting to accomplish on this diet. You arent diabetic, so how is this going to delve into what diet would heal the diabetic? Your blood glucose could be entirely different eating this diet if you were actually diabetic compared to not being diabetic. So Im just unclear as to the purpose of eating this way. Arent you going to have a hard time getting a sufficient amount of calories? Especially without fat. I hope for your sake this heals you somehow in the short term month you are doing it, because it seems ridiculous as hell to do for very long at all, especially when youre not diabetic.
This ain't exactly chemotherapy. Going without animal products for a couple weeks to a month – maybe even longer than that is highly unlikely to do any permanent damage.
I'm not diabetic, but you don't have to be diabetic to be insulin resistant. Most diabetics are insulin resistant for years, even decades before becoming diagnosed. I wanted confirmation that indeed fasting blood sugar levels could be lowered on such a diet. So far, I've had an 8 point drop to a level that is considered perfect.
Then again, my girlfriend, on the exact opposite fare, has had even more dramatic improvements thus far. We'll get into it more and more as a post each afternoon/evening on the diet.
More importantly, I wanna see if there is a negative recourse for being on the diet. Will I be worse off on a normal diet than when I started, or will actual healing take place that justifies the recommendation to diabetics?
As far as calories, it's damn tough to get enough, but you know I'm giving it my best. Lowering blood sugars and eliminating insulin resistance are just as significant for the metabolism as eating a large caloric load. You'll get before and after body temps as well, don't fret.
I haven't studied diabetes in significant depth, as you have, but after following Stephan's blog, I came away thinking that low-carb diets yield better results than you suggested. For instance, this post seems to make a good case for a low-carb diet: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/09/diabetics-on-low-carbohydrate-diet-part.html
Do you have any cites that I can see showing that low-fat diets yield superior glucose control?
Thanks, Dan
Well looks like you answered all my questions! GG!
How does one tell if they are slightly insulin resistant? Sites Ive seen list a million things, but from someone that used to be insulin resistant, what does it feel like, depending on what is eaten?
In The Schwarzbein Principle II Ive been reading she talks about damaged fats and says that most cheeses, including cream cheese, as well as buttermilk and several other dairy and non dairy products are damaged and you should avoid them. Are these fats really damaged, and if so how much does it matter (milk and its products are very low in PUFAs which Im guessing would be primarily what has been damaged be it from oxidation or high temperatures used in pasteurization, and perhaps some of the MUFAs)?
Im asking about the ones in dairy products only, the cheeses and such.
Schwarzbein's "damaged fats" thing is a little weird. Emphasize fresh fats sure, but picking on aged cheeses I always found to be a little odd. I don't get it, nor do I worry about 'damaged fats' in those foods. It's much more clear that polyunsaturates are the easily-damaged variety and one need not worry so much about monounsaturated and saturated sources and their level of 'damage.'
Dan,
Consider quotes like this from Fuhrman and Barnard:
?So, it is certainly true ? as the advocates of animal-food-rich diets, such as Atkins, Heller, Sears, and other proclaim ? carbohydrates drive up insulin levels temporarily. These writers, however, have not presented the data in accurate fashion. A diet revolving around unrefined carbohydrates (fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes) will not raise blood sugars or insulin levels. Studies have shown that such a diet can reduce fasting insulin levels 30-40 percent in just three weeks. Obviously, a low-fat diet that is high in refined sugars and refined carbohydrates and low in fiber is not a healthy diet. To lump refined and unrefined carbohydrates together is inaccurate and misleading. (Fuhrman)
?But as we have shown in our research studies, the road to high blood sugar is a two-way street. When you change your diet and make other healthful improvements, a rising glucose level can fall. Sometimes the change can be so dramatic that no doctor looking at you afterward would ever guess that you had once been diagnosed with diabetes. (Barnard)
Those changes of course, are eating a lot of carbohdyrates without much fat or animal protein.
?More than 90 percent of my diabetic patients who were on insulin at the time of their first visit got off all insulin within the first month. (Fuhrman)
Now those are quotes worth exploring, and that's why I'm taking the time and trouble to investigate with a glucose meter and all.
