If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pearls before the Choir
I had an idea this morning.
The apparent wonderful control of type II diabetes by low carb dieting might have another new explanation. I'm pulling wild monkeys from my ass on this, but as Alexander Graham Bell showed, the Universe reveals its secrets to anyone, regardless of lack of credentials. Hypothesis: The state of glycogen depletion leads to glucose control without the mechanism of insulin. If true, this could not only explain the normal HbA1c I get, but suggest that a reduced total release of insulin might be achieved. Traditional Atkins adds carbs back into the diet to find a level where weight regulation is balanced. I believe his idea is to maintain the highest carb level that is still low enough to have weight control. If correct, my hypothesis would make this part of Atkins a mistake. How do the muscles know when they can try to restore their missing glycogen supply? One might assume that the muscles cells watch for insulin, but what if they don't? Insulin, I believe, triggers glucose uptake by all or most of the body's cells. In a glycogen depleted state it would be reasonable to expect the body to have a way to restore the glycogen stores *before* pushing glucose into the body at large. Do the muscles cells detect blood sugar changes directly, or might there be a new/unknown hormonal messenger that tells the muscles that the intestines are full of carbohydrates? This question could be addressed in a study. The total insulin release of test subjects in identical in-hospital controlled diets could compare a two groups. The first group begins the key part of the study with glycogen saturated muscles. The second group begins the key part of the study with glycogen depleted muscles. My study hypothesis is that when the two groups are exposed to a brief dietary carbohydrate increase, that the glycogen depleted group will have lower total insulin release and lower net glucose levels. In terms of glucose and insulin, I'm interested here in what is called: the area under the curve. Cubit |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pearls before the Choir
I've been thinking about my own post.
Let's assume for a moment that glycogen depletion treats diabetes, or insulin resistance. Glycogen depletion might be achieved either through diet, or massive exercise. Thus, if the wild ass theory were right, heavy extensive exercise would help type II diabetes. Hmmm. Cubit "Cubit" wrote in message ... I had an idea this morning. The apparent wonderful control of type II diabetes by low carb dieting might have another new explanation. I'm pulling wild monkeys from my ass on this, but as Alexander Graham Bell showed, the Universe reveals its secrets to anyone, regardless of lack of credentials. Hypothesis: The state of glycogen depletion leads to glucose control without the mechanism of insulin. If true, this could not only explain the normal HbA1c I get, but suggest that a reduced total release of insulin might be achieved. Traditional Atkins adds carbs back into the diet to find a level where weight regulation is balanced. I believe his idea is to maintain the highest carb level that is still low enough to have weight control. If correct, my hypothesis would make this part of Atkins a mistake. How do the muscles know when they can try to restore their missing glycogen supply? One might assume that the muscles cells watch for insulin, but what if they don't? Insulin, I believe, triggers glucose uptake by all or most of the body's cells. In a glycogen depleted state it would be reasonable to expect the body to have a way to restore the glycogen stores *before* pushing glucose into the body at large. Do the muscles cells detect blood sugar changes directly, or might there be a new/unknown hormonal messenger that tells the muscles that the intestines are full of carbohydrates? This question could be addressed in a study. The total insulin release of test subjects in identical in-hospital controlled diets could compare a two groups. The first group begins the key part of the study with glycogen saturated muscles. The second group begins the key part of the study with glycogen depleted muscles. My study hypothesis is that when the two groups are exposed to a brief dietary carbohydrate increase, that the glycogen depleted group will have lower total insulin release and lower net glucose levels. In terms of glucose and insulin, I'm interested here in what is called: the area under the curve. Cubit |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pearls before the Choir
Cubit wrote:
I've been thinking about my own post. Let's assume for a moment that glycogen depletion treats diabetes, or insulin resistance. Glycogen depletion might be achieved either through diet, or massive exercise. Thus, if the wild ass theory were right, heavy extensive exercise would help type II diabetes. Exercise most definetly reduces bg; a lot of diabetics use things like taking a walk after each meal as part of their bg control strategy. In T2s, the resultant increase in lean body mass also seems to improve insulin resistance. -- http://www.ornery-geeks.org/consulting/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pearls before the Choir
