On May 29, 2:51*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 07:37:49 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:

[...]

Yes, they are. ~ 90-100 grams of carbs per day.

They are also on a low fat diet. *When you're eating
600 calories a day, it's low everything. *But that is only
for the first couple of weeks.

So what?

So, once again, since this diet only lasts for a few weeks,
how can you claim that it's a LC diet, not something to do
with the surgical bypass that completely reverses diabetes
forever in these patients. It doesn't get much simpler than
that. Capiche?



The reversal of diabetes
continues and has been verified in patients for 10 years
plus. *By then it's safe to assume they are no longer
eating 600 calories a day. *More like 4X that. *I also
haven't seen anything that says that diet is typically
LC years after surgery.

If it doesn't remain relatively low-carb, they'll likely regain the
weight.

According to you. Show us that these bariatric patients are
on a LC diet at 1 year, 2 years, 10 years. Let's start with
that. It's called the scientific method, otherwise known as
not just inventing crap.




In short, while the 600 calorie
diet could be part
of what is going on in the first weeks, it doesn't explain
the long term reversal of diabetes.

Low-carb explains it.


Quite amazing. See the above and provide us with a
reference that says the bariatric patients are on a LC diet
at 1, 2, 5 and 10 years. Show us where the rats used to
produce the same phenomenon were on a LC diet.









And for another the complete reversal of diabetes occurs
within a couple of days.

Diet can do that too.

http://drhyman.com/blog/2012/03/28/w...-cure-for-diab....

"A recent study entitled Reversal of type 2 diabetes: normalization of
beta cell function in association with decrease pancreas and liver
triglycerides proved that diet alone could reverse type 2 diabetes.
The bottom line: A dramatic diet change (protein shake, low glycemic
load, plant-based low-calorie diet but no exercise) in diabetics
reversed most features of diabetes within one week and all features by
eight weeks. That’s right; diabetes was reversed in one week."

There's nothing "mysterious" about it.

Yeah, as usual YOU know the absolute answer that the
rest of the medical community is just beginning to research.

There are no absolute answers (unless you're an AIDS alarmist!), but
the evidence (not that you would recognize it if you saw it) is piling
up.

[...]

You seemed to have left those adverse effects out.

I was NOT debating the pros or cons of bariatric surgery.

Sure you were. *You were in act of worshipping the medical industry
again. "If it's surgery, it must be good!"

You're just amazing.

Thank you! *I'm told that all the time!

You were pushing your typical reliance on the Medical Establishment,
also typically ignoring all the many adverse side effects of doing so,
and Doug (and I) were offering an alternative approach that appears to
garner similar results - curing diabetes, and losing weight, more or
less naturally, simply by eating correctly.


Again, it was clear to everyone except you, who goes astray so
easily, that the discussion was not about the merits or side effects
of bariatric surgery. It was about one specific phenomenon, which
is the reversal of diabetes. And yes, I rely on the medical
establishment.
So do you. What is the Mayo Clinic that you just cited? What was
the study you just cited? The only
difference is that I look, interpret, and make judgements with an
open mind and a balanced approach. You obviously have loony
preconceived notions and then very selectively cherry pick
and discard the mountains of scientific data that doesn't agree
with your ideas. Using that method, virtually anything can be
proven.




F*%K the ADA.

HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

Check!

HIV is harmless

Mostly. Check!

HPV isn't a cause of ovarian cancer

What? *You're not content in having HPV causing cervical cancer? Now
it causes ovarian cancer too? *What doesn't it cause? How about trying
to pin CHD on HPV, too! *It's such a powerful virus that it causes
people to lose their freakin' minds, too, apparently.

But, no, HPV doesn't cause ovarian cancer. *Check!

No virus can cause cancer

Check! Maybe genital warts. Maybe.

AIDS is the result of poor nutrition, not enough sleep, poor
sanitation

Along with other things. Check!

AIDS is confined to gay men, drug abusers and hemophiliacs

In the U.S. (and Europe), that's pretty much true. *Check!

http://www.aliveandwell.org/html/ris...realities.html

What else would you like to add to your list today?

How about Hep C, FeLV, FIV being mostly harmless, too?

Check!

And let's not forget that "prions" are only a figment of someone's
very vivid imagination (Stanley Prusiner), but earned him a Nobel
Prize anyway. *Check!


OK, we'll add prions to your running list of denialist nonsense.
What caused Mad Cow? The cows not getting enough sleep
and abusing IV drugs?




We need more scientists who don't give a crap about their
"reputations," but worship The Scientific Method.

You would not know real science if it hit you in the head.




Neither was James who brought it up. *So, there was no
need to discuss the adverse effects.

Of course there is! *Only idiots talk about the merits of bariatric
surgery without also mentioning all the many dangerous side effects.

We were not listing the merits. *We were discussing one very
narrow aspect of bariatric surgery. *I see the fat fast was mentioned.
Why don't you condemn and go after Doug for not mentioning
the dangers and side effects?

One reason? *Doug's not an asshole!

Oh, I see. You admit your arguments are not based
on applying logical rules, just going after people who
you don't like. That list must be very long and I'm
happy to be on it.




Second reason? It's already well known that it should only be
undertaken under a doctor's superrvision.

AFAIK, Atkins never placed any such requirement on it.
And if a doctor's supervision is now the reqt then thanks
for again shooting down your own case. Last time I
checked, anyone could do a fat fast without a doctor.
Tell us how many people can get bariatric surgery
without a doctor..... Yet, I'm supposed to list all the
side effects and dangers of bariatric surgery just to
discuss whether or not it reverses diabetes. In other words,
another fine example of just changing the rules to whatever
suits you at the moment.





Doug, being of sound mind, wasn't attributing anything, he was
suggesting that there's nothing mysterious about it, that diet alone
can produce the same effects in most people, and without undergoing
dangerous surgery.

Which is attributing the mysterious effects to a LC diet.

There's nothing mysterious about it!

It's simple biochemistry!

I think most of us here are content to wait for the research
instead of listening to your unfounded opinions given as fact.
And how do you explain the studies that showed the same
effect in rats? But then you didn't even bother to enter that
into the equation before knowing the answer. Your basic
problem is that you have vast preconcieved notions that
are faulty and you then back yourself into a corner trying
to find snippets, cherrypicking, in a desperate attempt to
support them. The 99.9% of solid evidence that says you're
wrong, you just ignore. Very standard approach with denialists
and conspiracy theorists. And it leads to very bad results.