Allies Voice: Big Breasts and Evolution
How on Earth did researchers come-up with the premise for this study? Girls with big breasts are more prone to diabetes - two words that are more attention-grabbing than free and money.
According to the study by Canadian scientists - girls with big breasts at the age of 20 have a 68% higher chance of developing diabetes by the age of 35 than those who are less endowed (A-cup or smaller).
The poor researchers were subjected to studying breasts for 10 long years. They evaluated 92, 102 nurses throughout 14 states in the US. The nurses were evaluated for their link between breast size and the risk of developing diabetes later in life. Hands-down, larger breasts in the tender years confirmed a significantly higher risk for developing Type 2 diabetes.
Lest we not forget - Type 2 diabetes is different from Type 1 (autoimmune) by the road traveled to high blood sugar. This study alludes to the fact that higher body mass will result in the body resisting more calories from entering the cells (insulin resistance). Does this study take into consideration the nature of the function of breasts?
In women, breasts house the mammary glands. These are the organs that produce milk for the nourishment and development of the young. Does a larger breast size infer a greater number of milk producing cells? If so - does this not suggest that women with larger breasts might have a better chance of providing sustenance to their young? Therefore increasing the young's ability to survive the external circumstances of life?
Furthermore, let's break this down to the primative male impulses. Andre Cross of AskMen.com posed the question: does breast size matter? His position is this: Men are attracted to a woman's general appearance, but unfortunately for women...size does matter to most men. Andre also prefaces his question with the caveat: Even if a man doesn't agree, his friends will convince him by the end of the night that it does. There is an unwritten law among friends, that we don't let each other doubt that breast size is important.
Is the increased likelihood of developing diabetes an evolutionary adaptation?
Note: this is not one of my classier blogs, but the opportunity to discuss openly the importance of adaptation is of vital importance to the existence of mankind!
- Support "Allies Voice" and SUBSCRIBE - it's free!
- Canadian researchers find girls with big breasts are more prone to diabetes
- Wikipedia explains the function of the mammary glands
- Andre Cross of AskMen.com posed the question: does breast size matter?
- Please join me on TuDiabetes.com - A Community for People Touched by Diabetes
OMG! so that is my issue...now I can prepare my own daughter if she takes after me.....LOL....My breasts are vital to my survival with diabetes! WoW! It all makes sense now......
"I'm not trying to say men are simple" but they are....j/k! What MAN developed that study.....LOL
Hugs!
Reply to this
oh wait this if for type 2's....so maybe they need to study my butt cheek size or something different since I'm type 1...hummmmm......
Reply to this
Lol! This study is too funny. I read about it yesterday. I know the study says it is an independent risk factor, but the fact remains that a *good majority* of women with large natural breasts are overweight or obese. And the study indicates that breasts are mostly an extra source of...fat.
And we all know that overweight/obesity is cited as the major cause of the increase in T2DM.
The average bra size was 34B for years. Now it is 36C, largely thought to be due to growing waistlines.
Most people with A cup breasts are very thin. We know that *in general* thin people have a lower risk of T2DM.
Remember that high levels of estrogen increase breast size (within individual genetic limits). Perhaps abnormally high levels of estrogen account for obesity and insulin resistance. We know all 3 lead to a high risk of breast cancer.
In the US, perhaps this could be blamed on hormones in milk.
In Canada, it is illegal for milk to have either hormones or antibiotics as per Canadian law. If detected, the milk is destroyed and the farmer is fined.
Reply to this
P.S. Men only like large breasts if a women is thin. Large breasts on an obese person signals "unhealthy" for fertility(studies show men prefer a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.8 or less, with 0.7 as ideal).Proportion and shape (perky) also seem to matter more than size, unless a woman is very small.
Gotta love this study! Type 2's, you should be mad that research dollars for your cure are going to studies studying breasts! Boobs studying boobs! Lol!
Reply to this
Forgot to add...differences in breast size are generally due to fat and not glandular (milk producing) tissue. It doesn't seem like milk glands/ducts are linked to size. Milk production is not dependant on breast size, as per all the research I have seen.
Yay for boobies! Lol!
Reply to this
I'd like to Volunteer my Expert Services on this one Allie! I will leave no bOObies of any Size left behind in my Exhaustive Reasearch!!
If U need to contact me I can be reached at MAXIM + FHM Bikini Shoots for the next 3 Years*
Reply to this
Big breast carry more estrogen. I have always been b cup. Recent yrs some illnesses and hormonal imbalances, and I am a d cup....along with swollen abdomen and cysts. The same hormones that control lepitin and insulin.
Reply to this
Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) is a disorder linked with obesity, insulin resistance, and infertility.
Unfortunately, many with PCOS do develop Type 2 diabetes.
It's not an overally common cause of Type 2 diabetes, but it's not rare either. If it is PCOS that you have, has your doctor tried birth control pills? Apparently BCP are a primary treatment along with lifestyle changes to help keep at least some of the weight off.
You are definitely correct linking all of the above together.
It makes you wonder how many diseases (cancer, T2 diabetes) are caused by enodrine disruptors (toxins in the environment), hormones in food (the U.S. allows this), and other such factors.
Reply to this
Large breasts are also good to take a nap on if a pillow is not near by.
Have you dressed for the occasion of this Blog Entry Allie? lol
Reply to this
I'm going to have to have a serious talk with my boobies tonight about how they feel about this new study.
lol.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
Your comment on http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/17/allies-voice-is-gm-human-insulin-making-diabetes-chronic.aspx#comment-798691 fits perfectly with Allie’s “Big Breasts and Evolution” (Sorry Allie, I didn’t mean to say “Allie’s big breasts” )
What you are saying is that "because diabetes occurred BEFORE milk was first pasteurized, therefore "RAW milk" causes diabetes. What makes you propose that raw milk was ever the cause of diabetes? Just because diabetes occurred before the pasteurization process, it does not follow that raw milk was the cause. And how can you suggest that milk was not cooked before the pasteurization process? This was written about 3000 years ago: Exodus 23:19 ". . .You must not boil a kid (goat) in its mother's milk."
Milk was cooked in pagan times--- "Boiling a kid in its mothers milk was a pagan fertility practice of the locals, so the Israelites were forbidden to practice it..."http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071217065709AAVkiOL
You say you were weaned off of RAW breast milk at 6 months and diabetic at 24 months. What were you being fed just before AND just after you were diagnosed and what tests are documented in your medical records to prove that you were NOT a type 1 diabetic, but ACTUALLY a type 2 diabetic (www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/158/3/292.pdf) -- or that you just had 'diabetes-like' hyperglycemia caused by some distress (you mentioned that your hyperglycemia followed a VIRUS) -- hyperglycemia that was protecting your nervous system from relative-hypoglycemia-distress?
What results were recorded on your medical records at the time about your blood cells' sedimentation rate?
Did you read Gracey's comment a few days ago?
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/17/allies-voice-is-gm-human-insulin-making-diabetes-chronic.aspx#comment-791174
" DR SCHNITZER'S CURE FOR TYPE 1 DIABETES & TYPE 2 DIABETES...
> 0104 www.tinyurl.com/yrhksm [Dr Johann G Schnitzer ~ page 107 documents HOPE for millions of Diabetics to 'quickly upgrade' from type 1 to type 2 diabetes and subsequently remain GM insulin-free following that CURE for type 1 diabetes]. "
Paul Tubiana says: " Blood cells sedimentation rate. If the sedimentation rate is faster than normal, there must be an infection or inflammation in the body, triggering a higher blood sugar level. This excludes both types of diabetes as a cause. Unfortunately most physicians, even most "diabetologists", don't apply these diagnostic tools. Therefore, there's a permanent risk for every patient, to be misdiagnosed as type 1 or as a diabetic at all. "
According to the Schnitzer/Tubiana reference (above) and the Eisenbarth reference (www.tinyurl.com/3bqcm9) it is FAR more LIKELY that your beta cells 'autoimmunity downregulation' was/is caused by your insulin treatment and NOT eating RAW milk when you had an infection at age 24 months.
Saying 'RAW milk causes diabetes' is as unscientific as saying "Men only like large breasts if a women is thin".
Reply to this
Interesting topic. With my own twisted sence of humor, I think pictures would have been nice to go along with it. LOL
Thanx for reporting Allie
I wish you well
Robert
Reply to this
.
BEATTY SAYS BIGGER BREASTS & DIABETES ARE BENEFICIAL
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/2eo4xv [LoveDiabetes.com]
KENDRICK PROVES HIGHER CHOLESTEROL IS BENEFICIAL
> 0907 www.tinyurl.com/28b3vs [Malcolm@llp.org.uk]
SO WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF HEART DISEASE?
> 0701 www.tinyurl.com/2b87mp [Lawrence.Young@yale.edu]
CHANGE TYPE 1A TO TYPE 2 = HEALTHIER HEART?
Halle Berry CHANGED from a type 1A [insulin dependent + insulin antibodies (IA)] OR type 1B [insulin dependent - IA] Diabetic into type 2 [insulin in-dependent +/- IA] Diabetic.
... Who REALLY knows if Halle Berry previously had type 1 diabetes WITH or WITHOUT insulin antibodies? But she apparently really HAS "managed to wean" Herself off GM insulin. Perhaps a greater understanding of "Psycho-Neuro-Immunology" [PNI], "Brain-Protective-Insulin" [BPI] & "relative-HYPO-glycemia" are the keys to a potentially rapid Halle Berry like CURE for type 1A [insulin-dependent] diabetes?
http://www.DiabetesHealth.com/read/2007/11/02/5548.html
> www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoneuroimmunology
CAUSE OF DIABETES
Eating too OFTEN = Relative-HYPO-glycemia-distress = diabetes
3 LAYERS OF EVIDENCE
In the light of > Harry Salzer's 1966 "relative-HYPO-glycemia" & Neuro-Psychiatric research, Michael Dosch's 2006 "Psycho-Neuro-Immunology" [PNI] type 1A research AND >> George Eisenbarth's NEW 2008 "Auto-Immunity to Human beta-cell insulin" research >>> how reasonable NOW is the 2007 Gracey HYPO-thesis for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes(?)
> 0367 www.tinyurl.com/2uxb99 [Dr Allan Cott c/o Dr Harry M Salzer]
> 1206 www.tinyurl.com/2odurt [HMDosch@sickkids.ca ~ Dr Michael Dosch]
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/3bqcm9 [George.Eisenbarth@uchsc.edu]
> 1207 www.tinyurl.com/399utj ["The Gracey HYPO-thesis" / Relative-HYPO-glycemia DISTRESS ... the avoidable CAUSE of type 0 / 1B / 2 / 1.5 / 1A / 2A / 3 / 4 diabetes appears substantially identical ... Please study that HYPO-thesis link, very CAREfully, and communicate any genuine questions / positivising suggestions by email]
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) WED.30.JAN.2008 @ 23:40hrs c/o DiabetesHealth.com
"The Gracey HYPOthesis" for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/32z33w
CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd
CURED diabetes [relative-HYPOglycemia-distress]... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
Eat not less but less OFTEN... www.tinyurl.com/299t3f
Eating less OFTEN is profoundly more healthy than eating less... www.tinyurl.com/ys63gk
Eating too OFTEN sustains & CAUSES all diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2j7p3t
Diabetes is not a disease ... tinyurl.com/2uxb99 ... diabetes is the CURE...
... for relative-HYPOglycemia-distress ... www.tinyurl.com/36qxn3
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN...
http://www.DiabetesHealth.com/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE ... www.tinyurl.com/29kvda ... "I-Fast-23hours-45minutes-EveryDay-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
My questions is this what are the percentages of women who have large breast have diabetes and really does it matter. I think not. Again another study that proves nothing and goes no where and we are still suffering and waiting for a cure or for that matter insulin. Why not take that money and spend it on importing animal insulin to the United States to help all people and yes women with large breast for that matter with managing and dealing with this condition which in my opinion is no fun and a real pain to live with. Let's cut the crap out there and get some real solutions to our problems and have a study for a cure and a choice for the proper insulin. This is all that I am asking for. But, if you want to throw in some large breast well I guess I can't argue with that. Sorry I said that but come on people let's get real.
Reply to this
Like all autoimmune diabetics, I had positive antibodies at diagnosis and zero c-peptide. I never had a honeymoon phase, which I hear is common in early onset T1DM. I know I tested positive for at least one of the early antibody tests. More are used now. I was lucky to have one of the best pediatric endo's in the country (Dr. Heather Dean).
I also have autoimmune polyglandular syndrome, which means I have positive antibodies to my beta cells/islet cells, thyroid, and Celiac Disease. Yes, I have autoimmune diabetes. I also have a family history of MS, RA, and other autoimmune diseases. My diagnosis is quite clear and I do not dispute it. I wish I *did* have MODY or some other rare form.
Remember that studies show that antibodies occur in T1DM BEFORE clincial disease onset (and therefore insulin treatment).
Elevated SED rates indicate inflammation. They occur in the prescence of autoimmune disease, among other reasons. Yes, I have an elevated SED rate NOW, but I also have 3 autoimmune diseases and allergies. This is not surprising to me.
Can you explain to my why you think my insulin treatment would have caused my autoimmunity? I'm not saying that anything caused my diabetes for sure, only assuming a virus or milk based on what we know. There's no hard evidence that raw milk *doesn't* cause diabetes. We have no idea. It may or may not.
We know insulin is the antigen in T1. Central Nervous tissue is the antigen in Multiple Sclerosis. Cartilage and connective tissues become the target in other autoimmune diseases. But that alone doesn't support Gracey's theory. It just means that something in the environment that likely shares similar genetic makeup is causing the body to become confused and attack its own tissue, not the foreign protein. It's called "molecular mimicry".
If we can prove that the enzymes in the raw milk help break down the proteins in the gut so they are less harmful, then we have a case. Does this happen with raw milk? I don't know.
While it's nice to listen to some alternative sources, remember that they are only speculating too and they often make spectacular unproven claims. Dr. Mercola also says that Type 2 diabetes can (virtually) always be prevented and reversed. Bird54, unfortunately you know that this is not true.
I am not sure I understand this whole "relative hypoglycemia" thing. You see, blood sugar stays within a very narrow range in non-diabetics. Between 4-6 mmol/l at virtually all times. It may shoot up *slightly* to 7 or perhaps even 8 mmol/l after a high sugar meal, but not for very long. And it should not ever go higher than that. It would not remain elevated for long periods of time. So it is this small elevation and decrease that leads to "relative hypoglycemia" and beta cell death???
Am I understanding this correctly?
I will read Gracey's post.
Thanks.
Reply to this
P.S. What is meant by "upgrade" to Type 2 diabetes?
How is going from autoimmunity to insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes a good thing? I'm confused.
I don't have the genes for T2 as far as I know. No one in my family has it, even if they gained weight as they aged.
Wouldn't it make more sense for a cure to mean I don't have diabetes at all?
Please explain.