"Cubit" wrote:
I had an idea this morning. The apparent wonderful control of type II diabetes by low carb dieting might have another new explanation ... Hypothesis: The state of glycogen depletion leads to glucose control without the mechanism of insulin. That's the principle behind Atkins CCLL - While in ketonuria dietary glucose is consumed by the cells and any short term excess is buffered into glycogen, but while in ketonuria there is no enough dietary carb to cover the total energy budget. So we can bounce in and out of ketonuria by the hour while under our CCLL but as long as all dietary carbs are consumed by the end of the day there's no need to release insulin. Hence insulin remains at its minimum output. And hence further reducing dietary carbs no longer has any effect on insulin release so lower isn't better for loss. While out of ketosis (switching away from ketonuria to the harder to determine ketosis) dietary glucose is high enough that it needs active control to push it into cells, to push its conversion into glycogen, to drive its conversion into stored fat. So the more dietary carbs that are eaten the more insulin needs to be released. The difference between ketonuria and ketosis above is why there isn't a sharp cutover, and this range is correlated with the higher carbs eaten during Premaint to find CCLM. If true, this could not only explain the normal HbA1c I get, but suggest that a reduced total release of insulin might be achieved. Once in ketonuria further lowering dietary carbs no longer drives insulin lower. How it might effect HbA1c isn't as clear. Traditional Atkins adds carbs back into the diet to find a level where weight regulation is balanced. I believe his idea is to maintain the highest carb level that is still low enough to have weight control. Dr A used the word loss interchangably with ketosis. Either he meant something specific by this that he never defined or he had no idea what he was writing about. That's why CCLL has to be about ketosis. Add carbs back while still in ketosis (actually ketonuria, yet another problem with his wording), understanding that his idea of loss was month to month. If correct, my hypothesis would make this part of Atkins a mistake. Only if you don't read the 1972 edition to understand what he means by the word loss. if lower were better, every single popular low carb plan out there would drive for lower. None do that. Because glycogen depletion does indeed lead to glucose control without the insulin method. Nice rephrasing of the principle behind the CCLL. How do the muscles know when they can try to restore their missing glycogen supply? One might assume that the muscles cells watch for insulin, but what if they don't? Start a new exercise program and the muscle hoard glycogen for a while. I think they know based on their most recent load compared to their previous habitual load. Insulin, I believe, triggers glucose uptake by all or most of the body's cells. In a glycogen depleted state it would be reasonable to expect the body to have a way to restore the glycogen stores *before* pushing glucose into the body at large. Rather like osmotic pressure - Below some point glucose is sucked into glycogen production in the muscles. Above some point glucose is driven into the cells by insulin. Do the muscles cells detect blood sugar changes directly, or might there be a new/unknown hormonal messenger that tells the muscles that the intestines are full of carbohydrates? There is the hormone ghrelin, but I think muscles use recent and long term load to determine their wanted glycogen stores and they draw the glucose from the blood based on that. This question could be addressed in a study. The total insulin release of test subjects in identical in-hospital controlled diets could compare a two groups. The first group begins the key part of the study with glycogen saturated muscles. The second group begins the key part of the study with glycogen depleted muscles. My study hypothesis is that when the two groups are exposed to a brief dietary carbohydrate increase, that the glycogen depleted group will have lower total insulin release and lower net glucose levels. Agreed. That's what happens during a leptin reset, whose goal is to recharge the glycogen in the muscles to its maximum. Insulin should indeed see low release. Maybe. Except that insulin is released in response to dietary carbs so it would be about relative rates of reaction. In terms of glucose and insulin, I'm interested here in what is called: the area under the curve. Cubit |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pearls of wisdom from JC | Rich R | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | June 10th, 2004 03:12 AM |