Benefits of a Macrobiotic Diet for Diabetes

Benefits of a Macrobiotic Diet for Diabetes
4.8 (96%) 90 votes

What happens when you add massive amounts of carbs to the daily diet of type 2 diabetics in the form of whole grains?

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Why are macrobiotic diets apparently so effective at reducing blood sugar levels in diabetes, within just a few weeks time? Because the diet is centered around whole grains—brown rice, barley, and millet? Maybe the high fiber intake is improving the gut microbiome, the friendly flora in the colons of diabetics, and that’s leading to a reduction in insulin resistance? Or, maybe because it also has lots of vegetables, it’s correcting some kind of low-grade acidosis from the high levels of animal protein in their regular diets? Regardless, this was after just 21 days. Can macrobiotic diets also help with longer-term blood sugar control?

How about a six-month dietary intervention with wildly out-of-control blood sugars? Hemoglobin A1c offers a sense of one’s average blood sugars over the previous few months. So, an A1c level of 5 would mean over the last few months, your blood sugars have been in the double digits most of the time, meaning your sugars have been normal, healthy, non-diabetic. But an A1c of like 6 is pre-diabetes territory, and 6-and-a-half can be a sign of full-blown diabetes. But under 7 is considered controlled diabetes—that’s what diabetics are striving towards with pills and insulin injections. And anything over 7 is considered out-of-control diabetes. The average A1c level in the macrobiotic diet study started out off the charts at 12.6, meaning for months they had been averaging blood sugars in the 300s, despite all being on insulin injections.

But then, they were placed on this so-called Ma-Pi 2 diet, a strictly plant-based macrobiotic-style diet centered around whole grains, vegetables, and beans, with some sesame seeds and green tea. What happened? A1c levels started out with a wildly out-of-control diabetic 12.6, despite daily insulin injections, and after six months eating that diet, ended up averaging a non-diabetic 5.7. And, are you ready for this? That was after they all were able to eliminate their insulin.

They went from 100% on insulin with out-of-control diabetes to 0% on insulin averaging non-diabetic blood sugars. That’s the power of plants. And three-quarters were off all their diabetes medications completely—in just six months’ time. And what are the side effects? How about LDL-cholesterol dropping 20%, triglycerides dropping nearly 40%—though, of course, anyone starting a strictly plant-based diet must ensure a regular, reliable source of vitamin B12.

All we need now is a randomized, controlled trial, and here it is. Type 2 diabetics randomized to the macrobiotic diet versus the recommended like American Diabetes Association-type diet. So, here’s an example of a typical day on the macrobiotic diet: a savory whole grains cake for breakfast with green tea, with brown rice sesame balls for a snack; lunch was a vegetable millet soup and brown rice salad, with lots of vegetable sides, and adzuki beans, more whole grain snacks; and a dinner similar to lunch: vegetable barley soup, lots of vegetables, chickpeas, green tea throughout the day.

Whereas the more standard diabetic-diet group got a day like this: low-fat milk, whole wheat bread, kind of a Mediterranean lunch with vegetables and beans, fruit for a snack, and a bean-and-vegetable soup, whole grain bread, agretti (like a green leafy vegetable), and baked fish. I have to say that’s a pretty healthy control diet. I mean, they could have compared it to some trashy diet, but they wanted to be like look, this is what the diabetes groups say is best, so let’s stack our diet against theirs. Okay, so what happened?

The macrobiotic diet won out on every measure of blood sugar control. Check out these numbers. They all started out with fasting blood sugars in the 120s. That’s bad, but they were, after all, diabetics. Normal fasting blood sugars, like when you wake up in the morning before breakfast, should be at least double digits, under a hundred. When they put people on this relatively healthy Diabetes Association diet, their blood sugars got better over the three-week study, from the 120s down into the one teens. So, that’s like the best the official diabetes-recommended diets can do.

Compare that to an isocaloric macrobiotic diet, meaning the same number of calories. This is what the macrobiotic diet did—better within days, and hitting normal fasting blood sugars within a week. 100% of those on the macrobiotic diet got down to at least under 110, whereas less than half of those on the diabetes diet did. And, this was on fewer drugs. In the control group, one person was able to reduce their oral hypoglycemic medications, whereas five of the seven on such drugs in the macrobiotic group had to stop taking them—otherwise their blood sugars would have fallen too low. So, better results on fewer drugs. That’s the power of a really healthy diet.

And, just as an aside, what a poke in the eye with a sharp stick this study was to the low-carb crowd. They took diabetics and put them on a 73% carbohydrate diet, adding a hundred grams of carbs to their daily diet, and in the form of grains. And what happened? Did their blood sugars skyrocket out of control? No, they got better—significantly better in a matter of days, with average fasting blood sugars starting out at 129 and falling to 95, and, holy moly, look at their LDL cholesterol, down to 62, a nearly 48% drop, in three weeks.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: CC0 Public Domain via Maxpixel. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Why are macrobiotic diets apparently so effective at reducing blood sugar levels in diabetes, within just a few weeks time? Because the diet is centered around whole grains—brown rice, barley, and millet? Maybe the high fiber intake is improving the gut microbiome, the friendly flora in the colons of diabetics, and that’s leading to a reduction in insulin resistance? Or, maybe because it also has lots of vegetables, it’s correcting some kind of low-grade acidosis from the high levels of animal protein in their regular diets? Regardless, this was after just 21 days. Can macrobiotic diets also help with longer-term blood sugar control?

How about a six-month dietary intervention with wildly out-of-control blood sugars? Hemoglobin A1c offers a sense of one’s average blood sugars over the previous few months. So, an A1c level of 5 would mean over the last few months, your blood sugars have been in the double digits most of the time, meaning your sugars have been normal, healthy, non-diabetic. But an A1c of like 6 is pre-diabetes territory, and 6-and-a-half can be a sign of full-blown diabetes. But under 7 is considered controlled diabetes—that’s what diabetics are striving towards with pills and insulin injections. And anything over 7 is considered out-of-control diabetes. The average A1c level in the macrobiotic diet study started out off the charts at 12.6, meaning for months they had been averaging blood sugars in the 300s, despite all being on insulin injections.

But then, they were placed on this so-called Ma-Pi 2 diet, a strictly plant-based macrobiotic-style diet centered around whole grains, vegetables, and beans, with some sesame seeds and green tea. What happened? A1c levels started out with a wildly out-of-control diabetic 12.6, despite daily insulin injections, and after six months eating that diet, ended up averaging a non-diabetic 5.7. And, are you ready for this? That was after they all were able to eliminate their insulin.

They went from 100% on insulin with out-of-control diabetes to 0% on insulin averaging non-diabetic blood sugars. That’s the power of plants. And three-quarters were off all their diabetes medications completely—in just six months’ time. And what are the side effects? How about LDL-cholesterol dropping 20%, triglycerides dropping nearly 40%—though, of course, anyone starting a strictly plant-based diet must ensure a regular, reliable source of vitamin B12.

All we need now is a randomized, controlled trial, and here it is. Type 2 diabetics randomized to the macrobiotic diet versus the recommended like American Diabetes Association-type diet. So, here’s an example of a typical day on the macrobiotic diet: a savory whole grains cake for breakfast with green tea, with brown rice sesame balls for a snack; lunch was a vegetable millet soup and brown rice salad, with lots of vegetable sides, and adzuki beans, more whole grain snacks; and a dinner similar to lunch: vegetable barley soup, lots of vegetables, chickpeas, green tea throughout the day.

Whereas the more standard diabetic-diet group got a day like this: low-fat milk, whole wheat bread, kind of a Mediterranean lunch with vegetables and beans, fruit for a snack, and a bean-and-vegetable soup, whole grain bread, agretti (like a green leafy vegetable), and baked fish. I have to say that’s a pretty healthy control diet. I mean, they could have compared it to some trashy diet, but they wanted to be like look, this is what the diabetes groups say is best, so let’s stack our diet against theirs. Okay, so what happened?

The macrobiotic diet won out on every measure of blood sugar control. Check out these numbers. They all started out with fasting blood sugars in the 120s. That’s bad, but they were, after all, diabetics. Normal fasting blood sugars, like when you wake up in the morning before breakfast, should be at least double digits, under a hundred. When they put people on this relatively healthy Diabetes Association diet, their blood sugars got better over the three-week study, from the 120s down into the one teens. So, that’s like the best the official diabetes-recommended diets can do.

Compare that to an isocaloric macrobiotic diet, meaning the same number of calories. This is what the macrobiotic diet did—better within days, and hitting normal fasting blood sugars within a week. 100% of those on the macrobiotic diet got down to at least under 110, whereas less than half of those on the diabetes diet did. And, this was on fewer drugs. In the control group, one person was able to reduce their oral hypoglycemic medications, whereas five of the seven on such drugs in the macrobiotic group had to stop taking them—otherwise their blood sugars would have fallen too low. So, better results on fewer drugs. That’s the power of a really healthy diet.

And, just as an aside, what a poke in the eye with a sharp stick this study was to the low-carb crowd. They took diabetics and put them on a 73% carbohydrate diet, adding a hundred grams of carbs to their daily diet, and in the form of grains. And what happened? Did their blood sugars skyrocket out of control? No, they got better—significantly better in a matter of days, with average fasting blood sugars starting out at 129 and falling to 95, and, holy moly, look at their LDL cholesterol, down to 62, a nearly 48% drop, in three weeks.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: CC0 Public Domain via Maxpixel. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Doctor's Note

Is the macrobiotic diet perfect? No. I offer some suggestions for improving it in my last video, Pros and Cons of a Macrobiotic Diet.

Here are a few other diabetes videos, but I’ve got tons more:

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

200 responses to “Benefits of a Macrobiotic Diet for Diabetes

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

    1. This is the kind of comment I love. Let’s take the most common sense approach ‘eat veggies’ and question whether it’s repeatable… duh. Time and time again.

      1. .The question was not whether it is repeatable. Duh. The question was, has it ever been repeated.

        When we see a study that seems to be too good to be true, it’s only prudent to ask if other research teams have obtained the same results doing the same thing. Even Barnard never got these sorts of results with his trial.

        1. There are many elements in a macrobiotic diet which are not normal. Certainly Toms comment is viable and also we must also identify what elements are the cause of improvement.
          Potatoes to my very dim recollection are a total no no, mushrooms also in macrobiotics…so we could identify a lot of variance here beyond just whole foods good….. processed bad. Seaweeds are a big part. Rice considered the perfect primary food.

      1. Thanks Valerie but this is a follow-up study by the same team not a replication of the original trial by a different group of researchers.

        Also, the originator of the diet (Mario Pianesi) is listed as one of the research team. Although the authors declare no financial conflict of interest, this appears not to be the case for Mr Pianesi. I understand that Pianesi for example owns a number of retail outlets and a farm, selling these macrobiotc foods. He has also founded at leat one association dedicated to promoting his macrobiotic philosophies and products. Further, he and some of his associates were arrested five months ago on a number of charges including tax evasion. Whether any other members of the research team also had undeclared financial conflicts of interest I couldn’t say.

        All I am saying is that the results from this trial are extraordinary. However, they have only ever been produced by the one team and I for one would be a lot more comfortable if the results were to be replicated by independent resarchers. Former US Pesident, Ronald Reaga, was fmous for frequently using the traditional Russian proverb – Trust but Verify. It sounds like good advice to me.

  1. This is just horrible, horrible news for the “diabetes management” industry that wants to supply you with all sorts of stuff to “manage” your diabetes FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. It’s an amazement to me that the apparent majority of diabetes type 2 afflicted people don’t just cure themselves. This information has been on the shelves of bookstores for probably a decade now. The U.S. continues to be the sickest population on earth even though we have a greater number of health options than any other country. Pardon my sarcasm, but people as a whole are just so sad.