@Aaron
Their gluten free and the amaranth is delicious nutty flavor that makes a great "cereal" with coconut milk.
Thank you for that. Sounds quite tasty. I have been making my own coconut milk and have noticed how it can serve as a tasty milk substitute. The homemade stuff is nothing like what comes out of the can.
Michael
Nutrition and Physical Regeneration
@Matt Stone
Drinking only lemonade or only water for a few weeks can cure the 'incurable' too, but no one would argue that it's sustainable to eat that way for the rest of one's life. That's the fatal flaw of the vegan freaks. It's an amazingly healing short-term fast. It's not meant to be continued for a decade unless you want to be emaciated, anemic, infertile (or close to it), emotionally unstable, and spacey.
Exactly! You can heal with vegan stuff but you can't maintain.
Having said that I have no doubt that there are a lot of vegans out there who "cheat" but still basically consider themselves vegan, not realizing the huge leap in the quality of their diet that is achieved by the occasional "cheating."
There is quite a bit of testimonial evidence that raw food vegans are "cheating" on a regular basis and yet passing themselves off as strict vegans.
Michael
Nutrition and Physical Regeneration
Michael,
Make sure you've read this one. It's a perfect case of short-term gain and long-term pain:
http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/2007/05/when-plants-fight-back.html
@Sunshine – the researcher formerly known as Matt Stone
This ain't exactly chemotherapy. Going without animal products for a couple weeks to a month – maybe even longer than that is highly unlikely to do any permanent damage.
I go twice a year for over 40 days with no animal products. From my experience it is not a problem at all. However I pound the coconut milk when I do (and the second 40 day period does include some fish on occasion) – almost Kitavan but not quite.
Michael
Nutrition and Physical Regeneration
Sunshine,
Can you please explain why you think that insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar cause cavities? What's the mechanism for that? Even the idea that ingested sugar building up on teeth causes cavities makes more sense to me…
@Sunshine – the researcher formerly known as Matt stone
Make sure you've read this one. It's a perfect case of short-term gain and long-term pain:
http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/2007/05/when-plants-fight-back.html
Ouch! Thanks for that. I have a friend who has gone through a similar experience but she is still heavy into avocados. I will email her the link.
Michael
Nutrition and Physical Regeneration
Hi Matt,
Fasting BG is typically higher in people eating LC than people eating high-carb. But you have to factor in post-meal blood sugar too. HbA1c typically goes down on LC even if fasting glucose goes up. Post-meal glucose is the main contributor to HbA1c.
So I hope you'll monitor post-meal sugars too.
I've always preferred this version:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnqj31VPNoE&feature=related
You can't go wrong with the rockin' flute part.
Fuhrman, eh. That guy and his "disease proof" website inadvertantly led me here.
Quote: I have witnessed ruddy-cheked Iowa farm boy types reduced to pale shadows of themselves by veganism.
Lol, I live in Iowa, but haven't seen much of those ruddy-cheeked Iowa farm boy types around. They must have all gotten fat sitting around on their combines eating HFCS and getting in debt by over 200k by 20 years of age. Maybe you could point me in the right direction? :)
I think Drew makes a good point about the fact that one can't deem something workable when they are not carrying the disease. Though, I get that you are trying to do – to see what it does to or for a normal person.
And I also hope someone talks about Harper's question. Cause all I hear about cavities are "it's sugar it's sugar it's sugar that causes them" and I never really understood why; especially because I thought I remembered you(sunny-man) say that you had had sore teeth on a low carbohydrate diet a while ago.
"dietary masters of the universe" killed me, Sunshine XD
@Stephen
But if the Sunshine diet lowers post-meal glucose upon returning to a LC diet (that is, lower than it would have been given the same meal pre-diet), it would still have a purpose in the diabetes world. Higher HbA1c for 2-4 weeks, followed by lower levels long-term? N'est-ce pas? Still, big "ifs".
If you lift weights, you get stronger. Maybe the same thing for pounding the carbs. It's adaptation. However, as Stephan pointed out, does this mean less sugar in the blood on average?