(Please don't use Halle Berry as an example, she is not a doctor and did not use the correct terminology to describe her disease based on what current medical doctors have said. There is no medical doctor who thinks that an autoimmune diabetic can "turn into" an entirely different disease, Type 2 (Insulin resistance)diabetes).
Reply to this
Also, please explain. If all people have fluctating blood sugars to some extent from eating, and many people have the genes for T1DM, why is T1DM such a rare disease? It only affects aboout 0.5% of the population.
Also, if milk is the trigger, it is easy to remove it to cure the disease (beta cell regeneration drugs may be needed). But if the cure is eating less often, how can you avoid the normal day to day spikes and dips that everyone experiences? Would the disease not return as soon as you eat a meal? What is the long term cure?
I don't understand this.
Reply to this
Read the article...some questions...
-This dentist assumes that the virus actually invades the beta cells themselves. This is not thought to be the case now, although many years ago it was. It is now thought that the virus likely acts by "molecular mimicry" or by somehow relating to the leaky gut. That said, anything is possible, and some cases of T1 may be caused by a virus directly. Perhaps Fullminant Diabetes or other "idiopathic" forms?
-Yes, the body IS designed to fight infections, but it does not always win! Who here has NEVER gotten the flu or a cold? Both viruses have been linked as *possible* triggers in T1DM.
-He says that "modern medicine" disables the immune response. But he is talking about VIRUSES, which no doctor in their right mind would prescibe antibiotics for! Antibiotics fight bacterial infections, not viruses!!!!
-I have no idea about what people with autoimmune disease should eat. One person says a meat based diet with little to no grains or legumes, and this guy advocates a "plant diet" filled with gluten. While some claim Atkins "cures" T2, this guy claims protein CAUSES diabetes complications. You can't win with these "alternative" types. This is exactly why no one takes them seriously. It seems like they try all hypothesis, hoping to one day hit a jackpot based on unproven theories. They mean well, though, I get that.
-I'm wary of people who promote unproven treatments like homeopathy. Homeopathy is NOT without side-effects. I know of at least one little girl who died because her mother tried to treat her diabetes using homeopathy instead of her insulin. She went into a preventable diabetic coma and died in 3 days. Is death a side effect? Perhaps.
-To give him credit, this guy DOES acknowlegde that T1 is "not so easy to cure". I can only assume any cases of "T1" that actually were "cured" were misdiagnosed thin Type 2's, MODY's, Kir.6's, or Type 1b's. I doubt he even is aware of these forms that often present as T1.
-Also, this Dr. is mistakenly thinking that adult T2's who use insulin are now called "Type 1". They are not "Type 1". Actually, adults who develop true Type 1 diabetes simply have a slow onest version of childhood diabetes. The pathology of the disease is the same (autoimmunity).
I already take very little insulin. But I am anything but cured. My blood sugar will shoot up from 6 mmol/l to 17 mmol/ in minutes for no preventable reason. You can't avoid nor predict hormones, stress, illness, factor x, all which cause swings in blood sugars. It's very frustrating! I hate it when people think that "less insulin" means anything like a "cure". It really doesn't in terms of my daily care or disease. I am still just as diabetic! I'm thin and do not seem to have the genes for insulin resistance (Type 2). So I need very little insulin...but I am just as severely diabetic! If my basal rate on my pump is not set at EXACTLY 0.5. units per hour (fasting insulin), then I am severely out of range.
Reply to this
Type 1 site (the original article had little on autoimmune T1):
http://www.doc-schnitzer.com/diabetes-secrets-expl.html
Reply to this
Just for the record...I obviously had no mercury fillings as a baby (a "risk factor" as this dentist claims).
I also have none as an adult. I have only had 3 cavities, and they were all filled with the white ("tooth colored") filling (plastic resin? Porcelain?).
Reply to this
Composite
Reply to this
Must clarify, I meant to say "most", not "all" autoimmune diabetics.
Reply to this
Sorry, but one more dumb question...if pasturization (heat)denatures the proteins in milk (but not enough to allow people with milk allergies to consume it), wouldn't LESS milk protein be better than more? And raw would have more intact protein, right, making it worse for consumption?
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-801487
"Like all autoimmune diabetics, I had positive antibodies at diagnosis and zero c-peptide."
Which antibodies were you "positive" for and how do you know to what degree the 'antibodies' were positive i.e. what were the numbers (Juvenile Diabetes Foundation units)? People can have insulin, islet cell antibodies and other related antibodies and remain totally free from any diabetes. All those islet cell-related antibodies are just 'risk factors' for Type 1 Diabetes, NOT proof of diabetes. Lots of research has been done to assess the risk and that research is far from conclusive.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/n287356012q64852
The islet cell antibodies may well be protective as suggested by Gracey in his extraordinary comment:
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/22/allies-voice-could-delta-force-explain-diabetes.aspx#comment-787097
Just because you may have had one related antibody, it doesn’t mean that you were destined to have diabetes. That appears to have been perpetuated by the insulin treatment as suggested by Eisenbarth recent new research (www.tinurl.com/3bqcm9)
You stated in an earlier comment that you developed diabetes suddenly after a virus. It is very hard to believe that you had "zero" c-peptide i.e. a complete and utter shut down of ALL beta cell insulin at the very start of being diagnosed for the first time, especially when you say your mom had been regularly testing your blood glucose before the 'sudden' diagnosis. Do you have some evidence that any c-peptide test was done correctly, if at all? Allie has pointed out the errors that can occur. Do you have any documentation of the type of c-peptide test actually mentioned so that you can refer to the evidence of what you are alleging with actual c-peptide number scores?
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/09/allies-voice-have-you-been-stimulated.aspx
And just one other question relating to Allie's (Big Breast) blog: If size matters in the evolution of humans and the development of diabetes as a beneficial adaptation, how would you rate your mother’s size before she was pregnant with you?
If big breasts relate to hyperglycemia… then it would follow that a mother who is small breasted would therefore predispose a child to relative hypoglycemia-distress ... and type 1A diabetes.
Reply to this
I feel like you are attacking me with what sounds like (to me) absurd and unproven alternative theories and claims. Like it or not, I have autoimmune Type 1. My mother has T1DM. My grandfather and his brother had T1DM. Every person one one side of my family has an autoimmune disease. My aunt is paralyzed, blind in one eye, and on a feeding tube from primary- progressive MS. She cannot speak. She was in a wheelchair at 23. I don't care if you believe me or not, this is the truth. I don't visit her because I hate knowing my family has such bad genes from an evolutionary standpoint. It is too sad to watch. I am glad none of my relatives from that side have reproduced.
I also have 2 other autoimmune diseases myself. It is not uncommon for T1DM, Celiac, and Hashimoto's to cluster.
Why is it so hard to understand that I have plain old autoimmune diabetes? It's not novel, it's not spectacular, and it's not interesting. Plain old autoimmune T1DM. Based on my test results and family history, I'm not sure why this is a surprise. I don't know why there is any reason to dispute my current theory on what explains autoimmune diseases in favor of any other theory.
And it is NOT unheard of for those diagnosed very young to have acute onset cases with zero c-peptide.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16731854?ordinalpos=5&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Some forms of "Fulminant" diabetes may be autoimmune in nature. Fulminant diabetes simply describes cases in which onset is rapid (days), with no detectable or very low c-peptide upon presentation. The patient almost always presents in severe DKA.
I will have to apply to the hospital clinic I attended to get my medical records. This may take months, and there is a chance they may have been destroyed. Remember that I was diagnosed 24 years ago this year. I have called once and asked about them. You are legally entitled to them, but they will investigate to find out why you want them. I plan on doing this for other reasons, but the fact is, simply put, I have autoimmune T1.