    1. No offense Chuck but we are not the sickest population on earth nor do we have the most health options.

      Treatments available on state run medicare programs leave a lot of gaps due to lack of funding compensation for docs and providers, which means a lot of the lower income peoples are left out. And we are still living longer than most all of the third world.

      I agree the industry does serve in part to further its continuance but we have to be realistic about it and its affects.
      Maintain healthy weight and exercise, absent dietary intervention and probably you stop a lot from becoming type 2 diabetic in the first place.
      Very few skinny people become type 2 diabetics. Type 1 sure. Once a diabetic one can loose weight with management problems.

  2. The y-axis in the chart at 05:40 starts at 80, making the result look a little more dramatic, a practice that Dr. G has sometimes decried. Still, it is encouraging to receive confirmation that whole grains are our friends after all. I will finish my organic short-grained brown rice accompanied meal with extra pleasure!

    1. “The y-axis in the chart at 05:40 starts at 80, making the result look a little more dramatic, a practice that Dr. G has sometimes decried”

      Context and clarity matter too.

      In the case of the graph at 5:40 you have an obvious dashed line near the bottom of the graph at a Y value of 100, thus showing you that the context of the Y axis values shown was such that you could see the changes around the target fasting level of 100.

      Sometimes graph play (lying with statistics) is done to be deceptive. In this case, it wasn’t done to exaggerate a change because a target was also marked on the graph. If the graph started at 0, which means you are dead and thus meaningless to show values below a certain point then you might not think that the change was significant enough to matter nor would you be able to clearly see the significant drop below 100. With fasting blood sugar levels, a drop from the mid 120’s to under 100 is pretty significant.

        1. I have not carefully read this article. However, it appears the diet mainly includes beans, legumes, and vegetables. If someone is pre-type II diabetic or type II diabetic besides eating beans, legumes, greens, vegetables, whole grains, non processed, (NO: meat, eggs, fish, poultry,) minimum avocado and nuts and avoid oil and salt, there appears to be no discussion of fruit which has a lot of sugar. So if you adopt this macro diet what fruit or berries
          are allowed and in what portions? What higher sugar fruit, if any, are excluded?

          Thank you,

          Ken W

          1. The MA-PI 2 Macrobiotic diet – although in some way similar to a generic vegan diet or a WFPB diet, also has important differences and restrictions from these, in the kinds of food eaten, their sources, and the proportion’s of these foods. Because of this the impressive results reported may not apply to vegan diets or a WFPB diets in general.

            Have a look at what they ate in this study:

            https://cfsremission.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/bmjdrc-2014-000079supp.pdf (General description and recipes)

            Some examples:

            All of the products used were labeled, giving exhaustive information on the origin and characteristics of the product and its supply chain (the Pianesian Transparent Label).

            No frozen products were used.

            Only seasonal vegetables grown in open fields were used. They were fresh, and used within 24 hours of harvesting.

            The wandadou jiangyou and miso condiments were non-GMO soy-based fermented foods prepared with the traditional 3-year fermentation process.

            Beicha Tea (roasted green tea) was the only drink allowed. The daily intake was about 2 liters per person.

            1. Thanks for the Macrobiotic Diet meal plans. I’m assuming this was the diet used in the study that Dr. Greger mentioned in this video? Some of the comments in various discussion here were about whole vs refined foods (and most of us agree that ‘whole’ offers more nutrients that ‘refined’). Regarding that, I’d like to bring attention to the following food items frequently used in this particular Macrobiotic diet:

              Baked millet balls
              Millet cake
              Barley Croquette (A croquette is a small roll of chopped vegetables, meat, or fish, fried in breadcrumbs.)
              Baked millet and brown rice cake
              Round millet cakes
              Brown rice balls

              I’d like to know the recipes of all the above before I agree this is a diet of entirely UNREFINED foods. Is it actually the cooked whole grain (and not its flour version) that is used to make the balls, cakes, croquettes? I assume it would be easier making these things using FLOUR instead of the WHOLE grain, because flour would hold a paste more easily and not fall apart when you form it into balls and cakes. So I question if these foods are whole or refined. If they are made from whole grain millet and rice (in its cooked form and not as flour) I would love to have the recipes!

              As I said in an earlier post, it would be interesting to see the results if ill people followed a completely puritan diet of NO refined foods at all.

              1. Yes, the balls and croquet’s would all be made from whole grains, preferably organic. Typically, the whole grain is cooked a little softer (extra water) and allowed to cool and refrigerate overnight. The next day, you take a small portion of whole grain, and roll it into a ball, or pat into a cake. It is a bit fragile, but will hold together. My favorite used to be a ball of brown rice with a small bit of umeboshi plum in the middle and lightly rolled in toasted sesame seeds.

                The macrobiotic diet is quite restrictive. Nightshades (tomato, eggplant, green peppers) are excluded, spicy foods are excluded, and most non regional fruits are excluded. The more I learned of the health benefits of nightshades, and spices, I expanded my diet to include those items too. I also feel that berries are so beneficial, it seems outdated to restrict those from the your diet.

  3. Wonderful presentation Dr Greger, thank you! It’s always amazing to me to see the remarkable things that plants can accomplish. As to the ‘why’ people with type 2 diabetes wouldn’t snap up the detail diet details and give it a go… well, I think NF frequent commenter Joseph touched on the addictions issues recently in this forum. And yes Chuck R., it is so sad.

    I downloaded the details of the diet, and it is quite remarkable. The folks drank an average of 2 litres of roasted green tea beverage daily. The sea salt consumption was high, at about 4 grams added before serving and olive oil was used, but the food itself was chosen and cooked with care. It would be interesting to see how many of the people in the macro group stuck with a version of the diet years following. Really great.

    1. Hi Barb,
      May I ask where you found the details of the diet?
      I looked up the study on Researchgate but couldn’t find the diet description itself.

  4. Bam! wow, look at those results. When I see this and I feel so good about teaching with diabetic patients. I don’t worry if I think they won’t make the change, I KNOW the is my professional ethics that directs me to share this every patient that I can, diabetic or not.

    This will be a favorite video for me that I will use again and again! Thanks so much Dr. Greger and Team!

    A healthy and proud monthly supporter of Nutritionfacts.org ;)

    1. Bam! wow, look at those results.

      Love that comment!

      Yes, comic book sounds need to be added to this one.

      Batman song playing.

      Pow! Bam! Bonk! Kapow!

    2. That’s awesome, Bobbi! Sounds like you’re doing great things to help people! If only all medical professionals and care takers made it a point to be so informed and help inform others based on the evidence. So great to hear!

        1. YR, the link is a download.. it doesnt come up as a page. Check your ‘download’ file because you may have half a dozen copies already if you clicked many times!

          1. Thanks, Barb, I tried that. When I clicked the link in “download,” all I got was a bunch of yyyyyyyyy’s, weird spacing, more letters….ooooo’s… and other odd thingies filling the screen.

            It could be it doesn’t want to open in my Windows Media Center.

            I guess I’m not meant to read it for some reason. :-(

            1. I’ll keep trying though.

              Meanwhile, maybe somebody could type a brief summary of the download? You know…something like “Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.”

                1. Hmmm….in the “Control Diet” they allow such items as:

                  Semi-skimmed cow milk;
                  durim (white) wheat pasta;
                  grilled veal fillet (VEAL?!!);
                  extra virgin olive oil;
                  whole wheat bread,
                  and etc.

                2. YR, again a total non-sequitur but to continue our previous conversation:

                  The reason why I put in so many dried figs in my hot cereal is because their calcium content. I was looking for fruits high in calcium. I had an accident this past year & broke a few bones. So that was one of the high calcium WFP meals I came up with.

                  1. AHso…..no fun to break bones, is it! It seems to take forever for them to knit and purl back together, but they do eventually.

                    Yes, figs are said to be high in calcium; good choice. Also, ’cause you add beans to your cereal (as I was thinking later) the figs probably wouldn’t seem too sweet. Somehow, it all comes out in the wash.

                    1. Nope. No fun to break bones. At all, YR.

                      The northern & navy beans are also higher in calcium than some of the other varieties.
                      Mashing them does help to smooth things out & take the sugary edge off.

              1. Robert

                You should be able to read that file using any of the free Open Office equivalents to Microsoft Office. Theey are available for no-charge downloading on the net. .

      1. Thanks Jon!

        Have you seen any documents with more than 2 days’ worth of meal plans on the Ma-Pi2 diet? Cooking recipes? (I understand this might be asking too much.)

        1. I always chuckle when people talk about “meal plans.” For EVERY meal, I pull out a cutting board and knife, and then lay out whole: lettuce, cucumber, tomato, cabbage, spinach, bell peppers, watermelon, blueberries, banana, mango, cherries, radish, beets, carrots, peanuts and sweet potato (yes, raw) and just start stuffing combos of these foods into my mouth. I eat whatever strikes me as tasty at the moment. No plan. No stress. Just great tasty raw unprocessed plants until I’m full. It takes minutes and then I’m back to work. A few hours later I do the exact same thing. I love it and feel fantastic 24/7/365.

          Cheers,
          Dr. Ben

  5. I think there would be greater than “significant” results if a study used WHOLE grains only — not grains after they were made into flour. To make pastas or breads (even “whole grain” bread) you have to use FLOUR. I’d like to see just one study that uses only whole grains cooked on the stove (as you would cook rice). “Bread” offers a higher glycemic index than grains cooked on the stove in their WHOLE form — looking the way they do when they come off the farmers’ fields. No one seems to be able to differentiate between the WHOLE GRAIN and FLOUR. It is not the same thing. A WHOLE GRAIN is a hard little pellet, or berry or kernel — whatever you want to call it. You can cook these hard whole kernels on the stove as you would cook rice, and most of the nutrients are still retained within the grain’s structure. However, you can’t use these hard, heavy kernels to “make” bread, you have to smash them into flour first. And when you do that, many nutrients are lost to oxidation (exposure to air, heat, light) including many nutrients we haven’t even discovered yet. We may also risk changing the chemical structure of the whole food including the chemical structure of its fibre, and we do not know enough about this to know how that can affect our bodies ability to absorb and utilize a “changed” food (keep in mind the nutrient-poor Western diet is highly criticized because it is largely composed of refined – or ‘changed’ – foods). Added to that, in the process of making bread we add yeast, salt, sometimes sugar, and in commercially-baked bread, perhaps other chemicals to improve the bread’s texture. Because we don’t differentiate between a WHOLE GRAIN and FLOUR, there will probably never be a study to see if the WHOLE form of the food will have a greater health effect that the more changed version of the food. I believe it would have a far greater positive outcome for diabetes and many other disorders.

    1. Eve, the macrobiotic diet, at least in the period (1980s-90s) when I knew it well, was based strongly predominantly on whole whole grains– whole-grain flour was for very limited use mostly by folks in good health. So it may be that the macrobiotic study above did use little flour– I haven’t checked the source listed.

    2. But this is exactly what this study does, have you seen the ingredients used for the macrobiotic diet? It’s definitely selective, not only using only whole grains, but most of the fresh ingredients were locally grown, eaten within 24hrs of harvesting and somewhat “undercooked” to preserve nutrients. I don’t see any processed ingredients aside from the ume plums (pickled), soy sauce and miso paste, all of them using traditional ‘slow’ methods.

      1. Dr. Gregor’s report reads “a savory whole grains cake for breakfast with green tea, with brown rice sesame balls for a snack.” I’m quite sure the savory whole grain cake is made from flour and the brown rice sesame balls that I know of are also made of flour. I’d still like to see a study of absolutely NO changed foods at all. I think it would be very interesting, although most people wouldn’t enjoy eating a puritan diet.

        1. You probably haven’t read the menu listing the ingredients. So you’re quite sure about something without verifying basic source material :)
          Anyway, Mario Pianesi would definitely be considered a puritan, even an extremist, by most standards. So the ‘cakes and balls’ were all made of locally sourced whole grains (Italy grows quite a lot of those, and Pianesi owns a macrobiotic food chain, so no doubt that’s where it came from). Everything was cooked in mineral water and all cooking gear was made of non synthetic materials. He did use seaweed for cooking and allowed miso paste, soy sauce, some pickles and salt, but other than that I’m convinced the vast majority of people would never be able to stick to this kind of diet. But it does indicate a direction for making our food intake healthier, you just need to adapt it to your own life circumstances and personality.

          1. BUSTED! You caught me being hasty and presumptuous with my wording :). But I do agree with you that we may need to rethink the way we are eating. Far too many of our foods are “changed.” And we just don’t know enough about our foods — or our bodies — to be doing this. I jokingly tell everyone I am conducting a ‘personal study’ and It would screw up my results if I stray from my ‘strict’ eating habits. It makes them laugh (and leave me alone) and I am having a blast with my study — especially witnessing the many different ways people react to it. I’ve been doing my ‘personal study’ for about 30 years now. I’m very curious to see if I will be as healthy at 90 as I was at 30 — and as I am now at 60.

          2. Why would you jump to the conclusion that most people would not be able to stick to this type of diet? Many of us eat nothing but raw unprocessed food and prefer this to cooked, processed food. As I counsel my patients, they gravitate to this as well.

            Dr. Ben

    3. Excellent point, Eve. Brenda Davis talks about this distinction a lot. It was also shown in the Weston Price diet in Scotland where they ate oats, but not oatmeal. They had intact whole oats and thrived.

    4. Eve

      I have always eaten a lot of wholemeal bread and pasta myself but I nonetheless strongly suspect that you are right about flour, and am currently transitioning away from them.

      As for your statement about studies, there has been at least one study that looked at the effect of whole grain consumption on heart attack risk. It found that those who ate a lot of whole grains had a sigificantly reduced heart attack risk BUT whole grain bread consumption was not associated with reduced heart attack risk. Rye and oats seemed particularly protective. However, the lack of protective effect shown for wholemeal bread would probably be mirrored by instant and quick cooking oats, I suspect.
      https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/103/4/999/4662897

      Ther may well be other relevant studies but I haven’t researched it enough to know for sure. This might be a good topic for a future NF video if there are enough studies available.

  6. OK as a 69 yr old 48 year T1 diabetic I am particularly happy to see this presentation. Actually the only really new thing about it is the great clarity and potential for pedagogical effect but that is an incredible contribution in itself . I cannot count the number of people who upon hearing that I am diabetic, will observe that I am probably doing so well because I am on such a low carb diet. I always take this as the equivalence of claiming the geocentric view of the universe is correct and have to go into a long diatribe about how what they are suggesting is amazingly unhealthy.

    Keep in mind, the lowered blood sugar and lowered drug input were important but consider the following. Any time we incorporate dead animal into our diets we are also increasing our load of exogenous advanced glycation end products. We diabetics also have high levels of endogenous AGEs because of our higher blood sugars. The impacts of AGEs on all of us have been addressed by Dr G previously and they are the basis of diabetic side effects. My A1c tends to be around 6.5 which is still high enough to produce all sorts of side effects, except that my dietary AGEs are very low.

    So, the effects of this trial for those with the completely vegan diet is that they no longer had excessive AGEs and the side effects if they had started, would likely be reversed at least to some extent. So the vegan group now have endogenous AGEs that are typical of non diabetics. AND their exogenous AGEs are much lower than most non diabetic. This is a successful medical outcome!

  7. Twenty years ago, I was an insulin-dependent Type 2 diabetic. All of the doctors I saw were certain that diabetes could not be reversed. Over the course of a few years I started eliminating various foods from my diet. I changed my diet from vegetarian to vegan and eliminated processed foods and grains. I was eventually able to wean myself off the insulin. For most of the time thereafter, my blood glucose was in the normal range. However, every time that I reintroduce grains or potatoes or other starchy veggies, or even quinoa or buckwheat, the diabetes comes right back. Bummer. So, I eat a fairly restrictive diet now of legumes, non-starchy veggies, low-glycemic fruits, and some nuts and seeds (no salt, sugar or oil) and that is working for me now. I’m wondering whether the two years in my food journey during which I ate exclusively raw foods made me more sensitive to the sugars in grains and starchy veggies. Any thoughts? Full disclosure: I have a number of health issues, the chief among them being systemic lupus erythemetosus (in remission but still on low dose of prednisone). I don’t know whether this is an additional factor affecting my glucose control.

    1. Prednisone is your answer.

      “In fact, another name for corticosteroids is glucocorticoids in honor of the powerful effect they have on glucose metabolism.”

      Have you healed your leaky gut yet?

      Because people get over lupus, too.

      1. Yes, lupus has been in remission for quite some time, although from time to time my blood work shows inflammation. The only reason I still take prednisone is that I was on such high doses of it for so long that my adrenal glands no longer work properly. Without the boost from a low dose of prednisone, I cannot function at all. I suspect you’re right about the steroids though. Unfortunately, I can’t live without them. I will choose to be completely satisfied with my limited diet. :)

        1. https://www.forksoverknives.com/beating-lupus-with-vegan-diet/#gs.m6RSZms

          There are a lot of testimonials for Lupus out there.

          You might be able to cut the Prednisone down further.

          That is a process you need to do with your doctor because it is dangerous to come off steroids too quickly and the longer you have been on the harder it is to get off. With the dog community, I see people cutting the pills into halves and eventually into quarters to get them off.

        2. Hi Deb, have you ever looked into something called an adrenal glandular? It’s basically dessicated tissue that can help rebuild weak glands…in addition, there are herbs that can support and strengthen those glands enough to help you wean off of the Prednisone entirely. May be something to look into.

      1. Thanks, Ron, I admit that I do miss grains. As to mortality, I really don’t care how long I live as long as I can have a good quality life while I’m here. Hopefully what I am doing will at least prevent stroke, dementia, or other lifestyle-influenced diseases.

    2. Congratulations on your success! I think you have described a situation that is much more nuanced and complicated than Just insulin resistance. As we age, various auto immune factors develop and with SLE you certainly are in that category. I had psoriatic arthritis until I figured out about all the probable factors associated with animal products that could cause it. The arthritis is gone now along with all animal based food. This often happens with SLE as well. Sadly not always. I believe it was Dean Ornish that did a study with auto immune disease in which he put people on a plant based whole food diet. 50% showed complete remission. Most of the remainder showed improvement. It worked for me but the real point is that you seem to be in that category where there is improvement not cure.

      So having said all that T1 diabetes is developing more and more with adults. I once worked in an office of about 20. There were 6 diabetics. In the case of three of them they were obese T2. Obvious cause and effect. The T1s though were all adult onset T1 and not overweight. I got it because of what the military exposed me to but the others were originally diagnosed at T2. Their SAD diets continued to keep them with the same auto immune factors so that they became T1. So the original diagnosis should have been T1.5 and this might have been done had they been given a C peptide test to determine the actual level of insulin production. Instead it was just assumed that they had T2 and could be treated as such. At this point with T1.5 diabetes though insulin resistance is probably a factor, the real problem is the reduction in insulin as the beta cells are slowly destroyed. As the immune system continues to attack the beta cells one becomes T1.
      As I said, not everyone responds completely to the WFPBD but you have had some success. If I were you, I would get checked for C peptide levels as this can tell you if you are T1.5. And yes that beats hell out of T1. So given the continued problems with lupus et al you might try to find a doctor who specializes in auto immune provoking factors. You might start with Northstar Clinic in California. They start with a wfpbd and go from there. Grains are very healthy but if you have some allergic reaction you should not eat them. Many other things could be at the basis of this as well. Some may argue with me but SLE strikes me as the mother of all auto immune disease. So best of luck. I hope to be able to read some success stories on that from you.

    3. Hi Deb – Thanks for your question! First off, that is so great that you have been able to wean yourself off of insulin and manage your blood sugar more effectively now with dietary changes! I do not believe that your raw food history necessarily made you more sensitive to sugars. Prednisone does induce elevated blood sugar levels (http://blog.joslin.org/2014/02/how-prednisone-affects-blood-sugar/), so this could certainly be one factor affecting your glucose control. You could always try introducing small quantities (<1/2 cup cooked) of grains and/or starchy veggies into your diet again and monitor your blood sugar response for any trends. It is certainly important to choose complex carbohydrate foods like whole grains in this process.

      Also if you are interested in learning more about managing/treating Lupus, here are a few additional links to check out:
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/fighting-lupus-with-turmeric-good-as-gold/
      http://www.veganmedicaldoctor.com/ – Dr. Brooke Goldner had helped many patients reverse their Lupus and this may be a great resource to check out

      1. My dog was on Prednisone, but he is off now.

        I did have horizontal nail ridges, and probably did have Diabetes, but they have grown out.

        Either way, I am not that Deb.

        It is almost a year since I came here.

        Time flies.

        1. I didn’t try to go Vegan until January and still haven’t gotten all the way over to WFPB.

          Maybe by next year.

          These studies are great motivators!

        1. I went back and looked and I didn’t start commenting on videos until about November 20th last year. Blog comments came after Christmas.

          There were other versions of Deb, DEB, and Debra, but I wasn’t there until closer to Thanksgiving, which matches with my memory.

          Thanksgiving, I was wondering if I could possibly give up dairy and I didn’t think I could.

    1. Yeah me too. I do remember a video Dr. Greger did, though, that said that miso, even though it’s salty, won’t raise blood pressure because of the other stuff in it.

            1. And isn’t it wonderful they helped fund it? Good on them! How else would the world at large learn that:

              “When the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped in Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945, physician Tatuichiro Akizuki, along with 20 employees, was taking care of 70 tuberculosis patients at “Uragami Daiichi Hospital” (St. Francis Hospital) about 1.4 km away from the hypocenter. However, these people including Dr. Akizuki did not have any acute radiation disease. Dr. Akizuki considered that this was the result of consuming cups of wakame miso soup (miso soup with garnish of wakame seaweed) every day4. Later, this was translated into English and became known in the West. In the Chernobyl of nuclear power plant accident on April 26, 1986, in the Ukraine, many Europeans consumed miso soup as a preventive measure for radiation diseases. Therefore, Dr. Akizuki can be considered to be the first person in Japan to point out radioprotective effects of miso for maintaining health.”

    2. Good point.

      In “Ma-Pi 2 macrobiotic diet and type 2 diabetes mellitus: pooled analysis of short-term intervention studies” (Porrata-Maury 2014) the average participant’s systolic BP dropped 10mmHg (baseline 129mmHg +/-15mmHg, and at T21 119mmHg +/-13mmHg)–with only an average wt loss of about 2.5kg (could expect 1-2mmHg drop per kg lost)–unclear whether physical activity increased among participants during this study.

      The other studies cited don’t report baseline or post-study BP measurements (although BP measurement was generally included in their methods).

  8. The first control group standard diabetic diet included fruit, even a high sugar fruit like pineapple, and bread as opposed to whole grains. The Macrobiotic diet used in the study contained whole grains as opposed to bread, and no fruit. I would like to see more information regarding how a real low carb diet would stack up against a macrobiotic diet or, better yet, a whole foods plant based diet that includes some fruit. I think most diabetics who are serious about controlling their A1C without drugs go for low carb and it would be interesting to see if an alternative is superior.

    1. linda, this is an anecdote, not a study, but: my brother was overweight and out of shape when he changed his diet to plant based eating and starting exercising. He lost about 70 pounds. A few years ago, he enrolled in a CHIP program (https://www.chiphealth.com), and starting cooking better food, with low to no oil and salt. Eventually, he went off his meds for Type 2 diabetes, as well as high cholesterol, high BP, and other conditions, though I don’t know the exact time line.

    2. Linda

      There must by now have been hundreds if not thousands of studies seeking to demonstrate that low carb diets are an effective treatment for T2D.

