Marty refers to these studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?te...hor_id=29149038

and also a 2012 book, titled
The Glucometer: a Self-Empowering Tool to a Healthy and Lean Body

https://www.amazon.com/Glucometer-S...k/dp/B0792YBSYM

Aside, Studies are from the Univ of Otago!! We've been there with Grav. Might be why I became intrigued by hunger training




All from this Free book: https://www.datadrivenfasting.com/b...kgVjYS2Y0GJR g


No one diet works for everyone, and this one takes interest in and dedication to monitoring and recording BG data. If that is not your thing, or you are frustrated from years of tracking foods or fasting, another twist to dieting isn't going to be appealing.

This makes me beleive that weight loss is not possible thru food management. That the baseline insulin is far more powerful than the food effects.


Then he writes:





Frustrating to read his stuff.

Loving the huge thread! Thanks everyone.

For more thoughts on managing insulin and our family journey see https://optimisingnutrition.com/how...e-your-insulin/

Energy balance always matters, but managing calories in / calories out rarely works. Improving food timing (IF), nutrient density and satiety seem to be a good strategy, with fat loss being the outcome.

I can't say I'm surprised by the results of the study. It makes sense to me both that falling blood sugar might be a useful proxy for genuine hunger in non-diabetics, and also that the measure is less useful in diabetics.

However, I can't say I'm a fan of the whole concept personally, as it leads towards reinforcing the theory that people can be trained to just eat less, that they just need to try harder, to just have more willpower, that hunger is their own personal responsibility to manage. To blame the person, not the policy.

As someone who previously struggled with obesity almost my whole life, I couldn't disagree more. Hunger to me is the body's way of saying "I need more of whatever it is that I need." The trick is just to identify what that something really is. And if you're eating less of everything, that question can never go answered to the body's satisfaction, leaving it constantly hungry.

Not to say that how much we eat doesn't ultimately matter, of course it does, you can still have too much of a good thing. But when it comes to addressing hunger specifically, I would argue that it matters far more what it is that we eat. Because if we get that right, then the issue of how much we eat becomes less of an issue anyway, if what we are eating is that much more satiating in the first place.

Well said! Focusing on giving your body what it needs (nutrients) with less energy tends to vastly improve satiety. Protein tends to be the most dominant factor, but individual vitamins, minerals and fatty acids all play their own role. If the food you are eating doesn't contain much, you will need to eat more to get what you need. You may be interested in the satiety series here. https://optimisingnutrition.com/how...-your-appetite/

Also, the studies in Hunger Training indicate that people with higher blood sugars have more dysregulated appetite signals (so an external cue can be helpful to identify true hunger). Once blood sugars decrease to more optimal levels people are able to calibrate their true hunger with their sensations and natural ques. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1702540 and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29149038/.

Many thanks for your input, Marty Kendall!
With one class ending and another starting tomorrow, anytime you post on your FB page and website to comment is much appreciated. You must be busy.

I agree with Grav that food come first. When new people find Dr Westman, his advice is only Eat from this list. No tracking, no timing/fasting, no worries about food quality to start (but the list is nutrient dense with little added fat).Start simple.

I view DDF is as an advanced "hack", if you have been LC for years. I’m stuck at 15 pounds over where I should be, yet my blood sugars barely move. I have recorded days with ten or less points between high and low. Waking, pre or post meal, no matter...but now that range is ratcheting down slowly.

Thanks for sharing all your information about a way out of these stable but high BG.

Marty posted another good explanation of how Data Driven Fasting works to allow fat loss from the body stores that have stubbornly hung on, even though BG may be low and flatlined.

Oxidative Priority: THE SECRET to effective fat loss

(Title sounds like an infomercial but this is the real thing It's science, and with all the graphics not a long read)

https://optimisingnutrition.com/oxi...ective-fat-loss


In a few days, I will have been tracking BG for 2 months. It has come down but very slowly, still not even reliably under 100. Quite frustrating. This has really made me question staying ketogenic consistently, and see the advantage of metabolic flexibility. I am the poster child of having a flatline BG from long term moderate protein, higher fat eating.

I now usually eat twice a day in a 4-6 hour window..taking to heart the instructions not to push the fasting, but focus on the foods. Eating a P:E diet of more protein, more green vegetable carbs, less fats. Not sure which has more impact, but I have lost 12 pounds from those gained the past year off the rails. The focus on a "new plan" with some sciencey data has helped me stay focused and avoid cheats.

After reading Mart Kendall's long long post that you recommended Janet, I decided to dig out my glucometers - I have 2 of them. Problem is I don't remember how to get them to work despite reading the instructions over and over again. I found one glucometer no longer had a battery - explains why it didn't work - but neither did the other one.

I will take all my blood testing supplies to our nurse Monday and ask her to remind me how to test my blood. The strips are so expensive, I don't want to lose any with my experimenting.