As for breast size, yes, my mom was an A cup. But realize that she was a ballet dancer, who was 4'11 and anorexic. It was disgusting. I can post a picture if you'd like. I have no idea what her natural "genetically determined" breast size is.
Now, she is fat (120 lbs) and a D cup. It's disgusting. She says she looks like an ape. Lol! She tried to apply for a breast reduction, but they won't take her because of her Congestive Heart and Kindey Failure from diabetes.
The horrible genetics in this family...
Reply to this
We should add this to the long-standing list of "dumb diabetes research", of which there are far too many studies. This, along with such studies conducted over the years as "Lifestyle Intervention Is Associated With Lower Prevalence of Urinary Incontinence: The Diabetes Prevention Program" and "Short legs related to excess weight and diabetes". The research industry has pissed away millions on these idiotic studies, and what do we have to show for them? If I had patience and energy to track these, we could always hold an awards banquet at the ADA scientific sessions (to be held in a hotel next door) and award the winners a packet of Sweet and Low, which describes the purpose of these studies!!
Reply to this
Scott--
You are SO-O-O on point. I believe these specious "studies" identified as "scientific research" have drained money from credible scientists, and garnered NOTHING! It would be interesting, if you decide to use your patience and energy to track these studies, to see how many were funded, or partially funded, by advocacy-group donations and taxpayer dollars. The distraction of these kinds of studices and misuse of dwindling research dollars makes my blood boil.
As Glenn said, above, monies would be better spent on providing access to animal insulins or lobbying, at least, for freedom of choice.
Reply to this
Sarah--
I'm so old, I never even had a doctor recommend an antibody test, a SED rate test, or any of the things you are talking about relative to insulin and functional diabetes control. I know the Deep South is the backwoods of the medical profession, but I'm having a hard time sorting out what is primary cause-and-effect from the discussion. Raw milk, in the past, was a suspected cause possibly because of the various contaminants or because of the dawn of increased milk production via hormones. I would still suspect that the immune system compromise involves an active microbial or viral or other submicroscopic entity which is toxic/parasitic only because proper biologic pathways have been compromised at the same time a "trigger" has been engaged.
Show me a scientist who is willing to look at the surrounding events that are part of the "history" of thousands of Type 1's, looking for commonality, and is willing to put forth a theory in a population of susceptible patients and observe outcomes based on manipulation of considered important events. An answer could be as simple as not receiving enough Vitamin D from sunlight (during the fall and winter) when some of the more virulent strains of virus seem to thrive.
Reply to this
I agree with you 100%. I think T1DM is caused by at least 2 triggers (a virus and a food protein) in the presence of facilitating factors (lack of vitamin D, Omega 3 EFA, excess "bad" bacteria in the gut" etc.) The point of entry appears to be the "leaky gut" according to recent research.
What's frustrating is that we seem to have so much information, and yet little progress on preventing, treating, and "curing" Type 1 diabetes.
Actually, my former doctor is doing a study on T1DM and Vitamin D. There is loads of research in this area now. Also, there is the TRIGR study, which is studying to see if breaking down milk proteins (hydrolyzing) in infant formula will reduce the risk of T1DM in infants whose mothers choose not to breastfeed. The study includes only children at risk for T1 based on a family history and genetic screening. We'll see what they find.
My question is, what the heck has taken so damn long to test this?
I agree there is so much "dumb diabetes research out there". Especially for Type 1. Diabetics makes the perfect lab rats of perpetual funding. However, I don't agree with you on "diabetes prevention studies" when it comes to Type 2 diabetes. Type 1 yes, since we never get anywhere with those (oral insulin, inhaled insulin, vitamin B3, etc. We'll see how the milk and Vitamin D studies pan out.) But time and time again, studies show that Type 2 diabetes is largely preventable, in the vast majority of cases. It's so obvious that a healthy lifestyle keeps T2 at bay, but some people really NEED to see the obvious in a scientific study before they believe it. For Type 2 diabetes, a healthy diet, weight control/loss, and at least 1 hour of exercise daily can prevent or at least delay the vast majority of cases.
Don't worry about the SED rate test, this was only done on me because I was having swelling in my joints and they were doing a Rheumatoid Arthritis panel. This was when I was 18.
Vitamin D study:
http://www.diabetesadvocacy.com/canadian_studies.htm
Reply to this
.
Dear Dr Joel G Ray [22:50hrs THU.31.JAN.2008] re Breast size and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus...
Hi Joel, this email is in relation to your recent research...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/2bfv97 [RayJ@smh.toronto.on.ca]
Allison Love Beatty of has done a video interpreting your work in a reasonably novel way...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/2eo4xv [LoveDiabetes.com]
The interpretation is that type 2 diabetes is an evolutionary advantage and that Those predisposed to 'beneficial hyperglycemia' are better endowed to procreate and breast feed.
My own thorough review of the research has yet to find any research with an UNdrugTREATED control Group that suggests that insulin resistance & type 2 diabetes is anything other than an evolutionary advantage.
What is your opinion on this?
Your research may well prove to be extraordinarily valuable to supporting this notion.
The initial stages of type 1 diabetes appear to progress via a protective 'insulin resistance phase'...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/3dze9q [Polly.Bingley@bristol.ac.uk (IRT1DM) > following protective down-regulation of beta-cell-insulin secretion (HYPO-insulinemia) >> protection from relative-HYPOglycemia distress >>> "...insulin resistance accelerates..." >>>> increasing protection from relative-HYPOglycemia-distress >>>>> to help SLOW and prevent the progression to type 1A diabetes...'].
Any comments upon these ideas and/or my HYPO-thesis in relation to the CAUSE of diabetes would be most appreciated...
> 1207 www.tinyurl.com/399utj ["The Gracey HYPO-thesis" / Relative-HYPO-glycemia DISTRESS ... the avoidable CAUSE of type 0 / 1B / 2 / 1.5 / 1A / 2A / 3 / 4 diabetes appears substantially identical ... Please study that HYPO-thesis link, very CAREfully, and communicate any genuine questions / positivising suggestions by email]
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) THU.31.JAN.2008 @ 23:14hrs c/o DiabetesHealth.com
"The Gracey HYPOthesis" for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/32z33w
CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd
CURED diabetes [relative-HYPOglycemia-distress]... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
Eat not less but less OFTEN... www.tinyurl.com/299t3f
Eating less OFTEN is profoundly more healthy than eating less... www.tinyurl.com/ys63gk
Eating too OFTEN sustains & CAUSES all diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2j7p3t
Diabetes is not a disease ... tinyurl.com/2uxb99 ... diabetes is the CURE...
... for relative-HYPOglycemia-distress ... www.tinyurl.com/36qxn3
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN...
http://www.DiabetesHealth.com/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE ... www.tinyurl.com/29kvda ... "I-Fast-23hours-45minutes-EveryDay-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
I just read Gracey's post on Diabetes Health. The study was very interesting.
Gracey said,
"SO WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF HEART DISEASE?
> 0701 www.tinyurl.com/2b87mp [Lawrence.Young@yale.edu]"
The study stated that with injected insulin, the cardiac output increased.
When I had gestational diabetes, they put me on insulin therapy. Every morning before breakfast, I injected a mix of fast and slow acting insulin. Aferwards, I could feel my heart race. I remember taking my pulse and it went from 70 to 130. I told the nurse and she said it was probably a panic attack, but I didn't think so because it happened as the result of the insulin injections.
Reply to this
some nurses can be so stupid, can't they?
I think it's widely accepted that high levels of insulin and sudden surges in insulin and/or swings in blood glucose will increase cardiac output.