      As far as I know, none of them have delivered results that come anywhere close to those seen in the trial discussed in this video.

      last year, a systematic review and meta-analysis of such studies concluded:

      “Conclusions Low to moderate carbohydrate diets have greater effect on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes compared with high-carbohydrate diets in the first year of intervention. The greater the carbohydrate restriction, the greater glucose lowering, a relationship that has not been demonstrated earlier. Apart from this lowering of HbA1c over the short term, there is no superiority of low-carbohydrate diets in terms of glycemic control, weight, or LDL cholesterol.”
      https://drc.bmj.com/content/5/1/e000354

      Note also that this review appears to take no account of carbohydrate quality which is a key feature of the study featured in the video.

      1. Tom,

        For them to not get the results this study or Dr. Barnard’s study or other WFPB doctors get tells me that they are including refined carbs and these results mean that refined carbs are particularly bad, because how else would you take a high carb diet and make it less effective?

        Logically, you have to have enough bad carbs to get these results. Closer to leaving that part of the SAD alone.

        And “The greater the carbohydrate restriction, the greater glucose lowering, a relationship that has not been demonstrated earlier.” tells me that there was not a glaring association outside of how they did these studies or else the answer would be “It has always been demonstrated…..”

        1. Back to your discussion about flour, there hasn’t been a useful study about it.

          I would have to go to a Non-American country and find people who might still be eating fairly healthy for me to understand.

          France maybe with their white baguettes, which people eat often.

          If they could demonstrate that the people who ate the baguettes while eating a healthy diet were less healthy in a measurable way, that would prove something to me.

          Bread is too wide a category in America. We have Wonder Bread and phony Whole Grain breads and we also have Ezekiel Bread. The studies that I have seen haven’t differentiated.

          The “healthier” French people who I know do eat bread, but they also eat a lot of veggies and are very active people with balanced lives and don’t smoke or drink. I will be surprised if bread leads people like that to Diabetes or takes years off of their lives. It hasn’t so far.

          My elderly relatives who lived into their 90’s all ate bread – made their own. I know that is anecdotal. I just not seeing that bread affected their lives and I guess I don’t expect people to live to 120.

          1. I said that and I have read the answer about white bread versus whole grain in some studies.

            I just also know that I do know people who are so healthy and so slender and who are not on any meds and they eat moderation. Probably calorie restriction. Without trying. Anyway, they eat baguettes.

            I don’t anymore, but I wasn’t good at not getting food addictions and they were good at it.

            1. I don’t know if I am saying that properly.

              My logic from anecdotal evidence is that people who do eat moderately don’t tend to have the same health issues, even if they are in their 90’s.

              I do know people who have lived into their hundreds and they were people who ate moderately.

              They ate bread moderately and meat moderately and drank wine at parties moderately and ate desserts moderately.

              That was mostly the generation before my parents’ generation.

              Bread is something my parents’ and my generation ate without moderation and I would say that about every category.

              When I talk to my friend’s mother who is a highly, highly disciplined person who eats in moderation, I don’t think the small slice of bread she eats with her lentil soup is going to cause her problems at all. She follows it up with a small handful of walnuts and fresh pomegranate seeds for dessert.

              The people who talk about food addiction put all flours on the list of addiction triggers. I don’t get triggered by Ezekiel bread. Sugar is a trigger for me.

              1. What I understand is that you are “health motivated” and probably not by hearing any negative news at a health exam.

                I had a customer who has been dealing with us for 30 years stop by and he is in his mid 60’s and had his first negative health exam.

                He has an enlarged prostate and is on meds for the first time in his life.

                We talked about Dr. Ornish and also about the guy with the tomato paste.

                He said that he doesn’t have Prostate Cancer.

                Anyway, I know people who made it to 100 without much wrong, but they died within a few years from that and maybe if they had given up their bread they might have made it to 110. Who knows?

                1. What I understand from saying that is that I am not health-motivated. I don’t want to spend money on meds or to have to deal with diseases, but that is “enough” for me. I think people who come from wanting to die all the way over to “How Not to Die” is already a pretty extraordinary shift in paradigms. I ended up having a second person who abused me as a child tell me that they love me and they are sincere. Healing the trauma load a little bit. I also had my house painter tell me they love me. Birthdays are sometimes useful.

                  The thing is, my mind isn’t all that good. I do have a motivation to figure it out like a puzzle. Same as my dog situation. But still, that isn’t from the deep health-motivated position. It is more fear-based because of having had everybody run away and that left a fear of being able to function enough to be alone someplace walking through stuff the rest of my life and that brought back having to be alone and walking through stuff earlier in life. I have been happy for years, but do have a doomed to walk through big stuff alone every time inner sense almost as if it was destiny and that isn’t what my faith is supposed to be thinking.

                  Anyway, I think it is beautiful when I see people who are health-motivated. It generally means that they succeeded in life in powerful ways.

          2. I’ve always been puzzled that people can’t seem to tell the difference between flour and whole grains. They aren’t the same thing — flour is the refined result from a whole grain. Anyway, I agree with your comments. Everything in moderation. I’m not saying bread and other products made from flour should be avoided, but we eat far too much ‘bready’ things. Would be nice to have cooked whole grains instead of bread or pasta, occasionally! But the bigger issue is if we don’t know the difference between whole grains and flour, it is a good indication that we really don’t know what a whole food is and what a refined food is. We have so many food products that we think are so ‘healthy.’ Things like nut and rice milk, whole grain low-fat muffins, gluten-free products, stevia, rice cakes, granola bars, green powders . . . none of these things are ‘natural’ — humans created them and they are all basically refined foods. I believe we need to learn this so that we can know what foods to put priority on. Sure, we can enjoy “refined foods” from time to time but if you don’t know what they are, you’ll no doubt be filling up on them, sacrificing the vital nutrients from the more nutrient-rich whole foods.

            1. I don’t know. Just speaking from Navajo culture, one of the prime things for food preparation was a stone slate type thing and a hand sized stone tool to grind corn and other things for use in prepared foods. I actually had one in my home for many years, as a cultural artifact of sorts, one of the last used I suppose.

              Which speaks to stone age technology type things. It was a form of flour, they grinded the blue corn into a mush and then made cakes out of it, and other things.
              But how long had those peoples been doing that sort of thing, and others before them…my guess is for as long as we had agriculture and perhaps even way before that . Navajo were hunters gatherers about 400 or so years ago. And still had some characteristics of that in culture.
              But the problems with diabetes did not appear amongst Navajo, before the introduction of a western diet. Their traditional diet included this then as a processed food….. a form of flour. A large part. And they just were not diabetic.

              And Hispanic initially out here, corn tortillias and such it was the same. Processed foods but no evidence of diabetes.

              So I would take exception to the term, processed. Highly processed…… as when the Navajo had really refined flour of wheats introduced and made into fry bread, basically wheat clumped into pads and then throw into fat, the cheapest food possible is when diabetes became epidemic.
              I think a distinction needs to be made. Likely human processed foods for many thousands upon thousands of years possibly even before agriculture. The local ancestors here were hunters gatherers and probably crushed grains they found, the same as the Navajo.

              Lumping all things into this term as generally then unhealthy seems not real.

              It is degree of refinement. And the dumping of beans or nuts into water crushing them to make a white colored milk type things would by my read be a lightly processed item. As but one example. Tofu probably of the same sort to mention another. Caloric density necessary for just living in primitive times speaks not of ability to derive calories only from found nuts grains and such. But the ability to retain those items over time in storage which processing is all about. And convience and scope of use. Navajo woman would collectively at one time of year get together in groups, in a circle to process corn. Our diets evolved from group contexts not individual. Processing speaks of that.

              1. Navajo restricted to the least wanted parts of their historical range, had to have government hand outs to not starve. One of these were wheat flour. In later years it was cheeses and other things.
                So to stop from starving they made Navajo fried bread, the food most identified with Navajo. Flour thrown in the cheapest oil available, which back in the day, was likely lard But really historically blue corn mush would be it.
                Per population they now probably average around 50 percent diabetic if not more. Back in the day none that I have ever heard of by reports of early anglo interactions and their personal history, reported of in books and such.

                It was not that they all died young…..the same also attests to beyond trauma accident and early infant childhood death they lived long. Peoples living say to 65 tended to as well to get into their nineties by my personal observation.

              2. Ron,

                I love it when you talk about culture.

                I haven’t been out to that part of the country for a long time but I always had a heart for the Native American people.

                So is it the wheat or the frying it in fat or both which caused the problems?

                1. I personally consider it a combination of the two. The wheat was the most highly processed wheat flour, bleached and all that. What was produced most grossly and thus most typically overmade and then sold to government programs to reap a profit.
                  And then fried in lard or real cheap corn oil. Keeps you alive.
                  In later times this was processed cheeses. A orange type product that resembles chedder in color but is the most refined thing of that thing, cheeses. More cheese like product than real cheese.

                  So highly refined fats and highly refined grains.
                  I personally don’t think this at all translates to other moderately or minimally processed foods that contain fat such as tofu at all.
                  Purists to my opinion of WFPB make that distinction, not me. I think it is a overreach. WE have been processing foods in some extend for as long as we probably have been humans by my read. Seeds of things, were a big thing of diet back in that day here. To get the most from seed nutritionally, wild grass seeds and such, what do you have to do…crush them. Otherwise you generally do not digest them. Like flax it just passes through you.

                  Which is why we prefer as specie, things like crushed grains so much..we advantage evolutionarily by crushing grains to make them more nutritionally beneficial. Like corn…you swallow it and one out of ten is found in poop. YOu crush it and then eat it…none if found in poop we digest much more of it. So we advantage by evolution the crusher/processor of things. So we by tendency, as specie, like breads and such more than just scoops of wheat grains. they taste horrible to most all of us..

                  1. We can look to our tastes generally as indicators of our historical evolutionary formative diets.
                    Why do we find plain old meat unsalted unseasoned and if raw not likeable at all….as we ate it, but only rarely.

                    Why do we find breads cakes and this and that so favorable….as we ate processed seeds grains all the time, as it enhanced nutritional content. Thus we by a group survived and another group that did not like it…died off.
                    So this is probably the most commonly found thing of diet one may say…we like processed foods and grains always.

                    So the notion processing is the abstract we must avoid as sole determinant is just not sustainable to my opinion.
                    Degree of processing and uniformity of items are abberations not found in anthropological study of diet.
                    So this is what is concerning, not processing itself.

                    Who lives..one who crushes and then processes, flax seeds, or one who does not….one who does of course if that is all they eat.
                    So it is in evolutionary terms and this specific. You simply provide more calories by simple wheat seed crushing as opposed to eating wheat seeds/berries for very little caloric expenditure/work..

              3. Ron

                You said that you didn’t know how long humans have been grinding corn. I’ll assume here that you are using ‘corn’ in the real sense of the word – ie any small grain – rather than to mean maize, in order to produce flour.

                In terms of just bread itself, humans appear to have been making bread from grains for over 14,000 years -ie way back in the paleo period.

                But turning corn into flour, appears go back at least 23,000 years in association with agriculture
                https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150722144709.htm

                However, there is also evidence that hunter gatherers had been doing the same thing for very much longer with gathered wild grains. This should be no surprise. After all, why else would people begin growing grains other than because wild grains were already an important source of calories and nutrients in their diet? Don’t mention this to paleo dieters though. They won’t thank you for it.. Anyway, this report pushes the grinding of corn back over 100,000 yers ago
                https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091217141312.htm

                1. Sure Tom, Where I live, I frequent one of the native abandoned sites, this one occupied until the 1400’s. It was a stone age culture then and what preceeded it by a thousand years probably, was people living in holes in the ground really. Another habitation was a cave I think 25 k years ago. The most primitive of primitive.

