Panaceia or Hygeia

immunize yourself against the pandemic of lifestyle diseases

Posts Tagged ‘weight loss’

Dan, the hospital doctor, is shocked, SHOCKED

Posted by Colin Rose on July 30, 2008

This post appeared recently in the ProCOR list.

——————————–

As a medical resident I have encountered an interesting case that raises the question of reversibility and education of the pre/early diabetic group.

The case is of a 38-year-old male that presented to a screening physical examination without any complaints apart from the hardships of life. Past medical history is significant for recent diagnosis of hypertension for which he receives a calcium channel blocker. Family history is positive for type 2 diabete with his father, no coronary syndromes in his family, and his lipid profile is unremarkable. Physical exam reveiled an obese young man (BMI of 33) with controlled blood pressure and the rest of the exam was unremarkable. His initial fasting glucose was >200mg% and soon after HbA1c came back as 12. The patient denied any diabetic related symptoms. The patient was very reluctant to start any kind of diabetic regiment and strongly insisted on a sugar free diet and weight reduction only strategy. The patient went home with his own idea of managing his newly diagnosed diabetes. He did not appear for later follow ups.

But we DID meet again, two months afterwards. This time the patient is with a BMI of 27. He explained to me that he was so shocked from the diagnosis. He just started running around the block and eating a very restricted vegetarian diet. His HbA1C was 6 and fasting glucose levels were normal, and he did return to eating sugar containing foods.

Now he insisted he doesn’t have diabetes. Does he? Was he cured? Did he go back to the pre-diabetic phase? Or is he overt diabetic only controlled by diet? Was the decrease in weight that much of an influence? Apperantely so.

Dan Halpern

——————————————

As a resident in the usual hospital environment, Dan has probably been taught that diseases can only be treated with drugs and/or surgery. Coincidentally, these are the acts to which doctors have exclusive rights and for which they can charge high fees. He was shocked, SHOCKED to discover that a patient might know how to treat his own disease without the help of the vaunted American “health care” system and that what he had been taught in the hospital has very little relevance to outpatient practice.

Dan has learned a valuable lesson which he should apply to his future practice. Today most of the fatal diseases are diseases of lifestyle and the only definitive treatment is lifestyle change. Blood glucose, blood lipids, blood pressure, etc. are all markers of lifestyle in the vast majority of cases, not diseases to be treated with drugs until lifestyle has been optimized. There is increasing  evidence that some of these markers may actually be protective responses to nutritional stress analogous to a fever in response to an infection. Obviously there are varying genetic predispositions to the effect of self-destructive lifestyles but as they say, genes load the gun, environment pulls the trigger.

So, yes, Dan’s patient did cure himself of Type 2 diabetes and probably hypertension as well. He probably doesn’t need any drugs.

Now if we could only get all doctors to treat lifestyle diseases with lifestyle change before prescribing drug of doing operations we could save hundreds of billions of dollars in disease care costs, close many hospitals, shut down many drug companies and many doctors would have to make a living actually talking to patients. Isn’t that the essence of being a professionial?

Posted in diabetes, diet, professionalism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A TO Z trial. Atkins tops?

Posted by Colin Rose on March 12, 2007

The recent publication of the results of the A TO Z trial of four weight-loss “diets” made headlines around the world: “ATKINS DIET TOPS”. The group on the Atkins diet lost about 10 pounds, a few more pounds than the others, after one year of “dieting”.

—————————————————————–

—————————————————————-

Did anyone, including the paper’s reviewers, actually look at the numbers behind this conclusion? Table 1 shows the baseline parameters.

————————————————————–

——————————————————————-

Note that the average BMI was about 32. One is considered to be obese above a BMI of 30. So most were obese. Note also the weights. About 85 kg. Now look at the results in Table 2 (below). Remember that these numbers are derived by SELF REPORTING of food consumption and exercise. The subject could tell the investigators anything. There was no check on what they said. They were paid, so the subjects had an incentive to the investigators what the subjects thought the investigators wanted to hear. The subjects claimed to be eating about 1900 kcal/day at the outset of the trial. Any adult who eats only 1900 kcal/day is UNLIKELY TO GET OBESE in the first place. During the trial they claimed to be eating only about 1500 kcal/day. So even if they hadn’t increased exercise they should have had a deficit of 400 kcal/day, 2800 kcal/wk. One pound of fat is about 3500 kcal. So, if we are to believe what they reported, they should have lost at least 3 pounds per month or 36 pounds per year. But even the Atkins group only lost 10 pounds. It gets worse. They reported total energy expenditure of about 35 kcal/kg/day. Multiply by their weight and you get about 3000 kcal/day. But they claimed to be eating only 1500 kcal/day. So they should have lost two to three pounds per week, at least 100 pounds per year. Also note that total calorie intake remained about the same in all groups in spite or a wide range of percentages of protein, fat and carbohydrate and by the end of the trial these percentages tended towards the same fraction in all groups. The First Law of Thermodynamics says energy cannot be created or destroyed. Any study of energy flows that cannot first show that energy is conserved should never be published. The methods employed by the study are fatally flawed. No conclusion can be drawn from this data. Many interpretations are possible. So, if all groups ate the same REPORTED calories on the average and burnt the same REPORTED calories on average, why did the Atkins group lose a little more weight? Maybe the Atkins group did a little more exercise. Who knows? They were lying about everything. Or, maybe, for some reason those presumably following the Atkins diet were slightly less proficient liars as the others.

——————————————————————-

———————————————————————-

That obese people lie about food intake was proven beyond doubt by a study using doubly-labeled water to measure true energy expenditure. About 65% of these subjects were overweight or obese. They claimed to be eating only about 1500 kcal/day but were burning 2500. So, they should have had a deficit of 1000 kcal/day and be losing weight dramatically but their weights were stable. Ergo they were “misreporting”, a euphemism for lying.

—————————————————————

The real cause of obesity is food addiction. Like alcoholics food addicts will deny they consume too much and/or exercise too little. See my photo essay on the topic. Which diet is this lady on?

Food Addiction

Is she on a low-fat or low-carb diet?

Posted in cholesterol, diet, exercise | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »