Allies Voice: Can vaccines cause diabetes?
In spite of over 100 million flu vaccines being administered since October, 2007 - the total anticipated by the end of the season is 132 million. With the flu outbreak already widespread throughout the US - I can't help but wonder if going for the flu vaccine is all for not at this point?
What if you were told that receiving the flu vaccine might increase your chances of developing diabetes? According to recent research published by Classen Immunotherapies, vaccines are likely to cause insulin-dependent diabetes in over 2% of children with a strong family history of insulin-dependent diabetes.
Newly published data shows that vaccines are likely to cause diabetes in children with a strong family history of insulin dependent diabetes. Nowadays it feels like everybody knows somebody with diabetes. The next step in diabetes awareness is helping people distinguish between Type 1 (autoimmune) and Type 2 (insulin resistance) and AVOID developing all form at all costs. Knowing is half the battle, right?
Diabetes due to autoimmunity (Type 1) is when the beta cells are caught up in the failure to launch scenario. The body destroys the beta cells before they can release the insulin into the bloodstream. People with Type 1 diabetes must take insulin. I wish insulin was available with C-peptide as an adjunct treatment. C-peptide is the unsung hero in Type 1 diabetes. C-peptide is the balancing force of insulin that protects people with Type 1 from the long-term complications of diabetes. I've been heralding the importance of C-peptide for 2 years. In doing so I've met some of the most brilliant researchers. Please give them their 15 minutes - it's well worth it! Please meet: Anders Sima PhD of Wayne State University, John Wahren PhD of Karolinska Hospital, and Dana Spence PhD of Michigan State University.
Diabetes due to insulin resistance (Type 2) is when the body is making insulin, but the cells of the body are unable to take on more than they can handle. Too often this form of diabetes is treated with drugs that force the glucose into the cells. Although this removes the glucose from the blood and lowers blood sugar - it often results in further complications from the treatment of diabetes. For example, this study comparing two groups of diabetes control, conventional and intensive - showed a 20% increase of death rate in the tightly controlled group. Maybe this study confirms that some people are simply not capable of sustaining the drug treated protocol to achieve tight control. That doesn't make them a bad person. It just means their body cannot sustain a blood sugar that low. My question is this: why is it if a person without diabetes can have a blood sugar anywhere between 40 and 400 on any given Sunday - why are people with diabetes expected to keep unnatural control over their blood sugar? (Hint: see mention of C-peptide in the previous paragraph).
Now back to our blog topic - years of research have provided proof that vaccines cause diabetes in vaccine recipients who are predisposed to developing diabetes. New data indicates vaccines are particularly toxic to those with a strong family history of diabetes.
It was once believed that the hemophilus vaccine caused diabetes in approximately 1 in every 2,000 immunized children. However, the updated figure now shows that 1 in every 50 immunized children go on to develop insulin-dependent diabetes. That's 2% of ALL vaccinated children who have a sibling with insulin-dependent diabetes. Yikes!
The recent data shows that common childhood vaccines are especially dangerous to children with a strong family history of diabetes. Parents with a family history of insulin-dependent diabetes should be aware that a full series of vaccines may have a greater than 5% chance of causing their child to develop diabetes. To view the published papers and to find out the latest information on the effects of vaccines on autoimmune diseases including insulin dependent diabetes visit the Vaccine Safety Web site.
The CDC has now announced the failure of the 2007-2008 to prevent the strain of flu infecting a majority of states. This is a warning light for all to be aware of the increased chances of developing diabetes this spring. Please consider the following items as potential factors increasing your chances of developing diabetes this spring:
- Drugs such as steroids, Dilantin, and others may elevate the blood sugar.
- Other drugs, such as alloxan, streptozocin, and thiazide diuretics, are toxic to the beta cells of the pancreas and can cause diabetes.
- Certain syndromes (for example, Prader-Willi, Down's, Progeria, and Turner's) may result in a hyperglycemic state; if this state is prolonged, the result can be permanent diabetes.
- Drink plenty of fresh water
- Consume a fresh, clean diet: vegetables, fruits and whole grains (increase fiber intake !!)
- Fresh air, sunlight, and reduce stress levels (as much as humanly possible)
- The total flu vaccines administered is anticipated to be 132 million by the end of the 2007 - 2008 season
- Vaccines are Likely to Cause Insulin Dependent Diabetes in Over 2% of Children
- C-peptide function in diabetes treatment
- Anders Sima PhD - Wayne State Researcher
- John Wahren PhD - Creative Peptides and Karolinska Hospital Researcher
- Dana Spence PhD - Michigan State University Researcher
- Intensive Blood Sugar Treatment Strategy - Not for Everyone
- Vaccine Safety Web site Causes of Diabetes
- Take the Miracle Muffin Challenge - increase fiber in the 3, 2, 1 Program
Please help fund the mission of "Allies Voice" and checkout our featured sponsors. Disclaimer: These ads may not reflect the opinion of "Allies Voice" however these click-through ads PAY for "Allies Voice" to blogcast LOUD AND CLEAR (and free!)
.
INSULIN FROM SEMEN AND MUNCHAUSENS?
Long acting insulin [www.tinyurl.com/2xhpwr] is created by the addition of PROTAMINE [www.tinyurl.com/yrwyse] obtained from SEMEN [www.tinyurl.com/33x3ge] of river trout.
Adequate hydration [www.tinyurl.com/3d7xoo] and long acting Neutral Protamine Hagedorn aka NPH insulin has been successfully adopted since 1950 [www.tinyurl.com/3dqd5b] for helping prevent HYPER-glycemia COMA [www.tinyurl.com/ypozqv] and retain beta-cell activity [www.tinyurl.com/2u8x47] and associated endogenous insulin [www.tinyurl.com/27oard] and consequent endogenous C-peptide [www.tinyurl.com/ys9wv2] production.
Do Diabetics who refuse [www.tinyurl.com/2arzxs] to DEMAND regular STIMULATED ... C-peptide TESTS [www.tinyurl.com/2fuejn] and medical advice to help maximize the PERFORMANCE of their endogenous C-peptide production [www.tinyurl.com/32j6kl] really have Munchausens [www.tinyurl.com/ye9buf] ?
.
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) MON.25.FEB.2008 @ 21:14hrs c/o www.LoveDiabetes.cOM & www.HYPO-thesis.cOM
.
"The Gracey HYPO-thesis" for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.1MealEveryDay.cOM
CURE auto-immunity [100pc Fresh Organic Raw Liquidiet]... www.LIQUIDarian.cOM
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd CURED diabetes ... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN
http://www.DiabetesHealth.cOM/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE... www.1MealPerDay.cOM ..."Lovingly-I-Fast-Every-23hrs-45mins-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
Nick, have you lost your mind? What you are posting doesn't make any sense.
Please stop these ridiculous posts if you are serious about a TRUE cure for diabetes. These posts of yours make me think you are joking. Diabetes is no joke.
Sometimes I wonder if you and/or Bird54 are a "troll".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
I have a disease that I CANNOT cure no matter WHAT I try (no matter what you think), and these comments make me think you are joking about a fatal disease that can kill me. It's distasteful and stops us from discussing a TRUE solution to diabetes.
Thank you.
Reply to this
.
www.tinyurl.com/2w7gp9
.