                  They know what they ate, and seeds were a part of it. They just gathered the seeds and certainly crushed them and made them into things to eat. That is a known. Nuts pinons as well crushed them made flour. They did not do agriculture. I used to have on my premesis the same tools to crush that they used, and now are in use adjacent to their museum as a educational tool. Stone tools to crush grains seed whatever.
                  Anything that presupposes we did not as long as we were human, process foods is quite mistaken to my opinion. As long as we had tools we were probably crushing seeds to eat. And as monkey family are now known to utilize tools at times, likely that is way way before our identification as humans of today. In other words, in our formative evolutionary history is likely when we began crushing seeds and such to eat. Processing them.

                  The unification of source, so much of one thing to the exclusion of others and the degree of processing is the issue to my opinion not strictly processing. And so much to excess meat and oils. These are new things not processing.

                  1. Acorns probably are most conspicious in this locally. they must be crushed to be then soaked in water(twice) to remove the tannic acid which makes them normally inedible. Then crushed the flour is used for all sorts of things. This was firmly a hunter gatherer population.

                    So it is processed food. Totally healthy and it is the processing that makes the thing edible at all.
                    Certainly that is not a rare circumstance.

                    1. My guess is acorns as they are so persistant and more reliable than most any other foods out here(pinons only sprout seed every seven years or so on average)….they were the principle source of winter food…had to be.
                      And they have to be processed by the same exact tools the hunter gather Navajo used for other things 400 or so years ago….all having not a thing to do with agriculture. The same exact rocks were used by Navajo and were used by these peoples who probably inhabited it in a primitive fashion for a thousand years or more.

                      All processing foods. Though we do not typically think of it that way.
                      A water run stone mill for European grains is really just a elaboration of these tools. Size volume and permenance speaking of a agricultural not hunter gatherer life.

            2. Eve,

              I agree with you 100%.

              People don’t know what whole food is even.

              I would say that is one of the hardest things about transitioning from SAD to WFPB.

              Not nearly as hard going nutritional vegan. Might be an even greater step for some people to go moral vegan, but it isn’t hard to get rid of the animal products nowadays.

              When I became allergic to meat when I was a young person, you could only find vegetarian things at a health food store and it was packaged box of crumbles.

              By the time I moved back from CA the grocery stores had Garden Burgers. Now there is a whole section with frozen faux meats and a whole section of vegan chips and a whole vegan deli section, but none of it leads to WFZB.

        2. Well, to be fair, most people with T2D are overweight or obese. So you have people with damaged metabolic systems (obesity) and damaged endocrine systems (diabetes and prediabetes). It is fairly well recognised that they don’t respond to nutrients in exactly the same way that normal weight and nondiabetic people do. Low fat diets are often less effective in such people. Sometimes also low carb diets can induce weight loss (in the short term at least) and the weight loss alone can ameliorate or reverse the symptoms of diabetes.

          On the other hand, some studies do appear to be conveniently confounded. For example, you feed the low carb group fewer calories, so they lose more weight and this improves symptoms. However, you attribute all the benefits to a low carb diet rather than to greater weight loss. Or, as you say, the fibre content of the low carb diet is just as high or higher than that of the high carb diet indicating that the high carb diet is high in refined carbs. There are many ways studies can be designed to stack the odds in favour of certain outcomes

          1. Tom,

            You are right.

            People DO stack the odds all the time.

            Not just for money.

            People are so emotionally invested in their diets nowadays. There is a radical Food patriotism of sorts. People feel like better human beings for being smart enough to eat in a superior way.

            I think it comes from how the material is presented with condescending jokes to begin with. The speakers separate their audience from the naive and deceived masses.

            Political parties use the same techniques.

            It is frustrating because we end separated from rational discussion.

    1. Doug Neagles, I thought I heard Dr. Greger state that the two diets were isocaloric — which means that they each provided the same number of calories. Probably not semi-starvation.

        1. As I read caloric consumption norms this then in both cases is suboptimal and then both indicated a weight lowering regime. I believe 2000 is norm and with any sort of exercise it goes up into a more like 2500 range for men.

          So control could not have been a read on a normal diet. Both with weight lowering in time would seem to improve numbers. Unless all these peoples were bedridden.

  9. Why doesn’t the American Diabetic Association recommend this diet in place of their diet ? Or at least suggest WFPB would be another option to avoid drugs. Does anyone have an association with ADA and can answer this question. You would think with all their resources (money) they would be advertising this breakthough. If it was a drug you can be sure it would be on Nightly News for sure.

    1. Marc Parham, Dr. Greger’s video blurb states: “Dietary guidelines often patronizingly recommend what is considered acceptable or achievable, rather than what the best available balance of evidence suggests is best.” (https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-palatability-of-cancer-prevention/) So there you have it!

      Besides, how many folks do you know who have changed their eating habits, even when your provide them with some reasons and evidence to do so? I know very few. As someone wrote: A prescription is a permission slip to continue practicing bad habits, e.g. eating SAD (Standard American Diet).

      I’m waiting for a book about the Medical Industrial Complex to come out, “Code Blue.” I am attending a series of lectures by the author, an MD himself who does not appear to hold this industry in high esteem. Very well researched and exceedingly educational.

      1. Code Blue sounds interesting.

        I talked to my friend who has out of control Diabetes and Cancer and talked about the Macrobiotics study and I hate that doctors aren’t the ones saying it to her. She has so much Keto in her brain.

        1. Me saying it just confuses her.

          The people around me really do listen to the authority figures and they get so frustrated with me that I don’t.

    2. Perhaps because this is a single RCT by a team which is associated with the active promotion of a particular diet. It was also short-term and took place in a controlled residential setting.

      I suspect that mainstream authorities will not actively promote this diet until it has been replicated in RCTs by different teams of researchers using free-living subjects, with follow-ups measured in years not just months..

    3. I can see caution in this area. For years and years macrobiotics advocated the use of seaweeds as a daily, if not every meal, use in their common diet.
      Now we know at least one of these seaweeds is commonly overtly contaminated with arsenic ( I think it is). Most of the founders of this movement did not live all that long, seventies is my observation, if that. The lead woman proponent died relatively young of breast cancer.

      Point being yes it may be great for diabetics this or that diet…but what point, if other element in it make it unlivable and you end up dying of cancer?
      I think this points to a study needed to determine what was the actual component.
      You want a general term such as macrobiotics….and yes seaweeds are normally a big part of that. Maybe not this one from but mostly.

      1. Ron,

        I agree with the need for caution because the diet has been used by a cult and people lost too much weight, and not everything on the list is useful.

        But it is better than what they are recommending now.

        But there are parts of it which probably need review.

        1. A lot of their stuff is just arbitrarily based upon the historical japanese diet. And really a part of japan not the whole of it. They allowed small fish or small amounts of fish. Why that….as small fish inhabited the rice patties and that was common back in the day, to eat that. In India a whole class of peoples generally live off mice that live in agricultural fields….does that mean then mice are healthy….well no.
          White potatoes mushrooms…those are not bad things to eat. But they had them not so they are not in it.

          So it is with this the general principal makes sense and works. The fine details of this thing are arbitrarily based.
          Our present diet is probably worse than most all historical diets that are not directly related to overtly not starving.. Little recommends this over any other, excepting they had a group espousing for it.
          Others do not.

  10. Now I wonder how many more commercials I’ll get to see talking about the “fight” to find a cure (drug) for diabetes while this kind of information continues to be ignored…. Anyways, these results were incredible! God plants are amazing… it makes a girl want to go and hug a tree!

    1. “God plants are amazing… it makes a girl want to go and hug a tree!”
      – – – – – – – –

      Girl……trees are delighted when they sense you luuuuuuv them! Truth! Stand by a tree (hug it first), look up at one of the leaves and tell it you love it. Watch it shake its little head with happiness!

      Works with flowers too….especially cute little pansies. :-)

      1. YR…..
        Plant a tree from a opponent specie next to another and watch where the most long limbs of that tree grow….it is towards the opponent.

        It is not to shake hands or hug, it is as the opponent vies for them, and their specie, for food which is light and water. So they extend to dominate and destroy.
        Some specie such as juniper ponderosa pine, and pinon, vary from this and live right next to and at times into each other. Why that then….as invasive specie bark beetle is drawn to one specie or another not typically favoring all types….a degree of protection is afforded by two trees of different specie being right close to another.
        But that is only a specie related dependence dependent upon a common threat. Beetles will rarely attack all trees in a forest at the same time. Select specie of bark beetles arrive as if in waves to prevent the total destruction of forests and thus their food sources.

        So pinon right on ponderosa pine protects the pinon and in the reverse.
        Beetles see not a clear indicator by smell is it confused.
        But no they are quite as ruthless as us, just in a different form we do not recognize. It is late in their evolutionary history, but if it was earlier, they clearly seeing what we do kill us surely and completely as they could. We are not in general friends of trees. Nor are they overtly friendly. This is after all earth you know not some other place.

        1. Bitter, gumpy NM ron wrote: “It is late in their evolutionary history, but if it was earlier, they clearly seeing what we do kill us surely and completely as they could. We are not in general friends of trees. Nor are they overtly friendly. This is after all earth you know not some other place.”
          – – – – – – –

          Somewhere I heard/read that people who like trees like PEOPLE. Apparently, you consider trees your enemy. ‘Tis a pity. Do you get up in the morning with a glare on your face?

          https://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/20-random-reasons-really-love-trees.html

          1. To realize the reality of the thing,is not to consider it a enemy. I spent most of my morning this morning,providing rings to collect rainwater, digging around the trees a circle so water would collect. A storm is approaching, this is for the trees in the forest. Not my land, but near me, actually in the forest. Not a whole lot, probably a twenty or so with a hoe, it took a bit. So it is not personal, it is for them I don’t own them..

            So what did thou do today..hug some trees did we?
            I realize the evil that is human as well. But I do try to help them if I may, as I do the trees., As it is the nature of human and possibly things on a very grand scale beyond this very small thing we allow ourselves to see, this earth to help not harm.
            But that is not here, this earth nor human…we harm and hurt always in the end. WE have eaten the earth our home…you see not what is coming I do. So paint it with flowers if you may, none can say you may not. I will say it is painting a hue not deserved, however. Black is the nature of this thing and world and human. Your god is demon he may not save you nor provide the eternal thing he seeks with your delusion.

            Next project I cut the trees that are small. Only so many to be healthful may exist. So I remove them when I can. They like it not, I suppose, those who die. But it is the nature of this thing of tree to overpopulate and then destroy simply by being alive. I have done these things for years and years. It is now my work I can’t help human. So I have come to know them as I study them. Human work I will fail always. This in their brief span may not. I have consorted to with forest spirits. This I think upon next may be my fate. The older one gets the closer to the next one becomes. So perhaps it is I am drawn to this. Yes I dislike human. Trees not so much. Enemy much to strong. Hate to strong. How can you hate or have as enemy a thing of stupidity….it can only be a thing then of education..

            Too many they kill. Too many we kill. But we want to be not alone. If only we knew they are like us, we would not be. But few know that and only want them to be as us….they do not like hugs. They like water and light. We do as well, but it is locked deep in memory we can not retrieve.
            Remembering that and we then remember we are not alone. Then we seek light and not this thing of earth and human and demon design.

            Hugs….hug a vampire bat then I say….it will favor you greatly for that. Trees care not for such things.

            1. NM ron, the hermit, said, “Yes I dislike human.”
              – – – – – –

              Hmmm…..I guess that about sums it up then, doesn’t it!

              Sending you Good Vibes; you don’t have to accept them, of course. :-)

              1. Yes I guess that would.
                If a persons world is that of speaking of trees as opposed to doing for trees, personal good……, vibes is not a thing I would want nor endeavor. And that surmmation would suffice.