If you are going mainly cooked carbs, I suggest calling it the CarboMush Diet.
Oh, god, I hope it doesn't work. I just don't feel good on a diet like that.
Because I had gestational diabetes, I'm at risk for diabetes, and have had fasting blood sugars higher than I'd like off and on through my life. Strict interpreters would call them pre-diabetic, but my doctors were unconcerned (they were above 100 but under 107).
But I think my (non-pregnant) blood sugar blues have had more to due with stress, chronic anxiety, and a lifelong sleep disorder – which are all getting better. That cortisol will mess you up, as you've noted. But the one (non-gestating) HbA1c I had was superlative.
Though I don't feel good on a vegan diet, I am not a meat-lover. I do love me some dairy. But I feel better when I eat meat every day.
Tough being human – so many contradictions.
I do think that when people switch to a less processed diet they do better. They will swear that it's because it's raw, fermented, paleo, vegan, low-fat, or low-carb. All of that is debatable and to me quite interesting. But if you eliminate the added sugar, HFCS, and omega 6 oils by avoiding processed stuff by any of these means, you'll have done yourself a great favor.
Oh, but what I was going to say was this:
When I had gestational diabetes, I was on insulin and checking my blood sugar constantly. Because of another concern in the last weeks of my pregnancy, I ratcheted down my fat intake to something like what you're consuming now and watched my insulin demands dwindle down to practically nothing.
I'd had no clue that fat induces (at least temporary) insulin resistance, but looking it up, I found my observations backed up.
(Stephan Guyenet recently did a good post on why our cells might have evolved to handle fat this way.)
I had been carefully meting out carbs all along.
Helen,
Great feedback. It appears that intracellular fat accumulation is one of the direct biochemical causes of insulin resistance. I think people accumulate it primarily because of a low metabolism. A hypermetabolizer will burn fatty acids and never accumulate them in the blood or in the cells. That is the real hidden root cause of diabetes. If the diet is low enough in fat, it can provide dramatic short-term improvements. The first priority is to, of course, get a diabetic off of insulin.
If the fasting blood sugar is in the range of 75 to 85, one has relative immunity to tooth decay according to Melvin Page. Page could normalize most people's blood sugar within this range simply by removing refined sugar from their diet. I think it has to do with the glucose level of not just blood, but saliva maintaining too high of a level that feeds tooth-decay promoting bacteria. I would venture to say that candida feasts upon high blood sugars as well, not just that actual sugary material as dentists and candida-based health advisors believe.
Fyi, Page also found the pivotal Calcium to Phosphorous ratio – so key to bone and dental health, to be correlated to the blood sugar level.
Post meal blood sugars are irrelevant. Fasting glucose and insulin levels are everything. That is the cause behind type II diabetes and the entire metabolic syndrome. Plus, both Barnard and Fuhrman have witnessed stunning improvements in Glycated hemoglobin tests amongst diabetic patients.
Oh, and Carl sir, I'm about fiddy-fiddy in the carbo mush vs. raw carbo thing.
Helen, I noticed intently you said non-pregnant blood sugar blues. Are you saying you did not have blood sugar problems when you were pregnant? I say this because 1. woman are more likely to get diabetes; and 2. estrogen is something that increases both fat and free fatty acids (strongly associated with diabetes)
Progesterone, which is supposed to be specifically high in women during pregnancy, opposes both of these reactions!
In fact, there was an oral contraceptive pill that was found to produce signs of diabetes – because they decreased glucose tolerance.