On the rare occassion where I have to inject more than 3 units in the course of an hour to cover a meal, I also notice the exact same symtpoms as you. It's very uncomfortable.
It's been noticed many times that diabetes affects cardiac function. It was suggested in this study (and others) that diabetes causes subclinical changes to heart function and adaptation. Type 1 diabetics are at an increased risk of sudden cardiac death from both acute hypo and hyperglycemia (15 mmol/l or greater). Both have been shown to cause a long QT wave, along with other changes.
Other studies have also noted that the sympathetic response (i.e. an increase in heart rate)seems to be favored in Type 1 diabetics. Whether this is do to autonomic nerve damage from the diabetes or something else is not clear.
It is also possible that the reason why the response of diabetics in one of the tests was delayed because the body has adpated more so to hypoglycemia. In non-T1 diabetics, injected insulin would likely cause a much more "prompt" repsonse.
People who are overweight and/or have "reactive hypoglycemia" also tend to notice an increase in cardiac output after high carb meals for the same reasons...an increase in insulin levels. They often get that "smacked with a brick" feeling shortly after, with all the symptoms of hypoglycemia.
All I can say is that diabetes affects the entire body, and this is why a cure is needed ASAP.
I have even heard that there is some evidence to suugest that heart disease in Type 1 diabetics is autoimmune in some cases. Even more reason for a cure of autoimmunity.
Reply to this
.
Dear Professor Polly J Bingley [23:23hrs FRI.01.FEB.2008] re Insulin Resistance and Progression to Type 1 Diabetes...
Hi Polly, this email is in relation to your recent research as related to Dr Joel Ray's findings re Breast size and risk of Insulin Resistance and Progression to Type 2 Diabetes...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/2bfv97 [RayJ@smh.toronto.on.ca].
Allison Love Beatty of has done a video interpreting Dr Ray's work in a reasonably novel way...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/2eo4xv [LoveDiabetes.com].
The interpretation is that 'Insulin Resistance' is an evolutionary advantage and that Those predisposed to beneficial 'compensatory HYPER-Glycemia' are better endowed to procreate and breast feed.
My own reasonable thorough review of the research has yet to find any research, including an UNdrugTREATED control Group, that suggests that insulin resistance & type 2 diabetes is anything other than an evolutionary advantage.
What is your opinion on this?
Your 'insulin resistance research' may well prove to be extraordinarily valuable to supporting this notion.
The initial stages of type 1 diabetes appears to progress via a similar protective 'insulin resistance phase' which is only occasionally 'overloaded' into type 1A diabetes...
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/3dze9q [Polly.Bingley@bristol.ac.uk (IRT1DM) > following protective down-regulation of beta-cell-insulin secretion (HYPO-insulinemia) >> protection from relative HYPO-Glycemia-Distress >>> "...insulin resistance accelerates..." >>>> increasing protection from relative HYPO-Glycemia-Distress >>>>> to help SLOW and prevent the progression to type 1A diabetes...'].
Any comments upon these ideas and/or my HYPO-thesis in relation to the CAUSE of diabetes would be most appreciated...
> 1207 www.tinyurl.com/399utj ["The Gracey HYPO-thesis" / relative HYPO-Glycemia-Distress ... the avoidable CAUSE of type 0 / 1B / 2 / 1.5 / 1A / 2A / 3 / 4 diabetes appears substantially identical].
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) FRI.01.FEB.2008 @ 23:23hrs c/o DiabetesHealth.com
"The Gracey HYPOthesis" for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/32z33w
CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd
CURED diabetes [relative-HYPOglycemia-distress]... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
Eat not less but less OFTEN... www.tinyurl.com/299t3f
Eating less OFTEN is profoundly more healthy than eating less... www.tinyurl.com/ys63gk
Eating too OFTEN sustains & CAUSES all diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2j7p3t
Diabetes is not a disease ... tinyurl.com/2uxb99 ... diabetes is the CURE...
... for relative-HYPOglycemia-distress ... www.tinyurl.com/36qxn3
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN...
http://www.DiabetesHealth.com/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE ... www.tinyurl.com/29kvda ... "I-Fast-23hours-45minutes-EveryDay-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-801487
" I am not sure I understand this whole "relative hypoglycemia" thing. You see, blood sugar stays within a very narrow range in non-diabetics. "
THAT IS -- WHY -- THEY ARE 'NON-DIABETICS'.
Reply to this
Yes, but all diabetics (aisde from those with neonatal diabetes) are "non-diabetics" first. What triggers this sudden change? To make a person suddenly diabetic?
Reply to this
I wanted to correct something you said ... I don't know if someone has beat me to it or not, you have a lot of comments to this post :o)
BREAST SIZE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AMOUNT OF MILK PRODUCED. Though it will effect the amount of milk a mom can store until a feeding:
http://www.kellymom.com/bf/supply/milk production.html
Scroll down to where it says "storage capacity.
Sorry for shouting, I just wanted that comment to stand out.
Kellymom.com is a great site on breastfeeding, I get a lot of my information from them.
Great blog, very informative. Keep up the great work!
Reply to this
Hi Monica,
Please note that most mothers [ie mothers outside of 'western bottle culture'] breast feed for more than 4 years and often 2 or more children ... SO OF COURSE BIGGER JUGS STORE MORE MILK AND ARE A MASSIVE GENETIC ADVANTAGE
"Storage capacity: Another factor that affects milk production and breastfeeding management is mom's milk storage capacity. Storage capacity is the amount of milk that the breast can store between feedings. This can vary widely from mom to mom and also between breasts for the same mom. Storage capacity is not determined by breast size, although breast size can certainly limit the amount of milk that can be stored. Moms with large or small storage capacities can produce plenty of milk for baby. A mother with a larger milk storage capacity may be able to go longer between feedings without impacting milk supply and baby's growth. A mother with a smaller storage capacity, however, will need to nurse baby more often to satisfy baby's appetite and maintain milk supply since her breasts will become full (slowing production) more quickly."
Reply to this
Hi Bird54,
A "massive genetic advantage" ... is that a pun? Pretty funny, intentional or not, LOL
Actually more room in a woman's breasts for milk storage is not necessarily a big advantage. This is true especially in the example you presented. Women outside "Western bottle culture" are more likely to keep their nursing children either at their side, or more likely tied to them in a sling. A baby in a sling can be maneuvered around so they can feed while mom is doing other things. So longer storage time would not be a factor at all.
Having more "storage" would benefit Western women that go back into the workforce though.
I stayed home and exclusively breastfed my daughter until the age of 2 1/2, shortly after she was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-801544
"I'm thin and do not seem to have the genes for insulin resistance (Type 2). So I need very little insulin...but I am just as severely diabetic! "
-- So to be LESS "severely diabetic" you need to be MORE insulin resistant -- which is exactly what is proposed by the Gracey HYPO-thesis (www.tinyurl.com/399utj) eg please read this link which interprets GIR verses hypo-insulinemia (reduced insulin production) both competing to help slow progression of type 1a 'severity'. Surely you can understand how GIR is more efficient at preserving beta-cells (eg in type 2 diabetes before treating with hypoglycemic drugs). GIR appears to be the primary defense against relative hypo-glycemia-distress. Hypo-insulinemia, ie down-regulation of beta cell mass by progressive islet cell autoimmunity, is likely the secondary defense against relative hypo-glycemia-distress--
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/17/allies-voice-is-gm-human-insulin-making-diabetes-chronic.aspx#comment-780741
" WHY DO 'INSULIN RESISTANCE' aka GIR
~ vs ~ HYPO-INSULINEMIA PREDICT TYPE 1A ?