Vernon Howard's
SECRETS OF LIFE (R)
**********************************************************************
"We must be careful to not interpret positive words wrongly. Liberation does not mean escape from an exterior problem; it means insight into the inner cause of the outer effect. Love is not attachment to someone who provides a sense of security; it is a purified inner state which has no anxious craving for so-called security. "
Esoteric Mind Power, p. 54
Go to the Bookstore link at http://www.anewlife.org/html/home.html
**********************************************************************
Visit the SECRETS OF LIFE Archives of Vernon Howard quotes:
http://archive.mail-list.com/secretsoflife
**********************************************************************
Share Vernon Howard's SECRETS OF LIFE with a friend!
Forward this message to those you know who are also searching
for the answers to life, or copy a past quote from the archives
to e-mail them.
**********************************************************************
.
Reply to this
MISSIS S is ippi DISCRIMINATION TROLL ?
Sarah alleged, "I am glad your weight loss has enabled you to control your diabetes better..."
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/04/allies-voice-diabetes-does-not-discriminate--so-why-should-mississippi.aspx#comment-840161
No, Sarah, I controlled my challenges with Relative HYPOglycemia Distress (RHOD) well BEFORE any weight loss.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_Somogyi_rebound
The transient HYPERglycemia which you subconsciously like to call an 'OBESE diabetes disease' -- was apparently protecting my brain/nervous system from the repetitive HYPOglycemia I was suffering from BEFORE glucose insulin resistance (GIR) and associated stress HYPERglycemia 'came to my rescue' which can be called a "Somoygi effect.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_hyperglycemia
While fresh organic raw juice fasting (www.LIQUIDarian.cOM), my blood glucose changed to what you call 'normal' and my body fat % was reduced. However, 'weight gain' is a beneficial side-effect of fasting when someone is relatively 'underweight' and training with anabolic intermittent-exercising.
http://alliesvoice.com/2007/12/19/allies-voice-the-emotional-roller-coaster-of-diabetes.aspx#comment-734621
PS Recently I've been getting all kinds of compliments from people at work about how "young" and slim I look--like a high school girl--and now more & more people are asking about how to eat less OFTEN and 1 meal a day.
Why do you eat more than one meal a day?
Reply to this
Bird54,
In answer to your question, "Hunger" comes to mind. There's also a huge element of shared cultural experience with food. "Sorry, I can't eat lunch or dinner with you all, I'll just watch while you eat..." doesn't sound like much fun.
On the Somoygi effect, my understanding of this is that it does occur, is thought to be rare, and is mostly applicable to people who are newly diagnosed. I agree it does happen; just not sure it's the "end all be all cure" you refer to.
I'm curioius: how long have you been eating one meal a day?
Kelly
Reply to this
Please stop assuming that I have not tried what you have.
Why do I not eat more than 1 meal per day?
Fine, I'll take the bait and respond.
Because I have tried it...I've tried intermittent and long-term fasting too. My hair falls out, I feel tried, I get what feels like an irregular heartbeat, and I feel like crap. In fact, today I was not able to eat more than an orange and some grapes between 7 a.m and 7 p.m. I felt so horrible that I almost passed out in the grocery store. Do you mean to tell me that when you eat one meal per day, you don't feel lightheaded and "cloudy"? I cannot think straight.
Note: My BG was 10 mmol/l, so I was not low when I felt like passing out.
Not eating makes my allergies better (less asthma, less rashes, less dizziness, etc.) but it does not seem to make my blood glucose control any better nor cause my fasting insulin requirements go down (or by much). Nor does it make me feel "young" and healthy. And I don't need to lose weight.
As I personally don't think the Gracey hypothesis is feasible, I *personally* think that the only way Gracey's hypothesis would work is if:
-By drinking juice only, your remove one of the triggers (there may be other triggers) of autoimmune diabetes, and this reduces the autoimmune reaction. But you REALLY only need to just remove the individual trigger(s) from your diet.
Note: I have told Allie about a period in which immediately after I stopped eating milk proteins (casein, whey) 100%, I ended up in the hospital with unexplained hypoglycemia and low insulin requirements. My cortisol levels were SKY HIGH and as a result my T-cell count was low. I feel that this lowered my autoimmunity, and with the removal of the cow's milk, I was making some insulin. when my T-cells went up 2 weeks later, so did my BG.
-Then, if it is possible for long-standing T1 diabetics to regenerate their beta cells, all on their own (without drugs, transplants, or euroglycemia)...
Then Gracey may have a cure. But this has NOTHING to do really with his HYPO-thesis, and everything to do with what we know about autoimmune diabetes:
-The point of trigger appears to be the small intestine, much like in Celiac Disease.
-There is much evidence to suggest that viruses/bacteria/toxins/yeast (which may all lead to a "leaky gut") AND a food protein such as gluten and/or casein may be one of the triggers.
As I explained before, autoimmune diabetes can be explained without Gracey.
I, like Kelly, think Gracey has posted some interesting links. But that does not mean his thesis is presented in a logical manner based on the "supporting information" he presents.
From what you describe about yourself, there is no evidence for me to think that your (mild) Type 2 diabetes is being controlled by anything other than weight loss, less food intake, and perhaps less intake of toxic food like HFCS and Trans Fats if you ate a lot of processed foods before. Most Americans do.
Reply to this
I think I speak for us all when I say that we would be curious to see some pictures.
Do you mind posting a few "before" and "after" pictures of your story on Photobucket for us to see?
We are curious.
I am glad you feel great. I want to remind you that not all of us are you, nor do we have Type 2 diabetes, nor are we all going to be able to get healthy simply by drinking only a vegetable shake daily. I think that you need to keep that in mind.
Thanks and have a great day.
Reply to this
Hi Allie....Fresh Air will not rebalance the Body if the Scourge of Diabetes arrives. What a person should do instead is to borrow their neighbor's Glucose Meter to confirm an elevated Glucose level and then begin the process of Behavior/Life-Style Modification for either T1DM or IRD(aka Type 2 Diabetes).
I do not take the flu vaccine......hence No flu and no Diabetes..I spoke too quickly, just no flu. lol
Reply to this
Hey BetterCell -- I remember what you told me about people with T1DM possibly having Hyperactive immune systems. ::: knock on wood:: I haven't been sick in over 3 years. Coincidentally -- the last time I took a flu vaccine was 2004! Yes – I got the flu the winter of 2005.
Reply to this
Good for you Allie........
Your Health and Intelligence are partners to keep your self in a near perfect state of Balance, despite T1DM. That is why (as you already know) that you should, "never give up on yourself."
The reason why you got the Flu in 2005 was because your Private Army(Immune System) was very involved with other things also going on at that time.
Reply to this
Hi Allie. I agree 100% with you on the vaccine issue. In fact, I think have briefly mentioned this is a previous post.
Obviously there are are many genetic and environmental factors that all must be in place to develop autoimmune diabetes (Type 1). And all of these have to line up.
Some possible factors are gluten and/or casein introduction, Omega 3 and Vitamin D levels, and of course, viruses.
Viruses have long been linked to autoimmune diseases, including autoimmune diabetes (Type 1). Nobody knows if multiple viruses can cause Type 1 diabetes, or if they ALL need to be contracted. Perhaps, if someone has a high genetic disposition to autoimmune T1DM, then ANYTHING that stimulates the immune system can cause it. This includes vaccines, and the actual viruses themselves.
I personally would suggest the following for those with autoimmune T1DM that choose to have kids:
-While pregnant, avoid consuming cow's milk, gluten, and potatoes (a toxin in potatoes has been linked to an increased T1DM risk).
