As we know, there is a lot of ridiculous pseudoscience out there. That 1971 paper seems to reference a downregulation of sensitivity, (which happens in many body systems), but notes that glucose tolerance tests are still similar. Type II diabetes is Genetic, (the genetic penetrance much more so than in Type I) Unfortunately diet modification can only help with Type II for so long. Conversely, all those people who are told that 'sweet food will give them diabetes', not the case if they dont have the type II gene.
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
-4 points (16.7% liked)
Skeptics
92 readers
1 users here now
Did your crazy uncle Dave just send you some off the wall YouTube video about aliens giving free haircuts in New York with the explanation "If we all look bad then no one will take us seriously and then the guvernmint can easily inject us with memory erasing chemical dihydrogen monoxide"!" ?
You know its BS but you just don't have time to scratch the surface of why? Then rely on us! Skeptics! we have volunteers waiting to answer your call and help you source reputable, quality work that you can send to your Uncle so he can ignore it.
How this works If you have a question about something start your post with Question: Be as descriptive as you can. Post links if it helps you get your point across - but if it is really misleading the links may get removed.
If you are answering a question please only use quality sources (google scholar is a good one) and keep the answer to a few paragraphs.
If you have a problem with a source being used start a new thread to explain why. We as a community can decide if it stays or goes.
Example format Start: State your opinion: Is this real, crazy conspiracy or something in between.
Give you reasons for your opinion with good sources
End with a quick summary if you can.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_diet
Kempner admitted in statements before his death that he whipped patients who avoided his rice diet.
I think this was the original basis of this claim
Okay, I think the mechanism of action for this wackadoodle diet is:
Resistant starches are the only food source, they get into the gut, and produce short chain fatty acids. The glycemic impact is reduced versus other diet options. So insulin levels elevate, but not as high as with an ad libidum diet. This is sufficient for some patients to resolve their diabetic issues.
I think that's it inna nutshell. The potato Diet, rice diet, I wasn't able to find any detailed papers about mechanisms, or even insulin levels over time. So I'm just speculating wildly on the few papers that exist
Ok, I never really got a answer to this question so its been sitting in the back my of my head for a long time. I've stumbled across a plausible explanation
The Randall cycle : A cross inhibition between glucose and fatty acid metabolism in every cell. When both high glucose levels and high fatty acid levels exist at the same time the Randle cycle causes the cell to rapidly fluctuate between both method, which does cause stress and inflammation in the cell... now some handwaving... this is manifested as insulin resistance (i.e. the cell can't update more glucose because of the Randle cycle inhibition)
Now.... this is a CROSS inhibition... so if you remove one of the sources (glucose, and fatty acids) then the Randle cycle just stays in one mode and you don't get the seesaw inflammation.
This would account for the all starch diet being able to fix insulin resistance (no free fatty acids). It's a mechanistic explanation that works for me. i don't understand it fully, but it seems to fit.
Obviously going all glucose isn't super healthy, and I wouldn't recommend it, but it has been a puzzle on why it works in some circumstances.