                However if one did this morning or that, actually help some trees, then I would accept such a thing, though I consider it meaningless and unnecessary.
                Any vibes a person of this world could be sending me, would not be a thing I would consider good at all. I consider it only very lucky I can not in this time and place be firmly burned at the stake as witch, as I would in prior times have been. So restraining ones impulse to burn at the stake those who are different, may be enough for me. If we are in the business of giving things, give only that. That is what I am happy for in this human life. They cannot yet burn me on a stake.

                Good vibes on trees basis and human basis, I think I have accumulated enough…. if such a thing did exist..Having worked to both benefit for many years of no payment of any human sort, I have quite enough. But payment on the trees sort is my understanding of them.

                A thing willfully indulged but cannot be sent, as one would a postcard. It requires not words nor money nor donation… but actual work to help them.

                1. “Any vibes a person of this world could be sending me, would not be a thing I would consider good at all.”
                  – – – – –

                  I’m crushed. :-(

                  1. Well don’t be.
                    Years ago there were many specie of human types. Neanderthal is just the most base, we always tend to reference, as their baseness makes us look noble and good. And yes we had no problem mating with those things neanderthal.

                    The good ones, the most compassionate ones, the things we here spoken of in times of light and air, and this and that evolved, we crushed them ruthlessly, murdered them all, as we could not in the end tolerate a thing that showed us in so bad a light as human, and inferior.
                    So it is as a human, one can’t expect to much of human, we must realize our limitations as a specie.
                    So it is nothing personal. Good vibes from such a thing? I far prefer the company of most any other thing. What good vibes could such a evil thing send my way…..? When such a good, intends as good is evil, and evil is good. So please put these good vibes away and take them far from me. I have compassion for human as I am human, but will not abide their evil.

                    1. Everything is energy. But we in our disabled state of perception can not perceive of at least 60% of it. It is called dark matter and the only reason we know it exists(we can not perceive it even with the finest of instrumentation) is we see it affects other things.
                      This is a rude boy joke of a universe and a conditional scope that provides us only a very very tiny ability to perceive.
                      If I was allowed at least 90% of the universe I could then say..OK not 100, but I can live with it.

                      60%…..this is comical. I refuse to take any thing here to be real solid or serious. Show me a better playing field on which I may play, not this distorted thing designed by demon.
                      Comical. Expecting me to take this as real and reality, when I can perceive in the best of times best of days…less than half of the total of it?

                      Elon Musk may be right…the chances we are already in a computer type simulation are far greater than not.
                      Which is fine..but I refuse to take it then as real. No offense to all you, who do and think we may send vibrations and such…..only if the big demons who designed the software allow us to is my guess. Right now they seem off on that.

                    2. You may care to visit this(or not).
                      In study of the finest smallest particles observational by human, to be found, it was found quite conclusively and unequivocally…the behavior of the particles, the direction then ended up at…. is affected by the condition of being watched or not.

                      Observational or not….it affected their behavior..
                      It is quite clear to me by this finding, there is no substance to this universe, its element is all of observational quality.
                      How can observation or not, affect a real result, a physical property of solid matter being here or there, if it was other…this universe was a real thing?
                      The proof is here..but we refuse to accept its implications. You can easily find the study in a search. It is clearly this all is observational. It will never be accepted as the implications of that are quite significant. WE must consider this place real or the play discontinues. What matters the play if it seems all know it only a play?
                      Imagine our minds may affect real solid matter..a proven. What then is not possible? And what is impossible. Clearly we can imagine all we can and then all it possible, as the only limitation is what we can imagine.
                      So personally I feel free to create my own reality. Humans are but a minor part of that. They are insignificant.

                    3. My personal reality has now……. all as living or all as considered dead, The things I find in reality. solid objects are the same I find in myself without exception. It is all just degree………. we. things. trees. rocks. whatever. are all equal in things. All conscious or not. a degree only of perception.

                      I tend to the living all is alive. But would not argue forcibly against the inverse. A fine distinction how many angels on the head of a pin better for aristocrats to discuss and spend their time with, not me.
                      So presuming all the same, humans mean less. Standing on my mother, her me and me her, part but apart….what need a specific of this or that or human or not…matters not.
                      Trees, I try to help. It is human to help if and when easy. The trick is in providing a place of ease, so one may.. Mostly it is also human tendency to create places of dis ease. So then we may not help.
                      We can then endlessly chase out tail but never quite catch it. Study of vibrations is not separate from that. Like science in diet, the evidence is clear but mostly we use things of observation to affirm position,s not to determine positions. The determination of positions was concluded at around the age of 7 or so for most.

                    4. Aren’t you happy I give you so many opportunities to do the stream of consciousness thing? To expel your diarrhea of the mouth, as it were? Har!

                    5. No

                      I am happy when I provide depressions so water may collect for the trees to drink.
                      My spiritual practice requires time in cities as well as alone. Time in wilderness, consorting with spirits, ghosts, at risk for death and to the inverse, in the safest of places speaking publically perhaps. All must be provided, all circumstance, so mind may be studied fully. This place is a time in city.
                      I do not particularly find it making me happy talking to humans. Sad mostly. It is always tinged with sadness.

                      It is now raining, I am happy my work now comes to fruition.

                      Diaharrea can be quite a deabilitating condition, caused often by disease. If it is a problem for you and the why of it being on your mind , I suggest strongly, you have that looked at. Quite possibly diet has a to do with it.

                    6. “Diaharrea can be quite a deabilitating condition, caused often by disease. If it is a problem for you and the why of it being on your mind , I suggest strongly, you have that looked at. Quite possibly diet has a to do with it.”
                      – – – –

                      Nice try; I’ll give you an A for effort.

    1. Aveline Kushi, for one, has produced a book “Macro Biotic cooking” which I don’t know if it is still in print. I would guess others are out there.

      She was married to one of the other founders, and was a founder of the movement. She died of cervical cancer at the age of 78.
      A lot of the recipes are inclusive of seaweeds, (one of which is contaminated with toxins) and all based with a bias to the historical Japanese diet. Like most historical diets there are a lot to recommend them But their abhorance of some things, like mushrooms and potatoes and such, seems to not make sense. She had a poisoning incident in a dorm years ago due to bad preparation of potatoes, seems a cultural bias and not founded in science. The foods the west provided her by my read, after the war, were considered bad foods. Some were I think but others perhaps not.

      This diet was a bit of reemphasis of Japanese culture in a dietary fashion, as was also Zen buddhism religiously introduced at roughly the same time to America.

      They also favored the nonuse of all electrical appliances to cook or heat foods and also the use of any things such as electric blankets.

      1. To speak to a potential of concern, was the historical line of the diet. Way back in the day, a rice only type diet was in use as one of the variants of this for treatments of cancer. Which unfortunately was thought to have led to at least one death.

        This coupled with the fact the founders did not live that long, served to widely disinterest people in it.
        And it was a lifestyle not just diet. Anything in japan historically diet wise was good, anything not was suspect.

        1. To my very dim recollection one of the founders was also a smoker. But I probably could not provide reference for that presently…. as I studied the topic many years ago from very esoteric sources at times to determine the legitimacy of it.

          Like Allan Ginsberg being a pedophile(which I am certain of)….. it is just found when one examines a large large body of work, not just those published by the authors. So internet search does not suffice.

  11. Hello, I have a question, i’ve been watching all your videos for a long time. But i have always asked myself, how do you edit your videos so you could make those effects with the articles? I want to know how to let the article in shadow and the important part iluminate. It would be really helpful for me. Because i’m really interested in investigations. Thanks.

    1. Do you have editing software?

      I am old school and can’t help you, but software is probably your answer.

      When I helped people decades ago, we used AVID or spliced film.

      I suspect there are a lot of editing packages nowadays.

      Maybe someone from the team will answer which software they use.

    2. Yefry Santana, the videos we have enjoyed watching for the past couple of years (?) are professionally produced by Avocado Video company. https://avocadovideo.com/ They do an amazing job! Once in a blue moon the video might be produced by someone else like if it’s an animated feature for a special topic.

    1. Nope it is vegetable broth for dogs.

      But I did find dog’s gravy. That is beef or chicken.

      It works for me, because if Dr Fuhrman was right, I just need to keep his calories from animal products around 5%.

          1. No,

            I am Deb with the dog on my cell phone.

            Yes, the 18 weeks is missing.

            My dog wasn’t impressed with the broth, but he ate 1/2 bowl of that and then hunted me down when I was eating my chili and I made it without onions and not quite as spicy and he wolfed that down.

            You never know.

            1. I think he seems to want whatever I am eating.

              He ate raw carrots and cauliflower and tricolor peppers and anything I am eating.

              He is wanting to have me spend more time with him.

            2. Deb, may I ask a (stupid?) question? Why was the “18 Weeks!!!” missing?

              This seemed to happen right around the time that the Other Deb posted. Other Deb might be wondering the same.

              1. LOL!

                YR,

                Just keeping it interesting!

                LOL!

                I like that you are a tree hugger.

                Trees make me happy every day.

                If I knew how to post photos on this site, I would have one of my dog walking with the autumn trees.

                1. Deb, you with the Dog and NM ron the Curmudgeon Hermit — both highly unusual beings of the human (?) persuasion — should meet up with each other someday.

                  Wow….would THAT be interesting! At the very least. :-)

                  1. YR,

                    You might be another highly unusual beings of the human (?) persuasion.

                    Are you from California?

                    Maybe not, but you remind me of California.

                    1. Deb, I tried living in California three times throughout my lifetime. Uh-uh…not for me.

                      And I agree; I believe I TOO am an unusual entity. ‘Nuff said….woo-woo! :-)

  12. The macrobiotic diet seems like something a comic book villain came up with to mark everyone on their diet with goiter if they ever stray from the diet. I’ll call this villain dr. Goiter. Pearl Millet and soy are goitrogenic, but the seaweed provides enough iodine to reduce risk of goiter. What if you’re a precariat and for some reason, all of a sudden, you can’t afford the seaweed? Thyroid meltdown or if you immediately stop the millet and soy you’ll be OK? Also, radiation risk from seaweed, if the available sources are from areas affected by nuclear meltdown (Fukushima, Chernobyl)? Playing the juggling game with soy and seaweed, I want to avoid that. Also, what about fake b12 in sea vegetables competing with real b12 in your body? How do you deal with this safely?

    My takeaway from this is that bread and flour should be considered as red light foods. Maybe cold potatoes and pasta are still OK because of resistant starch. For cardiovascular health, hyperinsulinemia needs to be avoided and not just diabetes. We should eat intact whole grains only. Replace our daily bread with a daily porridge. What about sprouted breads? I figure they’re just as insulogenic. There are hundreds of varieties of cereal grasses classed with the name ‘millet’. Can’t scientists find a variety that’s nutritious and does not cause harm? Are there ways to prepare the millet that make it safe to eat? Despite all this, this is a great video, a real eye opener. I only wished I cut out bread from the diet earlier. It would have helped. Hard to persuade the family let alone convince yourself to change anything about diet without receiving the right advice.

    1. Peoples have been eating bread for back since we first invented the written word. In fact they call it he staff of life. In some of their first books.

      Point being……if bread in this context was causing such evil, diabetes and such, it would have presented multiple times in our history and certainly at times even in Europe…. the poor ate only bread. It was all they had. They died of infectious diseases a lot but diabetes…..I can find no reference in the poor, the rich perhaps.

      If one is a diabetic pre diabetic and or otherwise in some disease state, I am all for it..perhaps eliminating bread may help or even be now cause in part. Or maybe you are allergic or eating highly processed breads, or overweight, I can see all that.

      But bread, the bread of our likely dietary history, I find not a whole lot to support the demonization of it. This present bread sure.
      Diabetes was very very rare of the type 2 sort even a hundred years ago. And bread was a lot of what they ate. It was all they could afford. Meat is the singular most abstract thing we eat to great excess at almost every meal,when once it was rare,a one meal at best,and manly every other day. Catholics meatless Fridays were 1960’s gone. Meatless Wednesdays a hundred years before that gone, and meatless Saturdays, a hundred before that. And lent a whole thirty days none at all.
      So it was clearly we were not eating meat then and now are at each and every meal. ONe difference that is it. Processed foods perhaps half of that. AS bread is always a processed food.