"Spellacy and Carlson (1966) suggested that an elevation of circulating free fatty acids might be responsible, and remarked that "Free fatty acids can block the Krebs cycle, with relative insulin action resistance resulting." "The potential danger of the oral contraceptives is one of prolonged pancreatic stimulation." Recent papers are reporting that the estrogen used to "treat menopause" causes an increase in free fatty acids. Spellacy and Carlson suggested that estrogen's effect was mediated by growth hormone, and that is now the consensus. Women are much more likely than men to develop diabetes. "
"Diabetes mellitus, as named, refers to excessive urination and sugary urine, but it is now often diagnosed in people who neither urinate excessively nor pass glucose in the urine, on the basis of a high level of glucose in the blood. Many other signs (abnormal mucopolysaccharide metabolism with thickening of basement membranes, leakage of albumin through capillary walls and into the urine, a high level of free fatty acids in the blood, insensitivity of tissues to insulin, or reduced sensitivity of the beta cells to glucose) are considered diagnostic by some people, who believe that the worst aspects of the disease can be prevented if they can diagnose early and take preventive measures. This attitude derives largely from the genetic theory of causation, though it incorporates a belief that (environmental) intervention can ameliorate the course of the disease. ..I mentioned that the sudden appearance of diabetes in non-European Jews when they moved to Israel made the genetic theory of diabetes untenable, and since then other studies have made the similar point that environmental factors seem crucial. Many people are arguing for the racial/genetic theory of diabetes, but they are failing to consider some simple dietary factors, especially the high consumption of unsaturated seed oils and the combination of nutritional deficiencies and environmental stress.
I have known adults and children who were diagnosed as diabetic, and given insulin (and indoctrinated with the idea that they had a terminal degenerative disease) on the strength of a single test showing excessive glucose... I tried to make it clear that "diabetes" (a term referring to excessive urination) is a function, and that a high level of glucose in the blood or urine is also a function, and that the use of insulin should require a greater diagnostic justification than the use of aspirin for a headache does, because insulin use itself constitutes a serious health problem."
"Cushing's syndrome usually involves hyperglycemia. Normally, this is just a functional response to an excess of glucocorticoids, but studies in dogs suggested that intense and/or prolonged stress can damage the insulin-secreting cells in the pancreas. Dogs had half of their pancreas removed, to increase the burden put on the remaining tissue, and after a large dose of cortisone the dogs became (and remained) diabetic."
As well,
"The Shute brothers began using vitamin E to treat circulatory diseases in general, rather than just in pregnant women–blood clots, phlebitis, hypertension, heart disease, and diabetes all responded well to treatment with large doses."
This would make sense because Vitamin E prevents free radical oxidation. However, it's not as good as leaving out those free radicals from the diet entirely.
"In the opposite direction, an excess of insulin or prolactin, or a deficiency of vitamin E, increases the activity of the enzymes that convert linoleic acid into the more highly unsaturated fatty acids."
Matt, dude, come on, Ray Peat has cured diabetics – including someone who was diagnosed with type 1 that no longer had to use insulin. I think it'd be a really good notch on the information belt to include him on. But I still rarely have heard you talk about any of his articles. I try when I can to bring up his stuff..because it's oh so relevant, especially for this situation.
Welcome Michael. I know something about 40plus day fasts too….sounds like the Eastern Orthodox Church to me! I felt awful doing that for 12 years, but perhaps me and my then wife didnt know how to properly eat that way then(I remember lots of soy….)
ChOle,
My 4-5 servings of sugared stuff were as follows:
1)Vietnamese Ice tea(made with cream, tea, sugar)-no veg fats
2)A large organic homade cookie made with coconut oil and sugar-little to no veg fat(I didnt make it myself, but I know this person who did tries to avoid that stuff)
3)Two servings of a "fruity" wine. I assume there was a little sugar in this but I could be wrong.
4) A piece of fruit
I'm skeptical of the notion that its not the sugar on the teeth that caused this as in the past when I've had things like this in one day, I'd be find as long as I brushed my teeth right after eating the sugar. I didnt do that this time….I just brushed in the morning and at night.
Logically, I suspect veg oils are bad for the body and I try to avoid them, but I've never personally experienced much difference from eating or not eating them(not to say they are not fing things up slowly but surely). However, going near sugarless for a month felt like a Revelation. Fack Moses! Aaron is not Israel's Prophet! Ahem…please excuse that. :) Basically, I felt much much better on my "sugar fast". Nothing has ever compared to that except the first few runs through of "low carb" where I did feel great(probably from burning out my adrenals, which I do have clinical adrenal fatigue now).
