I have to say, I’m getting pretty sick of the medical establishment’s refusal to understand even basic definitions in the field of nutritional medicine. And I’m even more sick of their attempts to research these concepts, despite their blatant ignorance.
The end result is a bunch of poorly designed studies that deliver questionable results. And, once disseminated into the mainstream, these “studies” do nothing but leave practitioners and patients feeling more confused than ever before.
So, do you want to know what riled me up this morning? Allow me to share…
Outdated and long debunked
In typical fashion, along came a study recently showing that overweight type II diabetics saw similar drops in blood sugar after a year of intermittent fasting (IF) — in this case, fasting two days a week — versus a consistent low-calorie diet.
How many things can I find wrong with just one sentence?
Let’s go for the low-hanging fruit first: Why is anyone still studying low-calorie diets? We may as well still be studying the effects of leeches on illness! This outdated dieting approach has been thoroughly debunked and needs to be put to bed — forever!
Secondly, why are we even mentioning intermittent fasting in the same sentence as a low-calorie diet? They’re completely different strategies that affect your body in very different ways…
To be clear: Intermittent fasting (IF) is NOT about “calorie restriction.” The metabolic advantages of this strategy lie in the timing and the spacing of your food intake. In general, IF involves eating all your meals within a limited 8-hour window and going 16 hours without food before eating again.
So comparing IF to a low-calorie diet is a classic case of apples-and-oranges.
But now that I’ve gotten all that out of my system, let’s pick apart where this study really went wrong…
Real change requires real food
Subjects in the “continuous calorie restriction” group were told to limit intake to 1,200 to 1,500 calories daily, for a total of 10,300 calories per week. (Which, I should point out, isn’t even that calorie restricted…)
The real issue here lies in the breakdown of their diets: Namely, 30 percent protein, 45 percent carbohydrate, and 25 percent fat. (A diet that’s nearly half carbs?! What an excellent idea for blood sugar… NOT!)
Meanwhile, the intermittent fasting group ate 500 to 600 calories per day (which included 50 grams of protein, at a minimum) for two days of the week. And then they ate normally on the other days, for a total of 11,500 calories per week.
After a year, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) — which measures long-term blood sugar control — dropped between .3 and .5 percent in the “continuous calorie restriction” group. (Yes, that’s a half of a percent.) Subjects lost between 11 and 15 pounds that year, as well. Though ultimately, the IF group showed greater losses — which is hardly a shock.
Still, the authors insist that “this trial highlights the benefits of caloric restriction.” (Really?! Please explain how!)
And they also claim it gives patients an easier option to lose weight — in other words, one that doesn’t require them to change what they eat most of the time.
I’m sorry, but that’s just ridiculous. These subjects’ dietary choices are what got them into this mess in the first place. Why is it so wrong to tell someone they can no longer keep eating that way?
The government and mainstream medicine have no trouble telling people not to eat fat, salt, cholesterol, or eggs (which is all terrible advice, by the way). Their list of forbidden foods is practically endless.
Yet, the notion that eating real, whole food can reverse diabesity is somehow unthinkable… (Anything to prevent Big Food and Big Agribusiness’s pockets from taking a hit!)
There’s a lot to be said for the benefits of intermittent fasting. If you do it the right way. Which doesn’t involve starving yourself for days on end and then bingeing on all the same junk the rest of the time. I hate to break it to you, but you will have to change the way that you eat if you want to see real, long-lasting results.
The good news? There is an easy (and satisfying) way you can get the results you want. In fact, my patients routinely achieve better results than the ones these researchers considered so “groundbreaking” in less than a month using The A-List Diet — including reducing and even eliminating medications. And it’s fair to say that my patients are eating way more calories than these clowns were prescribing.
And guess what? They’re enjoying every bite, too.
P.S. For more step-by-step strategies to rein in your blood sugar levels, I encourage you to check out my drug-free plan for preventing and reversing type II diabetes, prediabetes, and metabolic syndrome. It’s called the Metabolic Repair Protocol. Click here to learn more, or sign up today.