    2. Arthur,

      I don’t think you can do it as a generality without someone putting these things to the test.

      Meaning that it would take a bread and heart problem study to show me that bread causes problems for people who aren’t Diabetic.

      I did find a study which looked at it and it was written too science-y for me, but I got to a sentence and it said that the results were different based on portion size and that every recipe has its own results.

      Makes it more interesting.

      1. There may be a study where they say that every slice of bread causes hyperinsulemia in every person and that causes heart problems but I haven’t found it yet.

        Also, I want to see the soy studies because Asia eats a whole lot of soy. If I go to their health data what percentage of the people have thyroid problems?

        Not necessarily disagreeing, but when Ron or Tom show up they show up with study links.

        It is helpful to know where your argument comes from.

        If you provide a good link or a well-reasoned enough connect the dots type of argument we would all enjoy it.

        1. The nurses study had a breakdown of mortality by eggs and by dairy and all sorts of things. Bread might be on there.

          Not sure.

          What comes to mind though is that “baked goods” had something bad about them way back when. Aluminum maybe.

          Can’t remember.

          Sorry, I have brain problems compounded by lack of sleep. The brain problems got worse when my sleep got worse so it is harder to do the work.

          Happily, I have Dr Greger, all of the WFPB doctors, people like Ryan from Happy Healthy Vegan and Mic the Vegan and people from this site.

          I still do my own homework but I am glad health seems to grade on a curve of sorts.

    3. Soy is slightly more tricky than the bread.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14977438
      Isoflavone supplements do not affect thyroid function in iodine-replete postmenopausal women.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30254609 In this one: “Intragroup differences for all three measures were statistically indistinguishable at 6 months, and levels were similar between the isoflavone supplement and placebo groups at each measurement. These results indicate that in this group of healthy iodine-replete subjects, soy isoflavones do not adversely affect thyroid function.” (But 2 people did get hypothyroidism in the group.)

      But if people are sub-clinical hypothyroid already, a percentage of them on high enough doses of soy do get to a clinical diagnosis.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6132702/

      Forty-eight participants completed the study. Within this subcohort, a difference concerning the mean TSH, fT4 and fT3 concentrations between the two intervention groups was not observed (fT3: p = 0.6; fT4: p = 0.4; TSH: p = 0.7). An improvement of the high blood pressure, insulin resistance and the C-reactive protein level (an inflammation and arteriosclerosis marker) was reported.

      Unfortunately, the people from the high soy group who did move from sub-clinical to clinical hypothyroid did not have it reverse after stopping the study, so caution is a good idea for people with subclinical thyroid problems. Too bad, because it helped Diabetes and blood pressure and inflammation. Bummer.

  13. Ron,

    You have verbalized the thoughts I have about bread.

    I do have friends who are Diabetic and who will not do WFPB or Macrobiotic.

    They love bread but might do better with Keto than high levels of Diabetes meds. Maybe?

    1. If I had relatives or friends who were diabetic or had other health issues, they would be eating bread that is not healthful.
      It takes a bit, but one can find bread that appears to me pretty healthful stuff. You mentioned that Ezekial bread I think. To me it tastes like cardboard, but there are other things likely almost as healthful to my opinion.
      Now eating bread with butter on it..of course there is a problem. We did not even use milk from cows as food till way after we had become evolutionaily what we are now. Processing foods as in crushing seeds nuts to eat I think we did. A good bread is that sort of processing.
      Why we presuppose a good bread is bad is beyond me.
      Meat as in keto…what supposes humans ever ate meat at that level…nothing. So what benefit if we exchange diabetic tendency with cancer in time…none at all.,
      Vegan keto as in beans sure.

        1. What I like about the study is this:

          “We combined self-report of type and number of bread slices (white, light whole grain, dense whole grain) to form a whole grain bread score, with range 0.05 (1 slice per day, made with 5% whole grain flour) to 5.4 (9 slices per day, made with 60% whole grain flour).”

          “After adjustment for age, energy intake, sex, serum cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, smoking, body mass index, physical activity at leisure and work, and use of cod liver oil or other vitamin supplements, hazard rate ratios (HRR) for total mortality were inverse and graded across whole grain bread score categories (category 5 vs category 1 HRR: 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.89 in men and 0.66, 0.44-0.98 in women).”

  14. Regarding the success of the Mediterranean diet, they said: “Studies that have specifically looked at bread in the context of these diets have found that people who eat the most whole-grain breads — six slices or more a day — are the least likely to be overweight or obese.”

        1. I think we rely too much on studies. They all seem to conflict and studies do not prove causation anyway — just a correlation. Here’s one that found white bread is no better than whole gain — it depends on our personal ability to digest it. So go ahead and enjoy your bread, I guess, just make sure you aren’t eating lots of Cheeze puffs or fudge cookies along with it.
          Hope you can open this: https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(17)30288-7

          1. This study is one of 20 people was a one week study and was between white and sourdough only.
            Well yes, if one wants to find a thing study may provide it. But a review of a study usually determines application.
            Debs study on bread use, longevity diabetes and this and that, was a meta analysis of 45 studies and 60 some odd papers.
            So it provides a consensus approach to utilization of study, not a single one off type thing.
            It may still provide a mistaken apprehension, but in general it provides a good starting point for determination of validity.

            Not you of course, but those with agenda, will typically take a one off study such as thi,s to proport their view as substance. But it is little served that.
            Better to just say…well it is my opinion.

      1. Well I hope not Deb. If they are, they likely have very little in the way of discriminatory taste in food ;)

        Yes it seems a very good study as it supports our position ;)…..
        No, as it draws from 45 studies and 60 some odd papers on it. And seems very well thought.

        And this is the conclusion…

        “Conclusions This meta-analysis provides further evidence that whole grain intake is associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and total cancer, and mortality from all causes, respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, diabetes, and all non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes. These findings support dietary guidelines that recommend increased intake of whole grain to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and premature mortality.”

        Just a quick read, but I think they tried to isolate out things like white bread, but did include in a count for whole grains which includes what we consider processed foods with whole grain as majority part. Bran cereal I think I noticed per example.

        The med diet is mentioned by one of the popular health dietary gurus, manipulated so the grain nature of it is totally removed. Ignoring that peoples in that part of the world grains in this or that is what they eat. But he is a keto supporter so….. AS I see it that part of the world grains have always been by vast majority the thing to eat. As opposed to asia rice perhaps.
        .

        1. Actually, I was glad that I read it because after the Food Revolution Summit, I felt like I learned that whole grains were good, but not bread because of flour. These studies looked specifically at bread and I never eat anywhere near 9 slices per day. Nor 7. Not even 6. There have been time I have had 4, but that is rare.

  15. Ron,
    I would be delighted if bread was helpful or benign. Same with flour. However, the more you pulverize or break down foods with starches, the sharper the glycemic response, the higher the insulin spike and the greater the hormone dysregulation. I don’t know about fruit since the sugars get processed by the liver. Fiber might not do much to help. It’s the breakdown of cell walls that makes the starches too readily available and are absorbed too quickly leading to the hyperinsulinemia. Dr. Greger’s videos already explain that animal protein is insulogenic so avoid that too I guess. I’m getting this stuff from a video on YouTube from some Keto guy named Ivor Cummins. I don’t know whether what he’s saying is right I’m just repeating some of it here more or less.

    1. Arthur our dietary history speaks directly against that. If just the grinding into flour made such a change and deterimental effect certainly we would have noticed and modified our diet to accommodate that knowledge. We have been eating flour type products since we have ever written a thing, for thousands upon thousands of years. Here I have mentioned the natives, who lived as primitive, acorn flour was a thing they made and lived on. Did they suffer diabetes as result….seems there is no record of that. Diabetes in this group natives came with the introduction of other things not use of flour. White bleached flour perhaps.

      Fruit also. WE do not manufacturer vitamin C as we eat so much fruit in our history there was no need, unlike other animals.
      Present new ways of making things. One type foods to exclusion of others. Grossly over done processed foods these are new to human not bread and flour nor any fruit.

      Does someone with existant disease to include diabetes have to follow a special diet as they are simply no longer able to accommodate things as we are…quite possibly. Like Esselstyne and his cardiac study, in a severely damaged group strict dietary regiment makes perfect sense.

      Us without overt disease prediabetic, none of that, it may be a different sort of question.

  16. I am all in with the HTND lifestyle- yes, I have my app.
    We are in Egypt and will be here for the school year. Last time we were here for only 3 months, we got a nasty parasite from raw fruit or veggie. 3 months eating only cooked food upon recovery is one thing, but 9 months is a real issue for me.
    There are lots of beans and nuts, and some whole grains that have not been stripped white, and I cook my veggies. I brought my matcha tea powder and picked up a green food ( but it won’t last long & I always worry about purity). When we have acclimated, I will start getting some thick- skinned fruits/ veggies and peel them myself at home.

    Do you think I can keep healthy with some principles from macrobiotic diet and Okinawan sweet potato model ( looking for purple ones)? By the way, since the food supply feeds such a huge population here and a lot of principles for health is unknown, a lot of the grains are GMO.

    Please help with any advice and direction.
    Thank you.

  17. I would suggest people check carefully what different grains do to their blood sugar. For example check what oats do to your post breakfast sugar levels,min hit 116 from fasting 80 when made with water and no additions. Compare that with beans on single slice of high fibre toast or eggs on similar and both come in at 95

    1. Ok given that…assuming I am not diabetic, what significance is that? Do you suppose then all without diabetes nor prediabetic will be harmed by a raise in blood sugar levels you describe?

      Secondarily are these numbers in a at rest individual or a exercising individual? If at rest, then why is that assumed to translate to a person in a active state?
      If exercising what then are the blood sugar levels over time duration of exercise?
      It is then assumed all peoples in a natural state are in a not moving or sedentary state. I suppose some are, but really, are we all…and then we take those numbers and apply them to all of our states and say well this is bad and that is good….based on one solitary reading in a certain state only?
      Is it then a given a slightly higher blood glucose level in a individual not at rest..is a bad thing?

      Or does all this apply to those who are totally sedentary and as we already know by other study then prone to weight gain and the presence of diabetes?
      Using solitary numbers in this fashion..how applicable are the findings?

      1. Point being…we consume food for what essential benefit above all others..to provide blood glucose levels so we may do things like get up and walk.
        Single solitary readings on blood glucose level rise from specific foods may be very important for a active diabetic who is insulin dependent to manage their diabetes.

        But for active healthy individuals they do not have a significant amount of import. Yes some produce more rise in a faster fashion then others.
        For healthy active peoples that does not mean one is bad and another is good. It depends on activity level and other foods consumed during a day.

        1. Here is one of multiple videos Dr Greger has done on the cause of diabetes and the likely interference of other dietary influence other than glycogen producing load of individual items in a diet…https://nutritionfacts.org/video/what-causes-diabetes/
          Are we seeing a whole lot of fruition diabetics are we? How about those who are on this macrobiotic thing….a bunch there? How about oatmeal eaters…..loads of them diabetics? How about when we ate meat as a rarity and oatmeal every day….all diabetics then?

          F*&^ no.
          JUNK food junk food junk food…..that is where we find these folks for the most part. And with no exercise at all.
          About a third of americans. Soon to be half . No it is not the pork rinds fried in greeze it is the oatmeal…..glycogen index tells us so.
          Biggest load of nonsense I ever heard. Talk about self confirming bias.