Wow, I guess you made it sound like junk but none of that stuff sounds incredibly as bad at all.
I'm just trying to figure out why someone would feel good going without any sugar for a certain period of time(you or Matt or whoever else) while someone felt nothing(Me, or Harper). Obviously there's the whole blood sugar and insulin resistance – one person has it, one person doesn't. But eliminating sugar doesn't necessarily solve those issues (and didn't necessarily cause them), and it's not like they haven't been solved without excluding sugar. This makes me believe it's not just sugar or no sugar that's the problem. I have understood the logic behind unsaturated fats and what they can do both in nature and in us that effects the hormonal systems, metabolism and thyroid. But I have not heard an incredible amount of logic for what sugar does to any system (that it's actually good in a lot of ways) to cause problems – other than simply "raising insulin" or "raising blood sugar" when there's a vast majority of factors that contribute to both of those things.
It's the same with low carbohydrate diets. Some people right away say oh, they feel great, when others entering them (myself) never felt anything good out of them – and, in fact, right away felt the bad. So I just wonder if it's that lingering insulin resistance factor; just like someone with heart disease (with other things in their diet) who claim they were healed from eating a vegan diet because of the "low cholesterol" and "low saturated fat".
So I think if I were in your situation, it'd be easier to believe; but being the way I is, I'm going to have to burry against the without-sugar-for-some-time and if it is good or if it's just a random step that wasn't necessary; i feel like that same feat is able to be accomplished through other means. That is, balancing blood sugar (makes my mind scream thyroid) and repairing insulin resistance, which is yet associated with more hormones.
I hope we can all delve deeper into this..cause this is kind of what I've been trying to figure out for a while. I want to go beyond that it's accepted as fact that it's just sugar or carbs that is associated with insulin to the highest degree.
Clo –
You've got the gestational diabetes thing wrong. Pregnant women often develop diabetes while pregnant only. After birthing, they return to having normal blood sugars, but gestational diabetes is prophetic. Most women develop it many years later.
You and Harper are much younger than the majority of people participating on the blog. I would venture to guess that neither of you are insulin resistant, and therefore haven't noticed much, as your glucose levels were already well-controlled. If you are insulin resistant, combining fat, meat, and refined sugar is like the perfect storm. Even natural sugars can be aggravating too.
Brushing the teeth certainly cuts back on the bacteria on the teeth. It eliminates them on site. I haven't brushed my teeth for two days now and have no pain or tooth scuz even while eating 8-10 pieces of fruit per day. That's much harder to get away with on my regular diet after my body temp plummeted over the course of the summer.
http://www.thegardendiet.com/
sunshine, the above link is what i was obsessed with when i decided that raw veganism was the holy grail 5 or so years ago. it only lasted a few weeks, thank goodness, b/c it was really hard to pull off, plus i got pregnant and then anything raw, esp. produce, made me want to hurl. but these people, at least the parents, do not look emaciated or pale or any of the other adjectives people assign to vegans. the kids are a little skinny, but they all claim to have amazing health and the father claims to have eaten this way for over 30 years with no problems. the main reason i was so attracted to this diet was b/c of the testimonies of the woman who said she had several raw vegan pregnancies and she didn't get stretch marks, her labor was a breeze and she regained strength immediately. it sounded like perfection to me and now that i have had 2 babies with very hard labors (although apparently not hard enough since i birthed both at home) and i felt like i had been hit by a bus after each one. it also has taken many weeks to feel like myself again and feel like i can take on the world again.
re: gestational diabetes–i am no expert on this, but the GB test they give to pregnant women is ridiculous given that they make them drink this sugar cocktail and then take the readings. i skipped it this time b/c i was not about to flood my body with that crap. my first pregnancy i opted to eat the real food that was prescribed and not that i remember, but i guess i did fine.
i can relate to helen above who said she had chronic anxiety and stress, which i have had but i wouldn't know if my blood sugars were affected. i am not about to start sticking myself multiple times a day to find out so i am banking on being aware of how i feel. i, too am reading the schwarzbein princ 2 and she seems to have a lot of "mainstream" ideas that i don't get like drinking 8 glasses of water and avoiding saturated fats like coconut and butter. i don't think i could survive on the food she suggests in her sample meal plans, at least now while i am nursing.
amanda
Both estrogen and progesterone get higher with pregnancy – but progesterone is the hormone that prevents miscarriage from the high levels of estrogen. Whatever the person does when pregnant probably be a big factor in how balanced the two are. I was thinking along the lines of the fact that, yes, blood sugar is high in pregnancy (However, Peat has pointed out that normal pregnancy can be considered diabetic based on the simple facts of blood sugar being higher.
"I got interested in this when I talked to a healthy "diabetic" woman who had a two year old child whose IQ must have been over 200, judging by his spontaneous precocious hobbies. Old gynecologists told me that it was common knowledge that "diabetic" women had intellectually precocious children."
But you've said yourself that blood sugar is not the root of diabetes – and those classifying "hyperglycemia" as diabetes must be off track.), but so is estrogen – and so happens to be progesterone. If blood sugar were high(or simply remained high), the symptoms would not be the same as that of diabetes or constantly dipping blood sugar(hypoglycemia).
And while Harper and I may be younger, it doesn't exactly tell me why we have the other metabolic problems, specifically not associated with insulin. Also, there are type 2 diabetic children. I just don't think aging is the only thing going on here.
If you're saying any form of sugar can be offensive to someone insulin resistant, why is it that people can put diabetes in remission on such high carb vegan diets, or Doug Graham's fruit only diet? Or by simply highly dosing on Vitamin E and/or Brewer's Yeast?
They aren't offensive because Graham and Fuhrman's diets help people to overcome insulin resistance. Your metabolic problems most likely arise from your fruitarian era with constant attempt at calorie restriction combined with overexercising – something that has consequences over the long-term in every personal case that I've investigated – particularly in a developing teen that's most in need of a hearty, anabolic diet – not a low-calorie fruit diet.
Their diets work because they remove what causes cells to be resistant to insulin – intracellular fat accumulation. This is done through fat starvation more or less.
Diabetes IS a disease of hyperglycemia that results from consuming carbohydrates in an insulin resistant state. The 2 options from there are to decrease sugar consumption (low-carb) or overcome insulin resistance. One route caters to a metabolic inefficiency, the other cures it in less than a month. You be the judge on which is more of a health achievement.
But that's my point..they're combating insulin resistance with sugar and carbs. If it were fat accumulation, then the fat must have accumulated for a reason. If it's pushed a step further, and the fats in the person were causing inflammation (which if it's a lot of fat, chances are it does) and were mostly unsaturated, then eliminating them would match up with the fact that it's more than just sugar that antagonizes insulin. That unsaturated fats play a large role in causing it; and their oxidation and accumulation in the body is effected by our hormones..and they effect the accumulation, the oxidation..and it effects the hormones..
Calorie restriction is a form of starvation and has been shown to increase lives — but this is strikingly because of the fact that it causes the body to "hold on to the saturated fats of youth" as it were. But what those restricters there don't know is that there's other ways to keep tissues saturated, and not be fat. It's called a fast thyroid..metabolism..true health for people in more than just lifespan terms.
My problems stem way back before I got into calorie restricting and fruit, though. The problems I had got me into those things, and were examples of metabolic disasters before I even began getting into health; which is why I think I am taking so long to get better, and find out what my full stemmed problem is. Else it seems like simply eating more calories would have helped me right away (with more than just a lack of weight) and continued to show. I've been eating a lot, and remain to eat a lot; I just tweak which things I eat. I think it makes a huge difference when involving the history and the outlook of more hormones (not just insulin, cortisol, and adrenaline) – which is why I find Peat so intriguing because most of his articles explain my situation, especially before my lack of food consumption. And it's more than just random studies that he writes about, it's important how his ideas all connect together.