-Keep your child gluten/cow's milk free from birth for life (or until T1DM develops).
-Give them lots of sunshine (Vitamin D). In the future, proper dosing may be worked out for Vitamin D and Omega 3 supplements (currently being studied).
-Don't vaccinate in these high risk kids, except for the *major* diseases such as polio. In my opinion, in some cases, the benefit outweighs the risk. That said, for most vaccines, it does not. I would not be giving my child the MMR vaccine. The chances of them getting any of those viruses and/or having serious illness is much smaller than the possible risk of triggering a serious autoimmune disease.
I love this particular blog. The is lots of vaccine controversy right now. In general, I feel that they are fairly safe for most people. And they have prevented a lot of deaths and disease. But for a small group of people (Us), the risk REALLY does outweigh the benefit in most cases. The risk is not sensationalized, it is real.
I personally do not get vaccinated for anything anymore. As part of my job in a long-term healthcare facility, I was "required" to be vaccinated each year for the flu. I never thought twice. I was also vaccinated (my choice) for Hepatitis A and B.
I always wonder if any of the above triggered my Celiac Disease. I had NO symptoms of Celiac until my 20's. Now I have a "severe" case of reacting to gluten, and multiple food allergies.
Ironically, those with Celiac do not respond to the Hep B vaccine.
Now I avoid all vaccines.
I suggest those with autoimmune diseases or a family history of possibly do the same.
Reply to this
MISSIS S is ippi DISCRIMINATION -- RAW MILK IS BETTER THAN COOKED MILK AND SUNLIGHT IS BETTER THAN VITAMIN D?
Sarah, here you allege: "...people are eating too much of the wrong foods ... and exercising less."
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/04/allies-voice-diabetes-does-not-discriminate--so-why-should-mississippi.aspx#comment-840161
Gary Taubes says, "Obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation, NOT overeating and NOT sedentary behavior ... Consuming excess calories does not cause us to grow fatter, any more than it causes a child to grow taller. Expending more energy than we consume does not lead to long-term weight loss; it leads to hunger ... Fattening and obesity are caused by an imbalance--a disequilibrium in the hormonal regulation of adipose tissue and fat metabolism. Fat synthesis and storage exceeds the mobilization of fat from the adipose tissue and subsequent oxidation. We become leaner when the hormonal regulation of the fat tissue reverses this balance." (p. 454)
http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes/dp/1400040787
INSULIN is a very important factor for fat storage in ALL diabetics. T1 diabetics are very thrifty with fat storage, storing fat most easily when they are more glucose insulin sensitive (GIS)—just as people who are morbidly obese continue to store fat but without developing HYPERglycemia.
Diabulimia is a challenge associated with more GIS.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/11/allies-voice-the-truth-about-diabulemia.aspx#comment-827695
T2 are less thrifty with fat storage than T1 diabetics because T2 diabetics are protected by glucose insulin resistance (GIR) which helps resist fat storage by urinating excess fuel -- a side effect of being a more healthy 'bigger' person.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/11/allies-voice-the-truth-about-diabulemia.aspx#comment-827702
You are 26? I got married at 26. I was 5'8" and weighed 130 pounds. What makes you think that you will not want to store more fat when having children? Just because you say you are 'thin' now—it doesn't mean you will want to remain that way, unless you want to avoid becoming more 'glucose insulin resistant' by choosing to prefer being GIS.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/09/allies-voice-have-you-been-stimulated.aspx#comment-789404
PS RAW BUTTER IS BETTER THAN COOKED BUTTER--
ARE YOU ALSO ALLERGIC TO BUTTER?
Reply to this
Of course I'm allergic to butter. I am ANAPHYLATIC to MILK. I cannot have ANY form of milk protein. EVER. In any form. I can't eat food processed on lines that run products with milk protein. I eat virtually no processed foods, except frozen vegetables and the odd gluten free/milk free rice bagel with soy cream cheese. But I really do thank you for at least trying to be what I assume is helpful.
I hate to say this, but there is a problem with the vast majority of American society. They prefer to be brainwashed, to live with their heads in the sand, to believe both the mainstream and especially the conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories and "alternative medicine" has got people just as brainwashed if not more so.
I have to admit I have not read Taubes' book. And yes, I am aware that he is not a doctor, scientist, or dietitian. He is a science fiction writer, I believe.
Again, we have some novel speculation, no evidence that I am aware of. I personally can't help but think that Taubes is trying to sell a book(science fiction?
The fact is, if there was only one specific cause for obesity, Type 2 diabetes, etc. then there would be only one way to fix the problem. But that is not true. Many people have lost weight simply by following a healthy diet and exercise plan. For life. It's all about changing your lifestyle, not any specific diet per se that you cannot sustain.
Why do I not want to store more fat? Because that would increase my risk for heart disease, the number 1 killer of diabetics. Fat Type 1 diabetics have a MUCH increased risk of complications and early death. Search Pub Med for more info. A fat T1DM has "Double Diabetes" and I don't want to die by the time I'm 30, thanks.
I am scared Bird54 that you have been brainwashed by the alternative medicine community. They want people to buy their books, buy their "cure all" diets, buy their miracle cures and claims.
I am ALL for novel ideas (science based) and "complimentary" alternative medicine. But I would never suggest that I have a cure for something as serious as autoimmune Type 1 diabetes, especially with NO evidence.
It becomes dangerous to society when people begin to foster ideas that have no supported basis, and claim them as fact (i.e. "One meal per day cures all types of diabetes", or "Obesity is not unhealthy").
Let's not promote very abstract speculation for cures as fact without evidence to do so.
Cheers,
Sarah
Reply to this
I quickly did a search on Taubes. I was only able to find articles that claim he supports a low carb diet and avoidance of HFCS (HFCS, as I mentioned, is directly linked to obesity and Type 2 diabetes). This actually is fairly mainstream and now backed up by science.
Low carb diets and avoiding HFCS are both known to lower insulin resistance and reduce fat storage.
I am not sure how you feel Taubes' fits into your claims? Since you have actually read the book you are referring to, can you explain further?
Thanks.
Reply to this
mmm...?
IS INSULIN A VACCINATION -- OR A --MALIGNANT MEDICAL MYTH ?
Sarah wrote: Unproven "alternative" testing … is a money grabbing joke for hypochondriacs. Real people … end up in the doctor's office or ER http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/25/allies-voice-can-vaccines-raise-your-chances-of-diabetes.aspx#comment-856668
"Real" people and HYPOchondriacs who rely on conventional medicine usually end up prematurely -- DEAD!
Did you know that conventional medicine has killed more than 50 million Americans? http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/07/30/most-astonishing-health-disaster-of-the-20th-century.aspx?PageIndex=1
Malignant Medical Myths: Why MEdical Treatment Causes 200,000 Deaths in the USA each Year, and How to Protect Yourself
by Joel, M. Kauffman PhD
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0741429098/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-5495298-0875318#reader-link
Reply to this
Insulin is neither a vaccination or malignant myth. Insulin is a hormone that all of us need to live.
I respectfully state that your argument is invalid, as is your diversion. My original points regarding the invalid and unscientific testing protocols of alternative medicine still stand.
Most practitioners of "alternative medicine" are out to make a quick buck, like everyone else. A hypochondriac to them is a walking dollar sign.