> 0108 www.tinyurl.com/3dze9q [Polly.Bingley@bristol.ac.uk (IRT1DM) > following protective down-regulation of beta-cell-insulin secretion (HYPO-insulinemia) >> protection from relative-HYPOglycemia distress >>> "...insulin resistance accelerates..." >>>> increasing protection from relative-HYPOglycemia-distress >>>>> to help SLOW and prevent the progression to type 1A diabetes...']. "
-- The type 2 down-regulation of beta cell mass by progressive islet cell autoimmunity, also appears to be a secondary defense against relative hypo-glycemia-distress, and is likely to be what is going on when unscientific 'leaky gut' type terminology references are made with terms like 'beta cell burn out' --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-805436
Reply to this
Please forgive my questions. I am not trying to attack, I am just attempting to understand. I know everything is clear to you, but you already in your mind have accepted this theory as fact, and view everything as supporting it as such.
So does insulin resistance slow down or accelerate autoimmune Type 1 diabetes? I thought the articles Gracey has posted (i.e. the "Accelerator Hypothesis") imply that insulin resistance speeds up the disease? And causes more complications (i.e. "Double Diabetes")? You can't have both...?
If the articles that Gracey posted are correct, and there is some degree of insulin resistance in at least *some* Type 1 cases (possibly secondary to autoimmunity/inflammation/infection), then do Type 1 diabetics not have ENOUGH insulin resistance?
Insulin resistance in my opinion is NOT a good thing. It is not an evolutionary advantage anymore in today's world. It is a throw back that may start to die out with this generation and the next. Maybe it was beneficial thousands of years ago when labor was hard and food scarce. But now, the thin people without insulin resistance are going to outlive everyone as the obese, Type 2 diabetics, and overweight die out from heart attacks, strokes, complications from undiagnosed and untreated diabetes, and some forms of cancer. You can find many studies linking insulin resistance to cancer and heart disease.
Not everything IS an evolutionary advantage if we treat it, I agree there. The proper thing to do would be to let people afflicted with these diseases in our modern environment die out. People have always gotten sick from gene/environment interaction diseases throughout history. If they died, it was good old natural selection. By treating diabetics, we are altering this. Obviously this cannot be put into practice, but its something to think about. Survival of the fittest...for the current environment.
How does Gracey's theory work when a Type 1 diabetic's blood sugars bounce around all day long from factors OTHER THAN FOOD (high and low), and without fasting insulin and extra insulin corrections for high blood sugar, they will go into a coma and die?
What is the answer for all of this? I mean, it's a novel concept (although the leaky gut is NOT "scientifically unproven"..look it up), but how does this apply in the "real world", where it is clear that any kind of special diet or fasting alone does not cure Type 1a diabetes?
What if the cause of Type 1 diabetes is a virus that still lives dormant in the body...but still is enough to keep the autoimmuny sustainable? Would the disease not be cured until the virus is removed?
Evidence suggest that a gluten free, lectin free, milk free, potato free, soy free, and raw food diet may HELP reduce insulin needs (not a cure, and not necessarily an improvement in quality of life), if combined with Vitamin D, NAG, probiotics, and Omega 3 EFA.
But what is the next step?
Reply to this
Hi Sarah, you say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-806875
"You can find many studies linking insulin resistance to cancer and heart disease."
Why do you assume?
I can find NONE where there are no drug effects involved.
Please identify one where you can prove that what you allege is NOT the result of drug effects.
Which study are you referring to?
Reply to this
Instead of attacking my responses, I would appreciate the answers to my questions. Reagrdless, here you go:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18078144?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17716297?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17914105?ordinalpos=18&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18239592?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18224460?ordinalpos=6&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16489319?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18220645?ordinalpos=11&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Please forgive me if any of these posts say these studies only apply to diagnosed Type 2 diabetics on medication, I did not see drugs mentioned in any of the studies. From my understanding, most of these people were screened, found to have undiagnosed or untreated Metabolic Disorders, and included in these studies.
I know Gracey keeps saying what you are asking, but this is HIS view of the world. Whether it makes sense or not in the real world is another story.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
Can you find ONE reference to support your allegation about insulin resistance in the absence of drug effects—-one--not a whole list of pub med search results of patients suffering from drug effects who may be defending their body against relative-hypoglycemia-distress with insulin resistance?
Reply to this
Hi Bird54,
I'm not sure how one could confirm that at least some of these study participants were unmediated, I would need the full report instead of the abstract. I did not see anything to imply they were. I am sorry to not have access to that (I believe it is a pay for service, but I could be wrong).
However, I don't think we should jump to conclusions and assume they were all medicated either. Not all people with insulin resistance are medicated.
Unmedicated children with Primary Hypertension, and previously undiagnosed Metabolic Syndrome:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17679036?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16054458?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16054458?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1
It would appear as though these patients are not being treated (i.e. prior to diabetes):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17953765?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Sorry for posting 3.
As for the previously posted studies, I am not sure if there is any reason to think that people with insulin resistance but not diabetes are routinely medicated. What medication were you started on prior to your diabetes onset? Metformin? What are the side effects from Metformin? Are you saying that you think that complications are caused by the medication and not the disease? I don't think that makes sense, because undiagnosed and untreated Type 2 diabetics are the ones who suffer severe complications. It is not uncommon for an undiagnosed T2 diabetic to find out they have diabetes after their first heart attack. If it is true that insulin resistance leads to hypertension, one can infer than this often progresses to a heart attack (and often T2 diabetes):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16054458?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16054458?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3799239?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You said, “Not all people with insulin resistance are medicated.”
Almost everyone is medicated these days-- Physicians prescribe drugs for almost everything i.e. blood pressure, cholesterol, colds, viruses-- and children are routinely vaccinated, filling their bodies with foreign agents. In addition, non-prescription drugs i.e. pain medications and cold remedies are frequently used by most people.
Who can say what causes cancer and heart disease? How can you suggest that un-drug-treated diabetes causes cancer and heart disease when non-diabetics get these diseases too?
You said, “I don't think that makes sense, because undiagnosed and untreated Type 2 diabetics are the ones who suffer severe complications.”
DRUG-TREATED DIABETICS SUFFER HEART ATTACKS--The drug, Avandia, which about 1 million Americans take to keep their blood sugar at safe levels, boosts the risk of a heart attack by 43 percent and may increase the risk of dying from a heart attack or stroke by 64 percent, the analysis found." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052100558.html
You said, “It is not uncommon for an undiagnosed T2 diabetic to find out they have diabetes after their first heart attack.”
That’s because heart attacks CAUSE diabetes—“People without diabetes were more than twice as likely to get diabetes within five years after their first heart attack than those who never had a heart attack.” http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-research/summaries/pajunen-diabetes-heartattack.jsp)
Reply to this
Sorry, but you sound brainwashed by the unscientific "natural" community. They want to sell products too. None of what you say makes any sense!
You ASKED for studies saying that insulin resistance INCREASES the risk of cancer and heart disease. I provided that. It definitely increases risk.
By saying that drug treated diabetics suffer heart attacks (from only a particular medication), that does NOT negate the fact that untreated diabetes causes diabetes complications and disease.
The reason why you think "heart attacks cause diabetes" is because you are not understanding that insulin resistance leads to both heart attacks and diabetes. If you have insulin resistance, your risk for a heart attack is higher. It is not uncommon for these people to go on to get diabetes.
Reply to this
Sorry, I hope this did not sound like I am attacking you, I just want us to all explore alternative theories without assuming that modern medicine is all bad. I know we live in a toxic environment, but there is more to it than that.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You said, ..."you already in your mind have accepted this theory as fact..."