Hyperglycemia does not always mean diabetes. And it and insulin are not always synonymous to react with each other – it's not like other things don't effect insulin or blood sugar. In a pregnant woman's case..classifying her as "diabetic" just because she has high blood sugar does not seem justified.
"You and Harper are much younger than the majority of people participating on the blog."
And yet, it seems we have the absolute worst health problems out of anyone here. There are plenty of young children that have Type 2 diabetes, that's one helluva blanket statement to say that I'm healthy or not insulin resistant just because of my age.
41 comments so far; i hope to make time to read them soon.
I followed Fuhrman's diet for almost three months this spring.
I did not know I had Type II Diabetes at the time so did not do any blood testing.
What steered me away from it was major muscle loss and, as you shared in the audio tape, the bloated belly, the poor sore belly from gas…
i just could not get adjusted to it.
i've been eating HFLC for over a month and a half and started testing my blood sugar for the past 3 wks.
My blood sugar was finally dropping under 90 and then I ate crap food at the fair. Since then, 10 days ago, I've struggled to get it under 100.
I'll be watching your blog, but I wonder, if you don't have high blood sugar (or type II diabetes) how this can be a valid test…..
@ ChlOe – Just to clarify, I had gestational diabetes – a pretty clear case of it, and not a surprising one, with twins stressing my body more than a singleton pregnancy. I also was 41 at the time. But I'd been noticing blood sugar problems since I was 19 in various ways. I had a glucose tolerance test at 20 and it was a bit outside the normal range, both on the up- and down-swings.
I was screened for gestational diabetes initially with a one-hour post-prandial test, instructed only to "eat a sweet breakfast" before having it. For good measure, I had no such thing (eggs, cheese, and one piece of Ezekiel toast) and my blood sugar was (I think) 200. The 3-hour glucose tolerance test confirmed it. I don't think it's a ridiculous test.
I generally go for holistic approaches over medicalized ones, but this is an issue where I part ways with some midwifery sites I've seen that claim that gestational diabetes is over-diagnosed and that mild cases (which mine was not) have no evidence of being harmful. I've seen a lot of research showing that gestational diabetes can have both immediate and lasting effects on both health and intellectual development. It's a good thing to take it seriously and to treat it (usually diet is enough) even if it's mild. I'm glad I did.
I'm sorry you had trouble; but that doesn't clarify that high blood sugar is equal to diabetes or that the range is not stretched in the medical community to make it appear as if any blood sugar out of their range when someone is pregnant is referred to as "diabetic".
Hi Chloe,
I won't argue with your point here, but I do know several women who had an out-of-range blood sugars at their initial gestational diabetes screen but passed the three-hour glucose tolerance test and hence were *not* diagnosed with gestational diabetes. So it doesn't seem their doctors were that rabid to label them diabetic.
My experience, outside of pregnancy, with the medical community has actually been the opposite. I think that ideal fasting blood sugars are lower than what my doctors have found acceptable – it's just very common for people to have higher than ideal fasting blood sugars, so it's considered "normal" to be around 100, when really it should be 85ish, max, for good health. (I'm no expert on this, but this is what I gather from what I've read.) The threshold for diabetes diagnosis is much higher than that. I'm not saying people who have elevated blood sugars have diabetes, but that doesn't mean it's good for their bodies.
What doctors are are usually quick to judge by tests, not rabid.
And as for them being higher, it may be a good thing to have elevated blood sugar during pregnancy; or natural. Obviously not extremely high; but being that hormones change with pregnancy, I don't know why we would assume nothing should happen to blood sugar.
But obviously my original theory can't apply(and is probably off, cause it was me, just thinking out loud)-since we've established you were classified with the gestational diabetes.
Everybody eating like Neal Barnard and Joel Fuhrman looks emaciated and too thin. Plus, they blame animal foods for every problem in the world even while admitting that sucrose, HFCS, bleached white flour, and processed vegetable oils (all vegan foods) are also involved. All the foods that make SAD the awful diet it is are plant-based foods: white flour, sugar, HFCS, and high-PUFA or rancid trans-fat laden vegetable oils.