Do you feel that "natural" medicine has not killed anyone? Look up "Kava Kava" and liver failure. Do you know that people used to die due to a LACK of proper treatment before modern medicine? What about those with Type 1 diabetes, which was a fatal disease before insulin was discovered? Polio? Infections? Appendicitis? Breast cancer? Brain tumors?
How many millions of people died BEFORE conventional medicine?
What about the case of a homeopath in Quebec who killed a 9 year old Type 1 diabetic in 3 days by withholding her insulin?
Yes, Mercola can offer great benefits to the "average" sick American, who is overweight/obese, Type 2 diabetic or at risk for it, eating junk food, drinking soft drinks, and generally not using any common sense when it comes to being proactive with one's health.
But you are stretching his message if you are making fanatical claims about curing T1. In fact, to his credit, Mercola never claims there is any cure for Type 1 diabetes, and he makes note of how horrible and severe of a disease it is. And he asserts that Type 2 diabetes can almost always be prevented.
Yes, there are plenty of dumb doctors, researchers, etc. But there are ALSO plenty of crazy/dumb quacks who will try to sell or convince you of everything under the sun.
Sure Mercola offers some decent advice. And yes, doctors, nurses, and medicines have accidentally killed people. Alternative medicine practitioners have killed people. And people have killed themselves by inducing their own diseases.
While I'll further consider your opinions and Gracey's hypothesis in the future if new information is logically and nicely presented, there is nothing you have presented at this time that causes me to see any validity in Gracey's hypothesis nor your interpretations of what you see as relevant research. And that is fine to believe what you want. But you should not be claiming a cure for T1DM with NO evidence.
We wouldn't have ANY injectable insulin(pig included) without conventional scientific medical research. So I don't think we should dismiss "conventional medicine" and research just yet.
My personal opinion, like Kelly's, is that Gracey's hypothesis is misguided. Perhaps one day you will prove me wrong.
P.S. Do you have your "before and after" pictures up yet? I'm sure everyone here would be very interested to see them. I'm really surprised that you look and feel so "healthy" on so few calories and nutrients. Do you take supplements?
Regards,
Sarah
Reply to this
Why are you surprised? Would you prefer that I eat a bucket of KFC?
You say"... the "average" sick American, who is overweight/obese, Type 2 diabetic or at risk for it, eating junk food, drinking soft drinks, and generally not using any common sense when it comes to being proactive with one's health."
And then you say, "I'm really surprised that you look and feel so "healthy" on so few calories and nutrients. Do you take supplements?"
Damned if I do and damned if I don't--Will you please make up your mind, or do you hate T2s so much that you criticize them no matter what they do?
Do you really believe that organically raised juiced vegetables and free range chicken eggs lack nutrients? And did you really say "supplements"?
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/3/1/are-vitamin-supplements-a-bad-idea-for-cancer-patients.aspx
Read this study —“…questioning the widespread use of antioxidant supplements.”
http://www.cellmetabolism.org/content/article/abstract?uid=PIIS1550413107002562
Now where is YOUR evidence that supplements are healthy or that a raw liquidiet is unhealthy?
Reply to this
Hi Mollie.
I'm sorry you always feel attacked by me. I never said that a liquid diet is unhealthy. I was implying that one vegetable drink per day is likely not meeting your RDI of nutrients or calories. I was not sure if you were eating eggs, or how many per day, as B12 is only found in animal products.
I have never claimed that organic (or any vegetables) foods lack nutrients, but you should be careful. Many "organic" foods are not truly organic. There are many labelling loopholes. In addition, there is no real evidence to suggest that pesticides are even evident on non-organic foods, or that organic foods result in better health.
That said, I do eat organic, but I am fully aware that there is no evidence that this will result in better health.
I firmly believe in the supplements I suggest. You are not eating any fatty fish, and your diet may lack Omega 3 EFA. You may also be lacking Vitamin D. There is strong science behind what I say. In fact, Dr. Mercola also agrees with Vitamin D and Omega 3 supplements. I am confused as to why you would beleive his other convictions, and yet not this:
http://www.mercola.com/forms/carlsons.htm
Secondly, we are not talking about cancer patients, nor typical anti-oxidants like Vitamin C and Vitamin E. My main promotion has been Omega 3 EFA and Vitamin D. So can you please explain why you used these references to discredit my post? Also, there are many other nutrients one can be deficient in besides anti-oxidants. Iron comes to mind, as well as calcium.
As I've said before, do whatever you want. No one is saying you HAVE to take supplements. I was simply concerned. As long as you are not trying to promote unproven cures for autoimmune Type 1 diabetes as fact, that's fine. This is what irritates me. I was simply pointing out my thoughts on your statements.
Best wishes,
Sarah
Reply to this
Just in case you want "proof" of organic food fraud, Dr. Mercola himself has this article:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/02/23/cracking-down-on-organic-food-fraud.aspx
Regardless, the diet you describe may lead to deficiencies in the long-term, whether the food is organic or not. I think this is a reasonable statment.
Kelly asked you how long you have been on the diet for, would you be willing to answer that?
Reply to this
Missis s is preJUICE discrimination
Sarah wrote: I never said that a liquid diet is unhealthy. I was implying that one vegetable drink per day is likely not meeting your RDI of nutrients or calories. I was not sure if you were eating eggs, or how many per day, as B12 is only found in animal products.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/25/allies-voice-can-vaccines-raise-your-chances-of-diabetes.aspx#comment-866774
You say you did not realize I was eating egg yolks,
yet you pre-judge the liquidiet without even reading it?
www.LIQUIDarian.cOM
"...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..."
How can you say you missed the words "egg yolks"?
Egg yolks = Vitamin D 359.64 IU 180 %RDA
http://yarrow.best.vwh.net/Usda_data/foods.cgi?food_num=01125&state_num=2&food_des_size=60.
Kelly asked you how long you have been on the diet for, would you be willing to answer that?
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/25/allies-voice-can-vaccines-raise-your-chances-of-diabetes.aspx#comment-866779
I started on a one-meal-a-day regimen of mostly raw foods in December and then went to a mainly raw liquidiet in January.
Please read my comment to Judy—
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/04/allies-voice-diabetes-does-not-discriminate--so-why-should-mississippi.aspx#comment-865717
Reply to this
Hi Allie,
I wanted to respond to a statement you made: "Diabetes due to autoimmunity (Type 1) is when the beta cells are caught up in the failure to launch scenario. The body destroys the beta cells before they can release the insulin into the bloodstream."
This, as the cause of Type 1 diabetes, has been the spoken lore from the medical community for a long, long time - that miraculously, people's bodies are just deciding in mass to turn on themselves, thwarting evolution's plan of survival of the species.
New research says otherwise - not just for diabetes but for asthma and arthritis and heart disease, pretty much any disease. At their core, they are all inflammation problems. There is an immune response, but that comes as a response to the initial insult.
As seen by Dosch's research, it isn't that the body is turning on itself, it's that there is an inflammation response (to something) that hits the beta cells and causes them to become inflammed. The inflammation creates a condition whereby the cell can't neurally connect to its environment. As quoted in one of many, many articles out there on Dosch: "Dosch had observed in previous research that islet cells in diabetics were surrounded by an "enormous" number of pain nerves that signaled the brain that the pancreatic tissue was damaged." It's like the cells take a toxic hit and then keep trying to neurally connect by sending out more and more neural growth, but in the rash of growth, the cell receptors fail to communicate.
Inflammation and neural connectivity are the genesis of T1 diabetes, not autoimmunity.