Actually, Gracey’s HYPO-thesis [www.tinyurl.com/399utj] is not a theory but a hypothesis, and a hypothesis needs to be tested first to become a theory. And it is my *opinion* that in my experience it works for me.
Reply to this
Sorry, yes, you are correct. Semantics, my fault.
Yes, I also feel that the vast majority cases of T2 diabetes can be controlled with diet changes, exercise, and weight loss. I was always under the impression that fasting can increase insulin resistance and weight gain in the long run, because the body thinks it's starving (i.e. "yo-yo" dieters).
But studies do support fasting for the treatment of T2. Does this not support Gracey?:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16051710?ordinalpos=10&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Reply to this
Hi Sarah, you say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-802577
" ...if pasturization (heat)denatures the proteins in milk (but not enough to allow people with milk allergies to consume it), wouldn't LESS milk protein be better than more? And raw would have more intact protein, right, making it worse for consumption? "
What standard are you referring to that suggests that if a protein is denatured enough it is fit for consumption by someone with allergies. You seem to be suggesting that, for someone with a peanut protein allergy, really well roasted peanuts would be safer for consumption than raw peanuts AND using that suggestion to back up your 'zero evidence whatsoever' proposal that 'RAW milk causes diabetes' ... both of which proposals are even more unscientific than your saying a few days ago -- "Men only like large breasts if a women is thin".
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-800139
The Gracey HYPO-thesis (www.tinyurl.com/399utj) states: "--Diabetes is caused by eating too OFTEN which ... reduces liver 'digestion efficiency' ... Eating also causes inflammation [due to various food intolerances associated with an inefficient liver function]. Diabetes is a protective cycle that can be controlled and/or CURED, as required, by intermittent-fasting [which also increases liver 'digestion efficiency'] and intermittent-eating of minimally allergenic foods. "
In his reference section Gracey states: "--CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu " and clearly advocates '100% RAW JUICE' "--efficiently builds increased muscle mass. A fast way [in my opinion] to achieve that is ... one meal a day [or less] of EXCLUSIVELY "fresh organic raw liquidiet nutrition" of minimally allergenic juicy water-rich foods [EG fruits / vegetables / raw egg yolks]. Modern technology makes this possible & sustainable. Vast quantities can be enjoyably 'eaten' within 15 minutes "
Food allergies and autoimmune reactions BOTH appear to be made worse by cooked foods. Grains are all cooked. Milk is pasteurized. Nuts are roasted. Dr. Bernstein and all the others say NOT to drink milk because lactose is a simple sugar and spikes your blood sugar. Following Gracey's logic I started 'eating less OFTEN' and 1 meal a day. GUESS WHAT? I can drink a pint of RAW milk and it does NOT raise my blood sugar! Bernstein also noted that cooked carrots (and vegetables) raise blood sugar more than raw veggies. I can drink a pint of RAW, freshly squeezed vegetable/fruit juice and it has absolutely NO EFFECT on my blood sugar. In my opinion, now that I eat less OFTEN, my liver can now absorb ALL of this 'RAW liquidiet nutrition' without hardly any 'overspill' of glucose (or allergenic cooked food particles) into my bloodstream.
ARE YOU STILL EATING COOKED FOODS?
Reply to this
1.) Please re-read what I wrote. I said no such thing. I clearly stated that those with milk allergy must avoid ALL forms of milk. All I said was that if milk protein was denatured/destroyed there would be less of the presumably allergenic protein, that's all.
Don't get me wrong. I am primarily a pesco-ovo vegetarian. I try to eat mostly organic (although this is not proven to be healthier). I mostly eat raw, about 70% of my diet. I fast quite often for long periods of time. But...
Let's not jump the gun on Raw Milk being any better than pasteurized milk. If it is a specific milk protein that is somehow linked to T1 as a direct or secondary cause, raw or pasteurized milk may make no difference. While it may or may not be true that raw milk enzymes help the leaky gut via natural probiotics in raw milk, or active enzymes help break down betacasein, the fact is there is no evidence that raw milk does NOT cause T1. If is entirely possible that a certain milk protein from ANY source is a trigger.
Betacasein A1 as specific protein from specific cows involved in T1DM:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv/1455.html">http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv/1455.html
There are quite a few studies and sources available on the web regarding this.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv/1455.html">http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv/1455.html
I personally don't feel that there is enough evidence to suggest that raw milk is even safe (in most cases), or offers an benefit or protection from disease:
http://www.bchealthguide.org/healthfiles/hfile03.stm
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/rawmilk.html
In general terms, (white) men DO like large breasts primarily on thin women. Men prefer a Waist to Hip ratio of less than 0.8, optimum is 0.7
This HAS been shown in actual scientific studies. A woman with large breasts AND a large waist looks pregnant, and like she carries large amounts of male hormones. This is often the case in T2 diabetics and those with causes of infertility such as PCOS/insulin resistance. As men generally want a fertile and healthy women, is only makes sense that overweight women are generally not seen as attractive, despite large breasts.
One can only speculate why some men (i.e. blacks) tend to like overweight women, it may be tied into the same genes that tend to make them T2 diabetics ("Thrifty genes" for survival). This is my own speculation here, of course.
You can research this more with more scientific studies, but Wikipedia explains it very simply and best (although I don't normally use this resource).
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You said, “I personally don't feel that there is enough evidence to suggest that raw milk is even safe (in most cases), or offers an benefit or protection from disease…”
Check out Organic Pastures (raw milk) in Fresno, CA. They test their milk for safety and post the results on the internet. They do have Jersey cows (A2).
http://www.organicpastures.com
“A growing wealth of information exists on the benefits and political issues of raw dairy products. Below is a partial list of reliable references.
1. Dr. Weston A. Price and Dr. Francis J. Pottenger, www.westonaprice.org and www.price-pottenger.org
2. Reducing the Body's Enzyme Depletion
3. Weston A. Price Foundation's Campaign for Real Milk
4. Natural Life Magazine's Bovine Growth Hormones
5. CCOF (California Certified Organic Farmers)
6. Stephen Byrnes, ND, RNCP, Why Butter is Better
7. Anna Soref, Natural Foods Merchandiser Culturing Taste & Tradition with Raw Milk Cheese
8. Dr. Chuck Meece's Nature's Blueprint
9. Dr. Joseph Mercola, author of the Total Health Program (or visit his website at www.mercola.com)
10. Dr. Eddys Integrated Medical Clinic & Ayurveda School: Our Integrated Medical Clinic and Ayurveda School is a unique healthcare facility, combining the strengths and knowledge of both traditional western and alternative medicine in a holistic manner (Visit their website at www.dreddyclinic.com).
11. The Makers Diet, www.makersdiet.com
12. Selene River Press: Publisher and Distributor of Select Books on Health. Committed to the nutrition research and philosophy of Dr. Royal Lee (Visit their website at www.seleneriverpress.com)
You said, “Men prefer a Waist to Hip ratio of less than 0.8, optimum is 0.7
This HAS been shown in actual scientific studies. A woman with large breasts AND a large waist looks pregnant, and like she carries large amounts of male hormones. This is often the case in T2 diabetics…”
I am T2D. I have a waist to hip ratio of 0.73. I do not have a large waist.
I see a lot of white women who are obese and guess what? They have skinny boyfriends/husbands. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”
Reply to this
2.) I agree that increasing the amount of glucose processed by the liver, and decreasing glucose output by the liver is important. Especially in T2 diabetes. I personally have no idea if "eating too often" causes reduced "liver digestion efficiency". It is the liver's job to eliminate toxins. That's what it evolved to do.