Helen is most likely correct in her thinking. High blood sugars and insulin levels in pregnant women has much to do with the development of the young buckaroo. Since there is really a wave of increasing insulin and blood sugar sweeping the globe, what is normal is probably off-the-charts to the upside.
Insulin resistance typically increases as one ages, and as we've seen, younger and younger people are getting diseases that used to take a lifetime to develop. A young person can be insulin resistant, but they have much lower rates and lower severity of insulin resistance than the rest of the population. Harper, you and Chloe's generation will see insulin resistance in almost 100% of people by the time you reach 70 or so. We're all really glad you guys are here to help reverse this trend for yourselves and your future families.
Karen –
I'm not diabetic, but the fact that this diet has lowered my fasting blood sugar level is very significant. I haven't had a single reading that was higher than the day prior. Let's just hope there's no yo-yo rebound when I start reintroducing important foods such as butter, cheese, eggs, meat, etc.
3 months is too long for Fuhrman's diet. Once a diabetic for example has normalized blood sugars and kept them there for a couple of weeks, they are ready to start bringing in more fats and proteins. I have been able to limit muscle loss thus far, keeping it to a minimum, by going crazy with stuff like whole grains and potatoes which are very protein dense and keeping calories as high as I can get them.
Ian –
Fuhrman and Barnard make tragic errors in the logic they use to develop these diets. There's no question about that. They are irrefutably unsustainable and lead to long-term problems. One only need eyes and access to some devout plant-ka-teers to see that. The question is simply, can a 'vegan fast' such as this provide an important shortcut in reversing problems? Are unrefined plant foods the best antidote for the damage done by refined plant foods? That's what I ponder.
I don’t understand the logic of this comment:
" 3 months is too long for Fuhrman's diet. Once a diabetic for example has normalized blood sugars and kept them there for a couple of weeks, they are ready to start bringing in more fats and proteins".
Is the BG not going to rise higher again to baseline (though not diabetic high, since you are not diabetic) once you get back to a more moderate carb diet? I eat a moderate carb diet and my BG is still slightly higher than I would like it to be, UNLESS I eat very low carb. But I'm not going back to that!
Lynn –
For a normal person, there's no urgent need to suddenly panic and go vegan to drop blood sugar levels as low as possible. For a diabetic, that's another story. It is urgent for them to get off of medications and let their bodies heal a bit by having normal blood sugar for an extended time period.
Toy around with your diet and test your blood sugar. I'd be really interested to know what you find. What I am really looking for is a way to take someone who has high blood sugars in response to mixed meals and improve upon that to where he or she has normal glucose levels and insulin response to mixed meals. I suspect that eating more food, more often, without restriction can take a person there over time via metabolic stimulation. Overfeeding is also known to decrease insulin and leptin resistance, it's greatest virtue.
But what I mean is what will happen to your BG when you (or anyone) goes back to eating a more mixed diet?
I suspect that going back to mixed diets after a restricted diet makes things worse not better. I'm hoping short-term healing can occur during brief restricted phases though.
But at least a restricted diet can offer a way for a diabetic to eat without being diabetic. It might not be the be-all end-all, but I'd rather be vegan or zero-carb than be diabetic.
So, the point was simply to show veganism can help diabetes, but that it does not actually help heal the metabolism?
Fuhrman’s diet is NOT low fat. Fat can range from 10-40% of the diet, but is typically 20-35%. Not sure where u got the lowfat connection with his diet….the lowfat vegan diets are Barnard, McDougall, etc. And, Fuhrman’s diet doesnt have to be vegan. U can eat ~10% animal products. How can u say Furhman’s diet is unhealthy? He bases his diet on greens, veggies, fruits, legumes, nuts/seeds/avos, and starches. He advises to eat fat with each meal for better nutrient absorption. He also advises to decrease the processed foods as much as possible.
So, where is the fault in his diet? Sounds healthier than any other WOEs and is completely backed by studies and thousands of testimonials. There is lots of room for tweaking but increasing/decreasing your fats, pro, carbs and the sources from which they are derived. It confuses me why u bash Fuhrman so much.