Dosch found that by injecting capsaicin into these cells, it selectively killed the excess neuron growth and rendered the beta cells functioning again. I contacted Dosch's group and they've gotten some funding in place to start human trials.
It's time we also put the age-old "blame the patient" theory to rest (not that you are Allie, I just want to reinforce the concept). I don't know if my body is respresentative; but, it's clear that I suffered a toxic reaction to an antibiotic that left me hyperglycemic 2 days after taking it. How many more people out there had similar situations? At least 400 people a day are Googling Norfloxacin-induced diabetes now. What about other fluoroquinolone antibiotics that are used to treat childhood ear infections with children who then end up diabetic? What about these children you're talking about Allie, who end up diabetic after taking a flu shot?
All I know is, like BetterCell, I say: "pass on the flu shot" and "please pass the capsaicin".
Kelly
Reply to this
Hi Kelly,
Assuming the Gracey HYPO-thesis is reasonable (www.HYPO-thesis.cOM) and the 'regulatory' nerves are preventing 'relative HYPO-glycemia distress' -- what happens to the blood glucose, long term, when the 'regulatory' nerves are destroyed, e.g. by 'pepper', and the insulin production 'surges' without the benefit of the nerve directed down-regulation of the beta cells? Were Dosch's mice tested for schizophrenia following treatment? -- www.Relative-HYPOglycemia.cOM
Reply to this
"Reasonable" is the key word. I, like Kelly, think that the Gracey hypthesis is misguided at best, severely flawed at worst. There are so many problems with it, and with what you just said that I have no idea where to begin...
Reply to this
MISSIS S is ippi DISCRIMINATION misguided at best, severely flawed at worst said, “There are so many problems with it, and with what you just said that I SHOULD have no idea where to begin... ” BUT HERE'S A REASONABLY POSITIVE WAY...
Sarah, you requested, "Please refer to scientific studies published on the "thrifty gene" hypothesis."
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/04/allies-voice-diabetes-does-not-discriminate--so-why-should-mississippi.aspx#comment-840161
OK, I have referred to Neel's 'thrifty gene' hypothesis but have you? Or do you just like the 'THRIFTY' name and pretend to guess what it says (without reading it properly) OR in your words you"...have no idea where to begin..." when making any reasonable interpretation of any HYPOthesis?
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1932342&blobtype=pdf
Sarah, Please refer to scientific studies published which have been referenced by the Gracey HYPO-thesis (www.HYPO-thesis.com).
According to Taubes, the thrifty gene hypothesis, proposed by geneticist James Neel in 1962, is often publicly rejected. (p. 243-245)
"Although famines were both common and severe in Europe until the nineteenth century, this would suggest that those with European ancestry should be the most likely to have thrifty genes, and the most susceptible to obesity and diabetes in our modern toxic environments. Rather, among Europeans there is a 'uniquely low occurrence of Type 2 diabetes.' as [Jared] Diamond puts it, more evidence that the thrifty-gene hypothesis is incorrect." (p. 247).
http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes/dp/1400040787
What is the possibility that T1A & T1B is really the 'THRIFTY-super-gene'?
Sarah, you also most alarmingly ALLEGE, "Therefore, if people with these genes continue with the current Western lifestyle, natural selection will wipe out many of these people with "thrifty genes".
Well it does not appear that un-drug-treated T2 diabetics are being wiped out by "thrifty genes." The fact is that 'bigger' people are having MORE children. It looks like 'bigger' people, like un-drug-treated T2 diabetics, are moving INTO the gene pool -- not out of it.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg19225760.900-the-10-roads-to-fatsville.html
If you cannot provide ONE pubmed research reference (re T2 diabetes), with an un-drug-treated T2 control group, evidencing why I, or any other un-drug-treated T2 diabetic (ie protected by C-peptide), should ever be concerned about my blood glucose rising as high or higher than yours / or any T1 (or other HYPOglycemia drug-treated diabetic) -- YOUR consistent complete and ongoing lack, of any evidence, reasonably suggests you DISCRIMINATE, without evidence, against un-drug-treated T2 diabetics who YOU repeatedly allege (always without any evidence) will suffer HYPERglycemic damage (irrespective of obvious C-peptide protection) as a consequence, YOU SAY, of being "OBESE".
Reply to this
Bird54,
While I appreciate some of the research Nick has brought to the table, I don't think his HYPO-thesis is reasonable.
That being said, the end result of Dosch's research has been restored TRPV1+ function and insulin sensitivity, i.e. complete reversal of the diabetic condition. It's unknown as yet I believe if the non-diabetic condition is permanent but other research out there indicates that using capsaicin as a neurotoxin is well established as is the concept that you have to deal with the inflammation as well as the regeneration of beta cells. One without the other doesn't do it.
It seems to me from reading the research that in T1, the beta cells aren't so much destroyed as they are paralyzed by over-acting nerve inflammation. Take care of the inflammation and the cells are left to function. So in response to your "insulin production surge" comment, there is no "surge" - the capsaicin, or more specifically, the Substance P, acts to restore cells to normal function. As to beta cell death over time, the "use it or lose it" idea comes to mind.
Here's the reference to Dosch's break-through study:
http://info.med.yale.edu/neurobio/yeckel/principles_2007/Principles_07-articles/Jordt%201.pdf
Kelly
Reply to this
I think that in EARLY autoimmune diabetes, inflammation alone may be the issue (with minimal beta cell loss).
However, current research shows that *some* (not all) long-standing autoimmune Type 1's have constant beta cell turnover, which indicates that NEW beta cells are being made, and being destroyed. Much like how the intestines of someone with Celiac will be under constant attack as long as they eat gluten.
Some studies link beta cell regeneration to the spleen, others indicate that any surviving beta cells enlarge, still other studies speculate that their are stem cells in the pancreas.
Two problems come to mind:
-Most if not all of these studies are done in mice. Mice apparently are very easy to cure of autoimmune diabetes, and often mice research does not translate to humans.
-Not all people with autoimmune have any beta cells left, or *may* lack the ability to regenerate them, especially after long-standing autoimmune diabetes (i.e. more than 10 years). So in most cases, regeneration drugs and/or a transplant may be needed.
In the Faustamn studies, it was shown that a temporary transplant was needed in ALL of the successful cases, as the beta cells were not able to regenerate outside of euroglycemia (normal blood glucose range), which is a catch-22.
Dosch is on to something, but there are so many factors involved in autoimmune diabetes that I feel there is no one simple cure.
I assume autoimmune diseases have at least 2 triggers involved: a virus/bacteria/toxin and a food protein. I believe these "cross-link" and/or inflame/coat the beta cells, triggering autoimmunity. Remove or prevent those triggers, treat the leftover inflammation, possibly use regenerating drugs/a transplant if needed, and we have a cure. It is possible that some long standing Ti's will need additional therapy to correct the long-standing autoimmune response to their beta cells.
If Celiac Disease goes undiagnosed for 20 years, the person can end up with "refractory" Celiac, which means their disease does NOT improve on the gluten free diet. There may be a similar issue in long-standing T1, in which additional steps will need to be taken (I.e. Diamyrd).
My 2 cents...
Reply to this
I think that reducing inflammation (i.e. Omega 3 supplements) and working to reduce autoimmunity via immune modulation and/or modulating the "leaky gut" (i.e. Vitamin D) will encourage any small amounts of beta cells that one has.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
I appreciated your post. I'd love to read the research you're referring to on beta cell destruction if you'd be interested in posting a list of references.