  18. In looking at the types of foods people ate on this diet, I found myself wondering how 15.2% of the calories were from fats. Olive oil, I presume? I can testify that this diet works, and that normal or near-normal blood sugars are achieved in just a matter of days. My own blood sugar readings went from over 300 down to 102 in just 4 days. My body fat composition went from 24% down to 12% in a year. My weight dropped from 205 down to 175, and my exercise endurance (cycling) improved dramatically. I attributed all of these improvements to reducing fats, particularly saturated fats, from my diet. I decided to stay on this diet.

    However, at some point, I noticed that my energy wasn’t as high as had been. I was huffing and puffing more on my bike. Stairs, which I used to take two or even three at a time, were now giving me trouble– sometimes I had to stop and rest half way up. I was taking vitamins, including B-12, so I knew that couldn’t be the problem. I was getting short of breath just doing normal activities at work. Then, one day, I woke up with severe edema in my legs and feet. It had been coming on for a few days, but I brushed it off as I must have eaten something salty, although I couldn’t remember what it might have been. The edema got so bad I finally had to go to the hospital. They diagnosed me with congestive heart failure. They thought I was going to die– my ejection fraction score (a measure of heart strength) was down to 10, (should be over 50). I was advised to make out my will. The hospital discharged me with some meds, but essentially told me there was nothing more they could do.

    I thought, well hell, here I’ve been eating healthy for so long and all of a sudden I’m at death’s door. What could possibly have happened? To make a long story short, I went to live with my sister, who does not eat a healthy diet at all. I decided that if I was going to die soon anyway, then screw the healthy diet and I was going to eat whatever I wanted. I went back to eating meats, cheeses, and eggs, all of which I had eliminated from my diet. And I didn’t die. In fact, I started feeling better. Little by little, my heart numbers improved. Today, my heart has completely recovered and I am avidly cycling again. I still eat pretty healthy, not a lot of fatty foods– but enough. You see, I learned that the heart runs on fats (fatty acids) and following a very low-fat diet will weaken the heart. So, if you follow the macrobiotic diet recommended in this article by Dr. Greger, be careful that you don’t overdo it.

    1. Very interesting, Thomas. Just goes to show you that we all “march to the beat of a different drummer.”

      How long ago were you given the dire diagnosis? Years? Months?

    2. Dr Greger is not recommending this diet. He is reporting on a observational result of study for a specific malady, diabetes.

      It is a proven many many years ago fat was necessary in diet. Those on tube feeding only, due to other medical condition, were not thriving on diets with no fat in them. So it was added and they improved.
      However the necessity of fats does not infer we must eat cheeses meats and this and that, as they are then all healthy for us. That is to much of a leap. It is amount of fat not that all fat and type of fat is good nor that no fat is good.
      So you had a bad experience with diet. That is sad and I am glad you solved your problem. But it was your specific problem and I would not take a large amount of conclusive evidence from your experience and then apply it to others.

      Diabetes coronary heart disease some conditions may be remediated or assisted by very low fat diets, this is pretty well shown in study. But that is not the same situation for a healthy active athlete. To apply one to the other may have untoward results.
      And your study of one did not apply how much protein you were consuming on your chosen diet.
      All the recognized nutritional bodies associated with sports, are in favor of increased protein requirements in a athlete who takes their sport seriously. So did you have adequate protein? The heart is a muscle it need protein for rebuild and growth…so what was you protein intake?

      1. It always bothers me a bit…those who have completely totally failed at diet in their lives, made a total bang up failure with it, developing this or that malady that is almost solely diet related…are then if cured…… the ones telling all the rest of us, who are mostly healthy and without many problem related to diet…how to eat.

        No offense but the rest of us..did not totally screw up a pretty simple thing. Eat healthy and you will in general, with some exception, be healthy.
        Going on about eggs and dairy and meat……we all know if taken to excess they produce harm. Can we eat a little bit..sure. Seems so. But these other things greens veggies fruits…our moms told us to eat them and we should. WE know that.

        Get me a healthy person who did not totally screw up a pretty simple thing, diet….and that person I may be inclined to listen to.
        Stuff the eggs and meat and dairy is my inclination. Mum says eat your veggies…….but we know better than mum as we totally screwed up and now have found a better way……???? What mum has ever said…. stuff the veggies…eat some more meat diary and eggs?

        Have we all lost our collective minds?

    3. We’re glad you feel better, but this is not an objective study and all available evidence clearly shows you’re putting yourself at risk for premature death with what you’re eating. There are many other likely factors that would result in the health decline that your report, other than a lack of high saturated fat food.

      This reminds me of the guy that falls off the hundred story building. His friend is standing at the 50th floor window that yells to the falling guy as he sails past: “how are you doing?” The falling guy says “I’m doing great! No problem at all!” Splat.

      We all sincerely hope that all the clinical evidence that demonstrated premature death and disease from eating animal products does not catch up with you.

      Dr. Ben

    4. Important though they are, I doubt if the heart “runs on fatty acids” (there is much more to heart health) and even if it did, the human body manufactures all the fatty acids it needs with the exception of a couple of (essential) fatty acids. These can be provided from a well-planned completely vegetarian diet. However, this will involve taking some supplements or eating fortified foods.

      However, the macrobiotic diet is based on a philosophy rather than scientific nutritional guidelines. The particular macrobiotic diet used in this study excluded animal foods of any kind and did not include supplements. It was therefore likely to be deficient in a variety of nutrients including B12 and possibly iron, zinc, selenium, vitamin D etc. It may well be tremendously effective as a short term therapeutic intervention (as the Kempner rice diet also appeared to be), as it was apparently in your case, but may be unsafe as a long tem dietary regime (as, again, it appeared to be in your case). Indeed, I think this is why such diets went out of favour – there were widely publicised reports in the 1960s and 1970s of deaths on such diets and studies demonstrated serious adverse effects on children fed such diets.

      I don’t recall Dr Greger recommending this diet. He merely reported the results from the trial.

      However, I would certainly agree that it should not be a long term dietary regime and that, long term, people should follow a well-planned whole food plant based diet that reflects Dr Greger’s optimal nutrition recommendations and the US Dietary Guidelines

      https://nutritionfacts.org/2011/09/12/dr-gregers-2011-optimum-nutrition-recommendations/
      https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-5/

    5. Thomas,

      Something doesn’t make sense, is what I am going to say and it might be that you were taking a type of B-12 which wasn’t working is going to be my guess. Either you might have needed Methyl donors or a different brand (because some don’t have what they say in them) or you could have had Methyl B-12, which had sat on a shelf for a long time or which was exposed to light and heat and lost its power.

      This is my guess and, yes, it is a total guess. https://www.mdedge.com/ccjm/article/90118/edema-due-vitamin-b-deficiency

      Your experience doesn’t line up with the studies at all. In fact, it is opposite of the results of studies like this one:

      “Plant-based diets came out ahead in another recent analysis by researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at New York’s Mt. Sinai Hospital. The study involved more than 15,000 people with no known heart problems and compared five dietary patterns. These included:

      Convenience (red meats, pastas, fried potatoes, fast food)
      Plant-based (dark green, leafy vegetables, fruits, beans, fish)
      Sweets (desserts, breads, sweet breakfast foods, chocolate, candy)
      Southern (eggs, fried food, organ meats, processed meats, sugar-sweetened beverages)
      Alcohol/salads (salad dressings, green leafy vegetables, tomatoes, wine, butter, liquor).
      The intriguing results: Those who adhered to a plant-based diet had a 42 percent decreased risk for heart failure over the study’s four years, compared to those eating fewer plant foods, even after adjusting for the effects of age, sex, race, and other risk factors. Those following other dietary patterns saw no such reduction.”

      1. “Total homocysteine (tHcy) has been linked to the severity of chronic heart failure (CHF).”

        Elevated homocysteine concentrations are mainly caused by folate and vitamin B-12 deficiencies.

        I am going to hypothesize B-12 deficiency because of what fixed it.

        https://www.livestrong.com/article/530551-vitamin-b12-deficiency-and-edema/

        If it was a B-6 deficiency the cure would have been from plant food.

        Note, I am not a doctor, but that is my theory.

        1. Here is a website which talks about ejection fraction

          If you keep scrolling down, B-12 is one of the things they use (because it is one of the things, which are low and can cause the high homocysteine)

          http://www.ottoschulze.net/increase-cardio-ef.html

          They also do mention Omega 3, which if you weren’t doing Omega 3’s, which I sometimes don’t do, then, that could also have been the difference.

          That is theory #2 that I have.

          1. But theory # 2 would have been “I started eating fish”

            And you are saying meat eggs and cheese.

            I can’t think of any “Cheese healed diseases” studies. Eggs…,,I would have to look…, because the egg industry might have some, but the nurses study and another study even one egg per week increased mortality.

            So that leaves meat and even Keto people aren’t pushing animal protein as good for you. Thry push oils, which are on Macrobiotic anyway.

            So what is in meat that could help you and it will be B-12 or Taurine or both.

            1. Nope, I did find industry studies for both cheese and eggs.

              The studies were from China, which someone told me has all of their studies end in positive results.

              Industry studies work that way, too.

              The heart association said that eggs are fine if you eat them less than 3 times per week.
              Cheese, it was an ounce per day is good for some things.

              I haven’t examined the quality of the studies just that they were industry studies from China.

              1. The pro-egg and cheese and cholesterol and saturated fat studies are ones I would like covered on this site.

                the debates between Keto and Vegan are so fierce and watching Ryan and Mic debate the points is the most useful thing to me.

                the plant paradox video is one I have used over and over again and any videos bringing down Keto studies would help so much.

                I tried coconut oil with my dog tonight and he ate 2 bites and then started licking the floor to get it off his tongue. I felt the same way about it. I felt like I should try because of the KetoPet Sanctuary but he does not like it.

  19. Ma-Pi is a cult in Italy that has tried to get their cure-all diet supported for decades, at first and for a long duration claiming it was a cure for AIDs. I’m really surprised that the Dr. Greger team didn’t dig into this group enough to have a big red flag about the credibility of this study. The cult sells supplements and services as I understand it (from reading about it from the US) and has been trying to gain some validity for decades now. Additionally, the diet they used after the 3 weeks the participants were allowed to have fish up to 3x per week i.e. the results at 6 months weren’t even Vegan. I do not think this is a credible study as much as I would love to believe it’s true.

    1. The research studies the diet, not the cult. The “cult” did not conduct the research, so I’m not sure why you think the credibility of the studies should be in question?

      1. KB

        “Cult” is really a sensational a media term intende to denigrate the people concerned. Nevertheless, if you look at the authors of these studies, they include not just members of the “cult” but the actual leader of it. What is more, the funding for these studies also appears to have come from organisations controlled by or associated with the “cult”.

        I think that a certain amount of caution about the reported resuts might be wise.

        1. Thanks Tom. Did not realize the authors included members/leaders of the “cult”. In that case I concur caution is warranted. Thanks for clarifying

  20. “The falling guy says “I’m doing great! No problem at all!” Splat.”
    – – – – –

    I heard The Optimistic Joke many years ago. But in the version I heard, the guy assured all those looking out their windows as he sailed past their floors on the way down, “I’m all right SO far!”

  21. Any information on diabetes Type 1?
    It would be fantastic if Dr. Greger could look into the relationship between DM I and the power of food in restoring healthier bloodsugar levels!
    Thank you. …

  22. Hi, Gabriëlla Morroy! You can find everything on this site related to Type 1 Diabetes here: https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=type+1+diabetes
    DM 1 is more difficult to deal with than DM 2, because the beta cells of the pancreas are destroyed by an autoimmune reaction. Once they are gone, there does not appear to be any way to get them back. It may be possible to prevent it, however. I hope that helps!

  23. What is the relationship between the numbers please?
    Sometimes you talk in values of 5 to 12 and then you talk 100 to 120 – I find this very confusing.
    Really would appreciate a simple explanation of the comparison relativity.
    Thank you

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This