Also weighed and measured today - my Sunday morning routine now. Weight the same but waist inches less. Waist/height ratio is now at 0.533. Getting down to the "below 0.50" recommended ratio in spite of no weight change.

So thanks Jey for the link.

I think BG meters have continued to become more accurate, and strips less expensive. I last had a True Metrix, which was good, but decided to replace the whole kit. Check both Amazon and American Diabetes Warehouse for the best deals with good reviews. The meters given "free" by doctors seem to have pricey strips...the "printer and ink tank" business model. This Metene kit is now only $2 more than the box of strips, new battery and all. Seems very accurate for me. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07QQC4R1K/

Thanks again, Jey for the new glucometer suggestions and where to get them

I did all the calculations Marty Kendall suggests to establish my "insulin load" but I don't know what to do with the results. From my computer program which gives daily, monthly, quarterly and yearly readings of all the nutrients in my diet, my insulin load ranges from 2.18 to 53.

Even after reading about "insulin load" several times, I am not clear what it means. What am I supposed to do with the findings? Am I just being obtuse?

I also took his Nutrition Optimizer test and saw the list of nutrients I am missing. He does not ask whether I am supplementing already which might influence his results.

I will try to start using a glucometer to establish whether my "hunger signals" agree with low blood sugar readings. What I did not find was the number of the glucometer that indicates low blood sugar readings.

I am beginning to think my brain cells are deteriorating at a faster rate that I supposed.

100 is also the ADA cut off for normal into pre-diabetes. Ideal would be around 90, and an after meal rise no more than 30.
BUT, if you are above your personal fat threshold now, and don’t see those nice "normal levels", that's fine, that is the purpose of doing the tracking and adding some fasting to your routine.

Jean knows more about the Nutrient Optimizer. I decided not to get into food details using Cronometer and food tracking at this point, but see if time restricted eating and more a P:E diet would be helpful. If I get stuck, then will buckle down and weigh and measure all foods.

I know nothing about Marty's "insulin load"...I have a Fasting Insulin blood test every year and know that it is consistently very low, mostly under 5.

Marty announced a new book to pre-order. If you want to shake up your thoughts on keto and fasting, the link explains how the offer is structured.



I am particularly interested in #12

The truth with facts needs to be told. I have no objections to any of the lies listed, as these are things some of us have learned as we travel this journey. These are myths that sometimes make their ways into the mainstream due to people publishing their N=1 experiences AND some "experts" who tout fat consumption over everything else (bullet-proof coffee, anyone?) without checking the facts. While I'm a big proponent of what today is called the ketogenic diet based on how I've adapted it from personal experiences, my adaptation has been done over the years through trial and error. I'm aware that the mere term "ketogenic diet" is not that different from what is being called a "Mediterranean diet" or a "plant-based diet." There are no defining, factual health-based guidelines. I could eat pasta and tomato sauce all day, and I would be eating a Mediterranean and plant-based diet, but I would be back into an unhealthy, insulin-resistant state. I'm hoping in the book Marty can clarify what constitutes a healthy ketogenic approach by refuting the myths that tend to cloud our perceptions and encouraging the practices that lead to success.

Keto lie #13--if somebody says they're keto, then they believe one through twelve.

"Eat fat to satiety"--for me the lie in this one is the universal "You." My usual initial advice is--eat low carb/keto to satiety. See if you lose weight. A lot of people do, at least at first. For me just this advice brought me from a little obese (by bmi) to a little overweight. For me that's down from around 190 to 170. Going further down the ketogenic rabbit hole brought me down another 15 pounds. I still feel a little pudgy sometimes--but last time I was at this weight for a prolonged time, I was in my early twenties, and I remember feeling a little pudgy then, too, so it's sort of par for the course.

So for me the lie isn't that eat fat to satiety can work, it's any guarantee that it will work. Which is not far from my opinion on calories--if somebody just decided to eat a little less, and it works for them for a prolonged period, that's fine. They just don't get to tell me that what I'm doing works because I eat less, or am more active--with the implication that any way of eating less or being more active would work just as well. I don't get to tell people that a fat dominant keto diet will reduce their appetite and increase their energy levels--but I do get to tell them that it might.

Becauses--a ketogenic diet works for me because I eat less and move more. Or--Because I eat a ketogenic diet, I eat less and move more. Or what I really think--Because I eat a diet that happens to be ketogenic, I eat less and move more. I don't know why--but various hormonal and other signalling mechanisms for satiety respond somewhat differently to fat, protein, carbohydrate. It doesn't seem unlikely that one person's system might regulate bodyweight better--or at least at a lower body fat level--on a higher carb intake, and another's on a higher fat intake.

If you pre-order the book you get to, according to Marty, "Preview (Of) Each Chapter before it gets released so you can be involved in the process of refining the book".

I think you many of us here could have a lot to offer Marty based on our n=1 experiences. I have pre-ordered it.