My understanding is that the inflammation leads and autoimmunity follows. My question is whether beta cell loss occurs because the inflammation is never dealt with and compounded by the introduction of exogenous insulin, which acts to suppress endogenous insulin secretion (the "use it or lose it" concept). All cells are regenerated in the body in something like 3 months, so regeneration of beta cells makes total sense. My question is: what if they're wrong? What if it isn't autoimmunity that's causing beta cell death, but is instead "use it or lose it" or beta cell paralysis with autoimmunity present because of the cause and continuation of the inflammation and presence of exogenous insulin? Most people who take insulin for a long period of time eventually develop antibodies to insulin.
On the problem you raise of mice, I don't know. I hadn't heard that mice are "easy" to cure of autoimmune diabetes. I've heard that the cures that have been found haven't yet been successfully transferred into humans.
On your comment that not all people have any beta cells left, I have a couple of comments. First, aside from a pancreatic biopsy, no one knows if this is true. Testing for c-peptide is the "normal" way they make this statement, but it's inaccurate. What's more accurate is to say, the beta cells aren't functioning, not that they're not present. Unless they perform a biopsy, they don't know. It is possible that the beta cells are present and fine, but that they're paralyzed by inflammation and neural growth.
On the inability to regenerate beta cells, I wouldn't make that assumption either; I don't think that's been established yet. There are two good studies that show gymnema sylvestre does regenerate beta cell mass. (I can dig up the references if you like.) I also think neem might have similar properties but it hasn't been studied in the same way to my knowledge.
With Faustman's work, they did I understand use transplants to gain beta cell mass, but, I would add that Faustman is looking for a "quick" cure. Slow regeneration doesn't generally fly well or high in the western medical model of "cures". It seems to me that it's possible that if the inflammation is taken care of (both Dosch and Faustman's work seems to accomplish this), who's to say that slow regeneration won't do the trick in lieu of a transplant?
I agree that there could be more than 1 trigger; I look at it as the straw that broke the camel's back. Straws come and go as the body gets hurt and heals, but too many at once and whammo. Your assertion that a food protein is also at play is an interesting one. Perhaps its also the lack of a food protein - specifically, breastmilk.
I don't know much about Celiac Disease; but, it seems like an inflammation problem at its root too.
Kelly
Reply to this
A lot of good comments, which I appreciate.
I'm tired and want to go to bed, I apologize that I have spent most of my time responding to Bird 54.
Regardless, I will try and hit some on your key points. First of all, most of my thoughts are speculation based on my interpretation of current scientific knowledge with a little leap of speculation.
I'll start backwards with Celiac Disease. Celiac Disease is an autoimmune disease with a shared genetic basis with autoimmune Type 1 diabetes. Up to 30% of people with autoimmune diabetes also have Celiac. With Celiac Disease, when gluten (a food protein) is ingested, it appears to be absorbed half-intact into the small intestine (via a "leaky gut" or large gaps in the small intestines). These large gaps seem to be found in those with other autoimmune diseases as well, including T1DM and MS. This protein now sets off a cascade of a reaction, involving a systemic reaction to this foreign protein (which should have been broken down into harmless amino acids prior to being absorbed), and ending up with the body attacking the intestines themselves. Much like how the body attacks the beta cells in the pancreas. That is the very basic pathology for Celiac.
It is thought that there is a initiating trigger for Celiac to develop aside from gluten exposure. *I* have always speculated that this is a virus, and only THEN will the person respond negativly to gluten. Some studies support this idea. Since there are studies (Pub Med)showing that intestinal permeability precedes T1DM, and excess zonulin is produced to keep the gaps in the intestines open, it is logical to reason that there is a good chance that the pathology of T1DM is similar to Celiac, just with different triggers (although gluten has been linked to T1DM onset as well).
Autoimmune diabetes is a polygenetic disease that likely needs multiple factors in place to develop it. It may even have different triggers in different people. Breastmilk has been shown in some studies to protect against T1DM. No one knows if this is due to avoiding cow's milk, or the immune modulating properties of breastmilk. The TRIGR study is looking at this right now.
Honestly, my thoughts are all speculation on regeneration, as we just don't know. Again, it could go either way. It is such a new concept that beta cells even CAN possibly regenerate. From my understanding, Faustman has claimed that euroglycmia is needed to achieve beta cell regeneration. I do not know her reasoning behind this, other than as far as I know, hyperglycemia is shown to be toxic to beta cells and/or may "overwork" them (last one my speculation). I think it may be in order for one of us to contact Faustman, her asistant does respond to her emails.
Reply to this
Continued...
While I have no doubt Faustman wants a "quick" cure so she can prove to the world that her theory works (and secure funding), and am not ready to dismiss the fact that a temporary transplant may be needed for the reasons I list above based on what I know. Obviously, it would be nice if that was NOT needed, but we will have to wait and see, provided her research pans out.
I have heard of some herbs promoted to cause beta cell regeneration, but no scientific studies. That would be awesome if you had those at hand. I can always search for them too. Regardless, like you said, it can go either way. The Joslin 50 Year Medalist study does show that some (or at least some at the time of the study) T1's have residual beta cell mass, and that there does appear to be constant turnover. I am trying to find the study I have seen, I have not yet, but I'll look for it later. I'm just too tired!
It's really hard to say what will be needed for a cure if we can remove the trigger(s). If caught early, then yes, perhaps all that is needed to reverse T1DM is to reduce the inflammation. But if that inflammation causes autoimmunity and destruction of said cells, once that occurs, there is just no way to know how much intervention will be needed.Some people may need more help than others, it may depend on many factors. I am thinking that one size will not fit all here. It would be nice if we could block/remove the trigger(s) and then have our beta cells simply regenerate. But nobody knows. I'd say it's certainly possible.
As for mice, there are HUNDREDS of mice studies in which they have been cured of "autoimmune" T1DM. Or in which T1DM has been prevented. From all of the studies I have seen, it looks like almost anything can cure T1DM in a mouse. I think this is why we are not finding a cure, and why we should focus on human studies.
As for your ideas, yes, I do believe inflammation plays a huge role in autoimmune disease, including T1DM. I can't say one way or another about the "use it or lose it hypothesis". From my understanding, recent imaging studies (using MRI I believe) show decreased beta cell mass early on in T1DM. I may be able to find some studies that show beta cell loss (or preservation) upon autopsy of those who died from acute onset undiagnosed Type 1 diabetes.
Imaging Beta Cells:
http://www.nibib1.nih.gov/nibib/File/News%20and%20Events/Previous%20Symposia%20and%20Workshops/2122April2003/BetaCell2003_FinalReport.pdf
Here's a start, anyway.
Cheers,
Sarah
Reply to this
Sarah,
Thanks for your comments. The references for the gymnema sylvestre are:
(1) Shanmugasundarum, E., Shanmugasundarum, K., Rajendran V.M. Possible regeneration of the islets of Langerhans in streptozotocin-diabetic rat given gymnema sylvestre leaf extracts. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 1990; 30:265-279.
(2) Shanmugasundarum, E., Rajeswari, G., Baskaran, K., et al. Use of gymnema sylvestre leaf extract in the control of blood glucose in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 1990; 30:281-294.
Happy researching!
