Boy I feel better about my BG numbers -- I'm doing a musical review (Teveye from Fiddler on the Roof and Arthur from Camelot are some of the numbers I'm doing). Anyway before tonight's perfomance the talk turned to diabetes. Three of us were type two and I told them where I was (blood sugar) and told them I'd like to be around 80. Wow did they chew me out -- they said that was TOO LOW. They said I needed to be a minimum of 130 to have any energy. They said that was dangerous to be any lower (even though I was real clear that I was on no medication) than 130. Amazing. However they also still eat a normal American diet.

wow yes, 130.. for fasting? What's funny, is that doesn't mean they have energy, it means their NOT pulling in the glucose so wouldn't have 'energy'. If it's in the blood, their not sucking it up into their cells.

Gee, if only your blood sugar numbers were higher you would be able to do energy demanding things like perform in musicals

Yeah pretty weird. I've talked to plenty of people who said it was ok to have high blood sugars (as long as they eventually came down some) but I don't think I ever talked to a guy who said it was "preferable" to have fasting blood sugars well into the diabetic range all the time. That guy has had diabetes for 6 years and he's taking 2000 mg metformin as well as two shots daily of insulin. He might be somewhat in denial as I asked how he was eating -- he said you're not supposed to have corn but he said he eats it all the time -- he makes sweet wines and eats plenty of bread as the ADA told him. So it might be that that's the best he can do and still eat like that.

By the way Ken if you are reading this thread I am always amazed how similar our experiences are -- Not only did we try the same Mayo clinic diet almost at the same time back several years ago but we both got diabetes in 2013 (pretty sure) and were diagosed in 2014. We both have sinister lookings beards and love to walk. However you are taller and have gotten skinnier (I'm going to catch up though bro) but I am better looking JUST KIDDING -- you might just have me beat there too.

For the member that stated they had much improved post prandial numbers with carbs, after 18 months of low carb, this might be interesting to them. (I posted this on a diabetes forum, but thought it relevant here too)

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...50413114001144

Very interesting .
T2: not beta cell loss, but dedifferentiation, early insulin or other means to induce normal glycemia can cause cells to re-differentiate back to insulin positive beta cells.

Basically, it's all about just keeping low BGs.
I'd even bet money that ppl who ran low carb and low BG levels , then report better carb processing years later, did so from actually increasing working beta cell numbers.

To me though, the main cool part, is that this is the 3rd thing I've found so far that is saying that the old idea of apoptosis (beta cell death) might not be right, that just because the cells are not insulin positive, does not mean they are 'dead and gone'. Simply put, their in a different form, like a coma state so to speak.

You are better looking. But you did not hear that from me.


That is pretty much what I've come to believe. I think excessive sugar on a daily basis just hammer and breaks down your system. At some point your BG will start to rise higher from eating the same foods. That is the damage. Once you eat sugar within your tolerance for it for an extended period of time I think that some healing does occur. You can tolerate carbs better. That line between healthy and excessive sugar in the diet depends on how metabolically healthy we are.

In fact, that's what I think the Atkins carb ladder is all about. On his plan, as you near your goal weight you add back carbs and try new foods one at a time. His tool for measuring success in his 'climbing the carb ladder' thing is the scale. But I'd be willing to bet that in can also be measured with a BG meter. Once BG & insulin start to rise too high too often, the body's ability to self regulate weight breaks down. You've climbed too high up the ladder and the pounds start to return. That is my twist on it, anyway.

Thanks for the link, BTW.

I get an error message when I click on the above link.
Can you post the full title of the paper?

I never got notified of your post, sorry, here is a better link

Pancreatic β Cell Dedifferentiation in Diabetes and Redifferentiation following Insulin Therapy

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...550413114001144

PDF
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...001144-main.pdf

Summary

Diabetes is characterized by “glucotoxic” loss of pancreatic β cell function and insulin content, but underlying mechanisms remain unclear. A mouse model of insulin-secretory deficiency induced by β cell inexcitability (KATP gain of function) demonstrates development of diabetes and reiterates the features of human neonatal diabetes. In the diabetic state, β cells lose their mature identity and dedifferentiate to neurogenin3-positive and insulin-negative cells. Lineage-tracing experiments show that dedifferentiated cells can subsequently redifferentiate to mature neurogenin3-negative, insulin-positive β cells after lowering of blood glucose by insulin therapy. We demonstrate here that β cell dedifferentiation, rather than apoptosis, is the main mechanism of loss of insulin-positive cells, and redifferentiation accounts for restoration of insulin content and antidiabetic drug responsivity in these animals. These results may help explain gradual decrease in β cell mass in long-standing diabetes and recovery of β cell function and drug responsivity in type 2 diabetic patients following insulin therapy, and they suggest an approach to rescuing “exhausted” β cells in diabetes.

I can't upload the PDF on here, wont' allow that type, but I can email it if you can't get it from those links.