However, if overeating leads to insulin resistance, obesity and fatty liver disease, it certainly looks like it can lead to inefficiency. Liver dysfunction is almost always associated with T2 diabetes and not T1, although a poorly controlled T1 may develop liver disease.
Not all people with allergies have inefficient livers. I have allergies to at least 20 things (2 severe food allergies) and yet my liver function is normal. However, I did have an elevated bilirubin rate before my Celiac Disease was diagnosed. But the cause was not eating "too often", the cause was eating a specific substance.
Reply to this
3.) I think we have to look at the big picture...the "leaky gut". Close the leaky gut, and the absorption of dietary "allergens" is greatly reduced, if not eliminated. This may apply to T1DM.
I personally am not sure I believe in "food intolerance". I think 90% of people who think they have "food allergies" (who have never had a positive allergy test)are somehow imagining they are getting ill from these foods. The exception to this would be those who are diagnosed via testing with a "leaky gut". This can be tested with the following by doctors:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10980980?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
I *personally* think it is similar to "Yuppie Flu". Most of those who claim "food intolerance" are overweight people with unhealthy lifestyles who somehow think their imagined "gluten/so/corn etc. intolerance" is to blame for their ills. Even though they have NO diagnosable allergies or Celiac Disease. I don't buy it, sorry.
For those who really have allergies, diagnosed leaky gut syndrome, Celiac Disease, and the genes for autoimmunity, then yes, I agree with you. I feel the rest of the people have Fatty Liver Disease from excess eating and fat/sugar consumption, not necessarily allergenic foods. Dietary fat, trans fat in particular, is linked to T2 diabetes and liver dysfunction.
4.) I think it's important to remember that T2 diabetes is not hard to "cure". Many people can get off medication or avoid medication by losing weight, eating less (and the right foods), and exercising. It only makes sense that a very low carb veggie shake once a day will put T2 symptoms into remission. But this is likely due to the low carbs and not "low allergenic" foods.
Can you please name your source that claims that "cooked foods" are worse for allergies or autoimmune disease? I don't disagree, I just want to research it more. Thank you.
Perhaps Celiacs will not react to raw gluten? Has anyone studied that? I have Celiac and a wheat allergy, but I may try adding back rye and barley to my diet. I'm not sure what raw barley is like, but I love raw oats!
Raw milk contains lactose, which breaks down into glucose. Glucose cannot get into your cells without insulin. For a T2 diabetic, like you, the 10 grams of carbs in 1/2 milk likely will not raise your blood glucose no matter the source. But glucose will raise in a T1 diabetic, who makes little to no insulin.
I am about 70% raw. I eat perhaps 4/7 days per week. My typical diet:
-Raw almonds.
-Baby carrots (organic)
-Mixed salad greens (organic, dressing NOT raw).
-Canned tuna, lemon (I don't think canned tuna is raw).
-Olive oil (Extra Virgin, unpressed..not sure if raw or not).
-Brown Rice (organic)
-Salmon
-Cherry tomatoes.
-Fruit (raw). I feel best when ALL I eat is fruit. No meat, no fish, no beans, no veggies.
I have to eat more to prevent hair loss. I got real human hair extensions for my wedding!
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You said, “I am about 70% raw. I eat perhaps 4/7 days per week.”
In his reference section Gracey states: "--CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu" and clearly advocates '100% RAW JUICE' -- "Diseases associated with inflammation such as 'Coeliac / Celiac' and/or 'Severe Type 1a Diabetes' and/or 'Lymes' need an intermittent eating & intermittent exercising system that ... every day better in every way ... efficiently reduces excess inflammation and efficiently builds increased muscle mass. A fast way [in my opinion] to achieve that is ... one meal a day [or less] of EXCLUSIVELY "fresh organic raw liquidiet nutrition" of minimally allergenic juicy water-rich foods [EG fruits / vegetables / raw egg yolks]. Modern technology makes this possible & sustainable. Vast quantities can be enjoyably 'eaten' within 15 minutes "
Since I began consuming 100% raw liquids--milk, eggs, veggies, and fruit—not only has my after meal glucose dropped, but my fasting blood sugar has also dropped. It is now down in the 80's.
You said, “For a T2 diabetic, like you, the 10 grams of carbs in 1/2 milk likely will not raise your blood glucose no matter the source.”
I am very sensitive to carbs. Just a small bite of bread or other carb will spike my blood sugar. Since I was 23 yrs old, I have gotten post-meal spikes. Just the other day I had a small sample (Dixie cup) of chicken enchilada from Trader Joe’s and my blood sugar soared. I have never been able to eat carbs. However, I can drink a pint of raw milk and carrot/veggie juice and my blood sugar remains below 100.
You said, “I have Celiac and a wheat allergy, but I may try adding back rye and barley to my diet. I'm not sure what raw barley is like, but I love raw oats!”
Rye and barley have gluten. Oats can be crossed contaminated with wheat, so make sure the oats say, “Gluten free”
Reply to this
I know rye and oats have gluten...but there is a chance that RAW gluten is OK.
I don't eat 100% raw yet because I don't have a juicer.
Reply to this
.
INSULIN RESISTANCE ...
IN THE ABSENCE OF HIGH
CIRCULATING GLUCOSE CONCENTRATIONS...
WHY?
> 0606 www.tinyurl.com/292ulj [rchaparr@aecom.yu.edu, chien@stanford.edu, hughmcd@stanford.edu ~ "insulin resistance ... in the absence of high circulating glucose concentrations"].
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) SAT.02.FEB.2008 @ 23:32hrs c/o DiabetesHealth.com
"The Gracey HYPOthesis" for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/32z33w
CURE auto-immunity... www.tinyurl.com/3cw8eu
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd
CURED diabetes [relative-HYPO-Glycemia-Distress (rHGD)]... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
Eat not less but less OFTEN... www.tinyurl.com/299t3f
Eating less OFTEN is profoundly more healthy than eating less... www.tinyurl.com/ys63gk
Eating too OFTEN sustains & CAUSES all diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2j7p3t
Diabetes is not a disease ... tinyurl.com/2uxb99 ... diabetes is the CURE...
... for relative HYPO-Glycemia-Distress (rHGD) ... www.tinyurl.com/36qxn3
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN...
http://www.DiabetesHealth.com/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE ... www.tinyurl.com/29kvda ... "I-Fast-23hours-45minutes-EveryDay-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
You say in your comment --
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/30/allies-voice-big-breasts-and-evolution.aspx#comment-805779
"What triggers this sudden change? To make a person suddenly diabetic?
Relative hypo-glycemic-distress from, eg. an infection leads to 'sudden' acute compensatory hyper-glycemia from glucagon which is helpful until that person eats too OFTEN when ill.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/22/allies-voice-could-delta-force-explain-diabetes.aspx#comment-787097
Eating too OFTEN leads to food induced chronic hyper-glycemia and food/insulin induced exacerbated relative hypo-glycemia-distress which can be harmful if that person still eats too OFTEN when still ill. That person then appears to develop chronically ill beta cells when eating too OFTEN leads to food induced chronic hyper-glycemia, which, when treated by hypo-glycemic drugs, such a GM insulin, can cause even more severe relative hypo-glycemic-distress, which Eisenbarth's research suggests actually causes beta cell autoimmunity (www.tinyurl.com/3bqcm9) resulting in a type 1a diabetic losing more of their beta cells.
So Eisenbarth's 2008 research apparently now explains how the JDRF advice can quickly remove a person's honeymoon period ("--Taking very small amounts of insulin or no insulin. Even though you may not need insulin, some doctors prefer that you take small doses of insulin daily throughout the honeymoon period.").
http://www.jdrf.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&