Kelly
Reply to this
Hey Sarah, I fear that I’m one of those diabetics who does not have constant beta cell turnover. I saw the Lilly for Life 50 year+ graduates who seem to have a readable C-peptide count. I believe that starting in rDNA biosynthetic is what thwarted my beta cells into nonexistence. I think the aggressive nature of treatment was too harsh on my body (at a 7 year old) – with a diagnosis blood glucose of nearly 1,000 – all things are relative. My body was probably shocked like whiplash when insulin treatment began. Woe is me. I wish the BIG PICTURE could be seen by all treating the newly diagnosed. Sometimes the most damage is done at the very beginning of treatment. One of these days.. maybe I'll turn the (proverbial key) and the beta cell engine will turnover once again! A girl can dream, can't she? Best, Allie
Reply to this
Allie,
Aaaaaagh. For years and years and years I blamed my mom, because I thought if she had breastfed me, I would have had the protective immunity I needed to withstand the environmental triggers I met. When I finally made the connection that my hyperglycemia was caused, not by lack of breastfeeding, but by an acute, toxic Norfloxacin exposure, it literally reordered my world. I was walking around a lake the day I made the connection, and I realized my mother probably had nothing to do with it, that all these years I had been blaming something that wasn't the real cause at all. (It reminds me a lot of The Upside of Anger, a movie that came out a few years ago, on the same topic.) Maybe even the Norfloxacin isn't the real cause for me - but it sure looks hugely suspicious now given the research. My point is, you're probably right that the treatment you received was too aggressive - you might not have needed any treatment at all (just a little time to heal) and an antibiotic triggered your hyperglycemia. BUT, you are young. Bodies are amazing in their self-righting quest to heal. Take away the cause of the dysfunctionality and I believe, with all my heart, that you - all of us - can heal. Beta cells come from the spleen, insulin from bones, insulin from the brain. The body isn't a "one organ - one function" deal like they make it out to be. It's a complex interwoven fabric. One tear here or there doesn't sink the boat.
Definitely, read the book: "The Biology of Belief" by Bruce Lipton.
And, believe.
Kelly
Reply to this
Kelly,
What a great comment to Allie! The pieces to our own puzzle are all out there, we just have to know where they fit. I believe as well that the Beta cells can heal once we get rid of the toxins, inflammation, scar tissue, etc. Of course, each individual is different. The mental aspect of believing/burying diabetes is a main piece to everyone's puzzle. Believe Allie........Yes, the body can heal itself, once it receives all that it needs. Kelly, our boats might need some repairing, but once they come up from below the water....LOOK OUT!!
Reply to this
Hey Allie....I also had an acute severe onset of T1 at a young age (age 2, no detectable c-peptide, high antibodies, DKA coma) and yet I still think I make some insulin from time to time. In fact, I am almost certain I do.
There is hope. I don't think it is really clear why some people maintain residual beta cells. Genetics come to mind. But so does environment. If milk IS a trigger for T1, then someone who drinks a lot of milk may be worse off than someone who generally avoids it. Who knows?
I have to agree with Kelly, don't give up hope!
I have said that I personally don't know what it's going to take to "reverse" T1...and that's true. I don't. Each case may be different. Some may need more help than others. But maybe not.
But I do agree that there is a chance that at least *some* T1's may be able to preserve what little beta cell function they have left.
There is no way to know unless you try. Even if it's impossible for us "old-timer" diabetics to completely, or even partially, regenerate our beta cells, even preserving 100 beta cells may be enough. Any c-peptide is better than none, I'd say.
All I know is that I have a routine going that seems to indicate that I have some remaining beta cell function from time to time. All I can do it share it and hope that someone else will benefit too.
Don't stop dreaming...start living your dream. Rome was not (re)built in a day...and neither will your pancreas be!
It would be nice if we could get some c-peptide in the meantime though...
Hang in there!
Reply to this
Hi Kelly,
What single major reason (in substance rather than style) do You say the Gracey HYPO-thesis is other than reasonable (www.HYPO-thesis.cOM)? The inflamed 'regulatory' nerves may well be inflamed because of 'Relative HYPOglycemia Distress duties' and may well be functioning to help prevent 'Relative HYPOglycemia Distress' by means of compensatory HYPERglycemia -- what happens to the blood glucose, long term, when those 'regulatory' nerves are destroyed, e.g. by 'pepper', and the relative insulin production returns to post-prandial 'surge levels' -- capable of inducing schizophrenia or HYPOglycemic coma -- without the benefit of the physiological nerve directed down-regulation pathway controlling beta cell insulin output? Do you think Dosch/Razavi's mice should have been tested for schizophrenia or normo-glycemia stress resistance following treatment? -- www.Relative-HYPOglycemia.cOM
Reply to this
No, sorry, I disagree that the Gracey hypothesis is reasonable. If you REALLY think about it (do it...give yourself time), you will see that there are many flaws, illogical connections, no supporting evidence that is *relevant*, and that is does not make any kind of sense.
It's good from afar...far from good.
Take a few days to really think about the Gracey hypothesis.
You are smart...I am sure you can see the same flaws that Kelly and I can.
Good luck.
P.S. A hint...there is a MAJOR reason why Gracey's hypothesis makes NO sense in the case of autoimmune diabetes. Really think about it, and you will see it too.
Reply to this
Kelly, if you or I continue to share our thoughts about why the Gracey hypothesis is illogical, then Gracey/Bird54 will simply integrate our comments into his hypothesis, either to try and make it valid, or to use our insight to fight with us.
Reply to this
Hi Sarah,
I agree. I've looked at the research Nick has pointed to as well as to his website and given him more than ample opportunity to convince me that his theory holds water. It doesn't. Much of the research Nick points to is irrelevant, his hypothesis is not evidence-based, and his method of communicating decreases the value of his input that is good. There's more anger in Bird's posts than anything else.
This is my approach. If/when Nick posts information that's relevant to the blog piece, without copying and pasting ad nauseum, in conversational English (i.e. complete sentences that make sense), I'll read it. If Bird posts information relevant to the blog piece without anger, confrontation or venom, I'll read it. Outside of that, I skip it.
If others do the same, ignoring their posts and telling them so (for example, we collectively post "Ignored." until they change their tune, perhaps the boundary collectively would carry meaning.
I'm not interested in fighting with either of them, which is what they seem to want to do most. But - if they have good information to bring to the table, I'll be more than happy to listen.
Kelly
Reply to this
Couldn't have said it better myself. EXACTLY.
Reply to this
Hi Kelly,
What single major reason (in substance rather than style) do You say the Gracey HYPO-thesis is other than reasonable (www.HYPO-thesis.cOM)? The inflamed 'regulatory' nerves may well be inflamed because of 'Relative HYPOglycemia Distress duties' and may well be functioning to help prevent 'Relative HYPOglycemia Distress' by means of compensatory HYPERglycemia -- what happens to the blood glucose, long term, when those 'regulatory' nerves are destroyed, e.g. by 'pepper', and the relative insulin production returns to post-prandial 'surge levels' -- capable of inducing schizophrenia or HYPOglycemic coma -- without the benefit of the physiological nerve directed down-regulation pathway controlling beta cell insulin output? Do you think Dosch/Razavi's mice should have been tested for schizophrenia or normo-glycemia stress resistance following treatment? -- www.Relative-HYPOglycemia.cOM
Then read this ....
http://projectfit.org/iflifeblog/
for info
Reply to this
Sorry, I'm not Kelly, and perhaps this is a stupid question, but why did you post a link to an article that is about "reducing insulin resistance" and all of the health problems it causes if you believe:
a.) Insulin resistance should be kept as it is beneficial.
and
b.) Insulin resistance does not cause disease.
