Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 03:57
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,837
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default Danish study shows positive effects of low carb diet

Quote:
Danish study shows positive effects of low carb diet


Replacing pasta and potatoes with meat and eggs could significantly improve blood sugar levels in people with type 2 diabetes, according to Danish researchers.

By reducing energy obtained from starchy carbs and increasing protein intake, participants also reported feeling more full between meals.

The study adds to the growing array of evidence showing how low carb eating can improve health outcomes, particularly for people with type 2 diabetes.

A total of 16 people with type 2 diabetes aged 43-70 who were being treated with metformin either went onto a standard, higher-carbohydrate diet or a high-protein diet. The latter group reduced their energy from carbs from 29% to 16% and increased their energy from proteins from 31% to 54%.

The University of Copenhagen researchers revealed that those who followed the high-protein diet had reduced their glucose levels after eating by 18% and also lowered their total insulin by 22%, compared to those on the higher-carb diet.

They also found that levels of two other hormones involved in metabolism - glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 - increased by 35% and 17% respectively.

Furthermore, those on the high protein diet reported feeling fuller for longer in between each meal, reducing their urge to snack.

The researchers say more work must be carried out to investigate the effects of eating a high-protein diet on diabetes over a long-term basis.

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/news/201...t-96179087.html


Quote:
Br J Nutr. 2018 Apr;119(8):910-917. doi: 10.1017/S0007114518000521.

A carbohydrate-reduced high-protein diet acutely decreases postprandial and diurnal glucose excursions in type 2 diabetes patients.

Samkani A1, Skytte MJ1, Kandel D1, Kjaer S1, Astrup A2, Deacon CF3, Holst JJ3, Madsbad S4, Rehfeld JF5, Haugaard SB1, Krarup T1.
Author information

Abstract
The aim of the study was to assess whether a simple substitution of carbohydrate in the conventionally recommended diet with protein and fat would result in a clinically meaningful reduction in postprandial hyperglycaemia in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In all, sixteen subjects with T2DM treated with metformin only, fourteen male, with a median age of 65 (43-70) years, HbA1c of 65 % (47 mmol/l) (55-83 % (37-67 mmol/l)) and a BMI of 30 (sd 44) kg/m2 participated in the randomised, cross-over study. A carbohydrate-reduced high-protein (CRHP) diet was compared with an iso-energetic conventional diabetes (CD) diet. Macronutrient contents of the CRHP/CD diets consisted of 31/54 % energy from carbohydrate, 29/16 % energy from protein and 40/30 % energy from fat, respectively. Each diet was consumed on 2 consecutive days in a randomised order. Postprandial glycaemia, pancreatic and gut hormones, as well as satiety, were evaluated at breakfast and lunch. Compared with the CD diet, the CRHP diet reduced postprandial AUC of glucose by 14 %, insulin by 22 % and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide by 17 % (all P<0001), respectively. Correspondingly, glucagon AUC increased by 33 % (P<0001), cholecystokinin by 24 % (P=0004) and satiety scores by 7 % (P=0035), respectively. A moderate reduction in carbohydrate with an increase in fat and protein in the diet, compared with an energy-matched CD diet, greatly reduced postprandial glucose excursions and resulted in increased satiety in patients with well-controlled T2DM.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29644957
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 04:43
BillyHW's Avatar
BillyHW BillyHW is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 298
 
Plan: Keto + IF
Stats: 260/300/165 Male 5' 6"
BF:
Progress: -42%
Location: Alberta, Canada
Default

Who knew that reducing carbohydrate consumption could improve blood sugar levels in people with Type II diabetes?

Everyone but the American Diabetes Association...
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 06:12
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,525
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Quote:
A total of 16 people with type 2 diabetes aged 43-70 who were being treated with metformin either went onto a standard, higher-carbohydrate diet or a high-protein diet. The latter group reduced their energy from carbs from 29% to 16% and increased their energy from proteins from 31% to 54%.


54 plus 16 is 70, leaves 30 for fat. They're sticking to their guns with the "30 percent or less fat" dictum... they've actually decreased fat as a percentage on this "low carb" diet. Not that I have a problem with that, if people are responding well to it.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 07:22
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,263
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/213/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 34%
Location: Texas
Default

From the above abstract:
Quote:
Macronutrient contents of the CRHP/CD diets consisted of 31/54 % energy from carbohydrate, 29/16 % energy from protein and 40/30 % energy from fat, respectively.
Looks like a number reporting mistake in the summarizing article. Also:
Quote:
They also found that levels of two other hormones involved in metabolism - glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 - increased by 35% and 17% respectively.
(Article) versus abstract:
Quote:
Compared with the CD diet, the CRHP diet reduced postprandial AUC of glucose by 14 %, insulin by 22 % and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide by 17 % (all P<0001), respectively.

