1. I have recently been very sick and I am amazed that I didn't lose weight. I would have thought sickness would cause weight loss. Everything I ate went right through me!
Fecal matter is not body fat so unless body fat went right through you, I can understand why you never lost a pound.
Sickness usually does not cause "weight loss" unless it causes cachexia (wasting). This is when the body simply breaks down all of its muscle and it can include body fat but not necessarily. Cachexia is usually a sign that impending death is near. The fact that cachexia "does not necessarily" include body fat in this breakdown is incredible in itself. It's amazing how the body will hold on to its body fat even when facing death.
Other than that, there is no sickness that increases leptin expression so you can lose body fat normally. You can lose a few pounds if you get a really bad flu, for example, as viral infections can cause dehydration through various mechanisms but that won't make you lean.
2. I have digestive problems and the only things that calm it are starch based foods. I am diabetic.
What may be good for your digestion is not good for your diabetes and vice versa. You would have to weigh what condition is more important to address or find alternative treatments for your digestive issues.
3. Why is the medical industry reluctant to say that the root cause of obesity/diabetes is blood glucose dysregulation even when they know this is a fact and is in their own literature? Your blog encouraged me to do my own research and I was appalled at what I found. What was found in these studies is not what's being told to the patients or even considered in their treatments.
The medical industry is reluctant to name anything as a "root cause" when it comes to chronic conditions that have a wide array of factors involved. The research is usually left up to interpretation and is muddied because what's being studied is "pathology in progress" which is already affecting multiple body wide systems.
Dr. Joseph Kraft studied metabolic syndrome before it became diabetes in order to see what changes occurred in metabolism which eventually led to pathology. What he found were abnormalities in insulin release in response to blood glucose dysregulation. So even in his study the focus became insulin rather than what insulin was responding to - abnormal blood glucose.
Doctors want to avoid conflicting recommendations. For instance, many patients who have been on long term blood pressure medications start developing conditions with their kidneys and intestinal lining. They go to the doctor for these symptoms and the doctor begins to treat these conditions with ineffective protocols. They never mention that these conditions are the result of long term side effects from these medications even when they know about them. After all, they can never actually prove this is what is occurring to this one individual patient and stopping the medication carries a greater risk than continuing to try and treat the conditions its causing.
Doctors want to avoid complications. Even though blood glucose dysregulation is what occurs before disease onset, your doctor will be reluctant to make that claim even if he agrees. After all, many things interfere with blood glucose regulation, including certain medications. This means many patients will be reluctant to take their medications if they knew it put them at risk for future diabetes.
Blood glucose dysregulation is also the result of the "heart healthy diet" that is commonly recommended. Doctors certainly don't want to discourage people from conventional diet advice as they believe it will put them all at cardiovascular risk. Certain diseases also disrupt blood glucose regulation and no one wants to add another burden to someone who is already tackling one condition by telling them it is causing another.
To further complicate the matter, no one is in full agreement over what proper blood glucose regulation even is. How is it measured? What is the criteria being used? Can it be applied across the board? After all, a teenager will regulate blood glucose differently than a senior. We already know for a fact that high blood glucose cannot be confidently used as a blood glucose regulation marker as it doesn't always manifest this way. There are people with "diabetes in situ" or "occult diabetes". These people do not have postprandial highs. They have postprandial norms or lows because of the massive insulin they are releasing in response to blood glucose disparities.
It all becomes too complicated to be applied in mass. It takes close individual monitoring which cannot be done as there isn't enough healthcare staff and time to do so. For this reason, diabetes is often explained away to the diabetic as some sort of mysterious "pancreatic malfunction" or the result of "insulin resistance". This is why you have to be involved in your health care. You cannot leave it all in the hands of your doctor. You have to be your own advocate. You have to care about what no doctor will care about which is your blood glucose regulation.
4. What is happening to the low carb community? All of the people that were here in the beginning, when I first started following it, are either gone or have changed up their entire approach and hardly speak on obesity or diabetes anymore. Now they seem to only speak on supplements, junk food and other conditions. I would have thought the movement would have grown astronomically by now, not dwindled away.
If the charlatans that participated in this movement didn't leave or change their approach, they would have gone bankrupt or worse. Staying long only increases their risk of being sued or losing whatever medical license they are still holding on to, as their "patients" become liabilities over time. You have to understand that the people who were promised miracle cures are now ready to cash in on that promise and they are finding out the checks are bouncing right off their still expanded bellies. This makes them highly litigious.
So, people in this circa do not stay around for long. They have to move on and take their magic show to another unsuspecting town. People in this business know the importance of diversifying their quackery. So yes, a lot of the people who where around some years ago are either gone, switched to some other scam or are hiding behind paywalls where no one can see their shenanigans except for their hardcore, paying followers.
5. What is the rule of thumb for protein consumption for a female?
A recommended daily, minimum consumption of 1.0 grams of protein, per pound of ideal body weight is the rule of thumb for an adult.
The best way to get a more personalized recommendation is to calculate your macros which take into consideration sex, goals and activity levels. You can do so here.
6. I heard someone on YouTube say that "you're fat because you got fat". Is this true?
That's horribly worded. Basically this is just a terrible way of saying that fat people get fatter. This is because once you start hoarding and sparing body fat, getting fatter only perpetuates the effect further.
No comments:
Post a Comment