Type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease reversed in rats
sciencedaily.com
sciencedaily.com
Then we will create a new rat species that is biologically immortal, smarter, stronger, and faster than any before. They will escape the NIH and establish their own society.
book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Frisby_and_the_Rats_of_NIM...
In this particular case, it is sad to see that we need a pill for everything; in many cases, T2D is easily controlled [3], even reversed, with aerobic exercise (note also that the mitochondrial biogenesis pathway is activated with exercise[4])
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_index
[2] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01868062#page-1
This has been cured too many times in too many ways in animals even by myself: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21816276
We have to move past being impressed by this type of information onto making a REAL Facebook and not just a site that looks like it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13887909
An extreme eight-week diet of 600 calories a day can reverse Type 2 diabetes in people newly diagnosed with the disease.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dme.12722
In people with Type 2 diabetes of more than 8 years' duration, a therapeutic trial of a very-low-calorie diet may be undertaken with a 50% chance of achieving non-diabetic fasting glucose levels, with all other antidiabetic therapies discontinued.
A single small trial isn't something to base medical advice around.
It can be used in both, and can use science, but that doesn't make it the same thing.
P.S. http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/1524537 is a study on parachute effectiveness
Americans eat so much they think overeating is normal. Bariatric patients (morbidly obese people getting their stomach essentially amputated, see Roux-en-Y) are generally told to fast for 24 hours prior to surgery. Their glucose levels before surgery are often normal, for the first time in decades.
The association between food intake and obesity is far, far stronger than cigarettes and lung cancer, even stronger than Hep B and hepatocellular carcinoma.
Asserting that eating less (and I do mean significantly less) needs to be studied more is like saying we should hold off on parachute use until more studies are done.
*not everyone, of course.
"Just eat less" is not a very helpful answer, it's incredibly frustrating to hear, believe me.
When your blood sugar is in the 60s or 50s range from trying like hell to do your diet all day, reason goes out the window and 'mere' will power is not enough.
It takes a lot of effort, lots of planning (preparing food, planning what, where and when to eat, snacks, etc) and a LOT of information (nutrition, insulin effects on the body, pros and cons of current 'fad' diets, etc) which takes a while to collect, also, lots of trial an error.
It doesn't help that most doctors, are clueless regarding healthy eating.
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on this site. Fresh, healthy, affordable food has never been more accessible to any society.
>"Just eat less" is not a very helpful answer, it's incredibly frustrating to hear, believe me.
Eating less is the only thing that works. You only find this advice unhelpful because it's hard. But the reason it's hard is because you've trained yourself to overeat and now you have to break that habit, a habit that has its psychological and physiological meathooks in you. People who haven't lived their entire lives stuffing themselves to the bursting point have no problems autoregulating. I mean, shit, my cat can manage it.
>It takes a lot of effort, lots of planning (preparing food, planning what, where and when to eat, snacks, etc) and a LOT of information (nutrition, insulin effects on the body, pros and cons of current 'fad' diets, etc) which takes a while to collect, also, lots of trial an error.
You sound like a pathetic whiny snot who has embraced a life of learned helplessness.
I'm trying to change my circumstances the 'hacker way': learning, experimenting and trying my best, even if it is a hard problem for me to resolve.
For me, staying healthy, slim and fit is incredibly hard, it seems that for you it is not.
A guy I went to high school with was an all-star center on our (American) football team at six feet tall and 294 lbs. He had always been "the fat guy" from the time we were children. Between the end of one football season and the start of the next school year, he dropped to 160 lbs. When he spoke on the topic of his change, he always first answered the "how" question with this response: "I just decided I was tired of being fat." For him, the particulars involved introducing heaping servings of fibrous vegetables (to help satiety) and running. But those things were of secondary importance.
Look at this guy: http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/2xczpt/6_month_prog...
45 years and old and resigned to being dumpy and hypertensive. Then he decided "fuck this" and changed his life. This is how it always works. You have to become sufficiently fed up to no longer accept the status quo. No one can do that for you nor will it appear in any study, book, or other "how-to-be-fit" advice.
This is why I no longer talk to people in real life about this topic. I can give them an endless supply of information on nutrition & programming but not the one thing without which they are doomed to failure.
You're body tries very hard to make sure you have enough nutrition. It increases hunger and reduces will power, and most long term research on diet based obesity/diabetes intervention shows that they have terrible effectiveness rates.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26868-do-sugary-drinks...
"Ah, so that's why the study found an association with sugary drinks?"
"Possibly. The study found that girls who drink more than 1.5 sugar-sweetened beverages a day started their periods 2.7 months earlier on average than girls who consumed them twice a week or less. The finding didn't apply to fruit juice – which contains a sugar called fructose – only to drinks sweetened with sucrose."
"What is the mechanism then?"
"That's one of the problems: we simply don't know. Karin Michels at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, who supervised the study, says that sucrose in sugary drinks causes a spike in the hormone insulin, which controls blood sugar levels. Over time this may make the body's tissues less sensitive to the hormone, with consequences for metabolism. Quite why this would lower the age of menstruation isn't understood, but a drug called metformin, which makes the body more sensitive to insulin, has been shown to reverse early puberty in clinical trials."
They don't find this insulin spike with fructose.
There are no confirmed causes for it but it varies. In certain population, it's a generic mutation, for some it's from fructose, and so on.
It has some very powerful side-effects though, like insomnia, sweating non-stop, and death if you take a few extra mcg than you should have. Ephedrine and caffeine are a lot safer.
Most who have done DNP say it is one of the worst experiences of their life.
Edit: It also may be mutagenic.
It's like suffering through a bad flu. Hot, sweaty, lethargic, gastrointestinal upset…it's unpleasant. The worst thing is the insomnia brought on by the night sweats. I live in a cold, cold Midwestern city, and I was sleeping with the windows open.
But, 15 pounds down in 2 weeks. While eating like 2200cal/day.
Anyone who disputes this is scientifically illiterate.
Well, those who possess a lower IQ are more likely to become obese. So perhaps not understanding the way the universe works is how they wind up obese in the first place. Not too surprising, then, that they would be unable to comprehend how to get themselves out of that state. And there is certainly no shortage of charlatans and mountebanks out there all too ready to lead them astray.
It still is, however a gross oversimplification. Fructose is dense in calories, easily absorbed (which is calories in, not necessarily the food you swallow), contributes heavily to lipogenesis, and does not inhibit leptin, a hormone that controls hunger.
Lots of data and an entertaining presentation, which starts by addressing calories in and calories out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z5X0i92OZQ
http://www.heartacademy.org/phpwcms/index.php?the-poisonous-...
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/2013/07/15/is...
Please no - you're someone who knows a bit but thinks they know the full picture. You're way overreactding.
You don't need to use a fancy model. Fructose is more likely to be used as liver fat. But, that doesn't mean it's impossible to lose weight.
Again, theoretically.
The difference between this DNP and the DNP you can buy on the blackmarket is that the DNP used in these modern fatty-liver studies is time released in smaller doses.
Users can expect to lose about ~1lb/day. But, it is very hard on you. You want to learn how to lose weight on a caloric deficit and macronutrient partitioning, about 1lb/week, and stick to a diet for at least a year before you even consider this. Otherwise, you don't have the right habits.