Not my intent to be critical of the report author, just to clarify a couple of things he missed that would make a bigger difference for those of us here who understand more about those things. 54% protein would be too uncomfortably high for me but 29%, yeah, I could easily do that. And bringing fat up to 40%, that sounds more like a level people a few decades back ate on average before the low-fat thing (and accompanying obesity/diabetes epidemic) got going. Carbohydrate percentage in their reduced carb diet would still be way too high for me personally to control my glucose numbers, but for the average diabetic currently on one of those ADA-style high carb diets plus drugs to drag their glucose back down, this diet would be a real improvement and probably fairly easy to sustain for those not ready or interested in giving up so much carbs.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 10:08
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,525
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Ah. That did sound like a higher than usual prescription for protein, even the "before" was pretty high.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Thu, Jul-05-18, 14:04
mike_d's Avatar
mike_d mike_d is online now
Grease is the word!
Posts: 8,234
 
Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/181/180 Male 72 inches
BF:disappearing!
Progress: 98%
Location: Alamo city, Texas
Default

They did say "high-protein diet" which many people still think of when you say "Atkins."
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Fri, Jul-06-18, 07:38
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,525
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...80705115623.htm

Quote:
Abnormal branched-chain amino acid breakdown may raise diabetes risk
Study suggests abnormal metabolism of three essential amino acids relates to type 2 diabetes risk in women with history of gestational diabetes

In the U.S., about five out of 100 expectant mothers develop gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), a temporary form of diabetes in which hormonal changes disrupt insulin function. Although GDM is often symptomless and subsides after delivery, women with a history of it face a seven-fold risk for developing type 2 diabetes.

The biological mechanisms underlying this rise in type 2 diabetes risk are mysterious. But a new study in Clinical Chemistry led by Deirdre Tobias, DSc., associate epidemiologist at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School, suggests that the irregular metabolism of branched-chain amino acids -- components of proteins found in many foods -- may be partially to blame for progression to type 2 diabetes.

Tobias and her team of researchers assessed reported diets and blood samples collected during the Nurses' Health Study II, an investigation of chronic disease risk in women that was carried out from 1989 and continues today. They looked at the data from 347 women with histories of GDM, roughly half of whom later developed type 2 diabetes. The researchers calculated the women's levels of branched-chain amino acid intake using published guidelines for nutrient content. Using mass spectrometry, they also measured the levels of branched-chain amino acids in the blood samples that were collected prior to type 2 diabetes development during the period of 1996-1999.

The researchers found that women with a history of GDM who later developed type 2 diabetes had higher levels of branched-chain amino acids in their blood, regardless of their dietary intake. That suggests that greater consumption of branched-chain amino acids may increase the risk for type 2 diabetes, but only if an individual's ability to properly metabolize them is impaired.

"If your dietary intake is high, but you can clear these normally from circulation, then you don't seem to be at a higher type 2 diabetes risk," said Tobias.

Researchers cannot yet fully characterize the specific pathway of this impaired metabolism, but the abnormality seems to result in a buildup of circulating branched-chain amino acids, which have a detrimental downstream effect on insulin function.

Branched-chain amino acids are essential amino acids, meaning that they can only be obtained from food. They play important roles in immune and neurological function, and they exist in a wide variety of foods. Tobias emphasized that branched-chain amino acids are not necessarily unhealthy. More research is needed to determine whether lowering dietary intake of them can lower type 2 diabetes risk in people with abnormal metabolism.

"From a practical point of view, branched-chain amino acids are difficult to avoid," said Tobias. "They are found in so many protein sources, both healthy and less healthy."

Tobias and her team hope that early detection of abnormally high branched-chain amino acid blood concentrations may one day enable earlier interventions for those at risk for type 2 diabetes. They suggest it will take further research to determine if tests to detect these levels should become standard procedures during doctor's appointments.

This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health.



I figured this was a good place for this... some vegans will pick up on this and claim high meat-->diabetes. Never mind what actually happens when carbohydrate is replaced with protein.

There are rodent studies where branched chain amino acids added to chow increases insulin resistance and fatty liver, but also plenty where a higher protein diet is protective. The authors seem to be pointing at this as a risk marker, rather than a reason to avoid branched chain amino acids, so that's good.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:40.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.