Just curious.
Also, have you seen the research that shows how the brain ADAPTS to hypoglycemia, and how the brain has glycogen stores within it? The brain is actually quite well equipped to deal with hypoglycemia (excluding severe hypoglycemia).
I think you are thinking that "relative hypoglycemia", assuming that the concept is valid, is much more of a threat (if any) then it really is.
Reply to this
You will note that the above site makes it very clear that you are to NOT restrict yourself to one meal per day, as this decreases the benefits of fasting. It is very clearly mentioned that one should NOT eat "one meal per day".
Reply to this
Hi Kelly.....
I wanted to add that Inflammation can also result as a consequence to the destruction of cells, tissues and organs within the body.
This process is almost like a "mop-up" campaign in the military whereby once the damage is done, the Inflammatory aftermath either rightly or wrongly feels that the causative factors are still present.
This Inflammation is/has a part in Heart Disease, Diabetes, Arthritis, Allergies, Asthma and many other Illnesses as you already know.
The Body is an intact entity and does what it feels is best for it based on Survival. So if there is reason for an Inflammatory Response to show itself, there must then be a causative Agent as well, or Kelly, is it the chicken and egg debate as to who came first?
Reply to this
Hi BetterCell and Kelly,
Yes, there is lots of inflammation going on! BetterCell there are many causative agents. Here is a good site to check out: www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html. And, yes this is not the kind of cocktail I ever wanted.
Reply to this
BetterCell,
Totally! You kick your shin, it becomes inflamed. You burn your mouth, it becomes inflamed. You take a drug, why wouldn't the body respond by becoming massive if it doesn't like the stimulus it's subjected to?
To add to your comment, there's another element here - with T1 and insulin-taking T2's - the addition of exogenous insulin into the picture creates a downward spiral in and of itself. Exogenous insulin suppresses the secretion of endogenous insulin. That's what I meant by the "use it or lose it" comment. If you don't use a muscle, it atrophies. Start to exercise it, it grows. Who's to say that if the inflammation were to be reduced that the beta cells wouldn't regenerate on their own???
On the concept of a causative agent, I think it's not a "chicken and egg" deal. I think there are causative agents all around. It's just those "lucky" ones of us who align the stars into the unlucky constellation of T1. In my case, for example, 3 months of breastfeeding (risk factor), vaccinations (risk factor), early cereal introduction (risk factor), zinc deficiency, followed by a final massive inflammation trigger, drug chemical toxicity.
It isn't a chicken and egg. It's egg, egg, egg, smash. It all depends on how many eggs are put into and taken out of your basket and how big the eggs are. One streptozocin egg is all anyone would need.
Kelly
Reply to this
This is wonderful for me. I feel as if I am at a gathering in a country house where the people who are there are intelligent, articulate, sane, create, stimulate, propose and provoke new ideas in T1DM.
This for me is a wonderful gift.
So thank you for your company Allie, Sarah, Kelly and Julie.
Intelligence with Sanity reigns Supreme.
Reply to this
BetterCell,
Likewise!
BetterCell, Thanks to you and others that care to share! Much aloha, Julie
Reply to this
Pass the butter! I feel the same way.
Kelly
Reply to this
The menu(so far) will be as follows:
1. Fruit Soup with assorted fresh berries and melon.
2. Iced Lemoncello and assorted Wines.
3. Steamed Sea Bass with in a Ginger/Scallion Base.
4. Assorted Italian Cheeses.
5. Roasted Chicken with Green Olives.
6. Assorted Sauteed Mixed Vegetables-In-Season.
7. Jasmine Rice from Thailand.
8. Cold Cucumbers w/Tomatoes in a Garlic/Olive Oil Pond.
8. Sour Cream Bundt Cake in a Vanilla Banana Essence/ Fresh Whipped Cram on the side.
9. Home-made Ice Cream.
10. Coffee served Fresh-Press Style.
11. Assorted Loose Teas.
I have cooked/prepared all the above(in Real Life) and would be happy to have those mentioned as my guests.
The only Fantasy would be a Country Home off a private Lake with habitat birds supplying the music.
Reply to this
Oh count me in. BetterCell, I knew you were into food; but wow. I seriously daydreamed reading your menu! Thanks for the vision of beauty. Truly brought a smile to my face.
Kelly
Reply to this
BetterCell,
Wow! What a menu. You truly are a chef! I have a kitchen, but only because it came with the house. LOL!
Reply to this
Wow, Bettercell. I can't believe I didn't get a good look at this menu...
We should open up a restaurant...we'll call it "Sweets for the Sweet" (as in us diabetics).
We'll use all fresh wholesome organic ingredients, no artifical sweetners or preservatives. Everything is bursting with flavor...
And we'll make sure some items are gluten and milk free too! For me! And all those Type 1 Celiacs..
WOW...that menu sure has my lemon chicken beat! Hey...I know how to make great salmon with honey dill sauce...
Reply to this
Sarah.........
A Restaurant sounds to me of great tidings.
Your Salmon should be Wild Salmon. as it has more taste. The sauce sounds good, but would be better with the addition of some Dijon Mustard added to it.
I have been thinking of you and the Lactose Intolerence issue........ A possibility for when I serve you, would be the use of a soymilk product to make the ice-cream. I always use butter in my Baking and never use "Artifical Sweetners" so, I would look for a substitute for you as well as far as Desserts go.
Maybe the sign in the Window of our new restaurant should read, "Only Those With Diabetes Welcomed."
Since I do not identify with the Illness, I never use the word Diabetic.
Reply to this
Funny, neither do I. I always say I have "autoimmune insulin deficiency" to avoid ignorant comments and "advice". I hate being lumped in with Type 2 diabetics. So much ignorance, and not enough time to educate.
I actually have a milk allergy (I am allergic to casein and whey), not lactose intolerance (totally different), but soy milk or rice milk sounds great! I am using potato milk right now, and I love it!
Cheers!
Reply to this
Hey Kelly, you’re comments are resounding and remarkable! I was floored when I first saw research about the pancreatic nerves causing inflammation. The more I look into diabetes, heart disease, and every other form of chronic condition – it ALL seems to stem from inflammation problems!! Why are we following protocols that invariably CONTINUE the inflammation? I stand by my mantra in pursuit of a CURE – if we continue to treat diabetes THE SAME WAY we will continue to get the SAME RESULTS. Last time I checked – the overall consensus of the diabetes medical community were still standing around scratching their heads. A little less *inflammation*, please. Best, Allie
Reply to this
Hi Allie,
Thanks for the compliment. I was also floored when I first saw the research on inflammation. A cure will come one day, but it isn't going to come from the insulin manufacturers...
Kelly
Reply to this
The problem is, although it is speculated, there is no proof that autoimmune diabetes IS or WAS a beneficial or expected immune response to an environmental stimulus.
Take insulin resistance (Type 2 diabetes) and the "Thrifty Gene" hypothesis. Insulin resistance WAS beneficial when food was scarce and people died by age 40, before they developed Type 2 diabetes.
So perhaps the genes that predispose to autoimmune diabetes (Type 1) offered some protection against an ancient extinct virus but cause disease with the newer viruses. In other words, natural selection got us here, but has now turned against us in the present environment, just like insulin resistance in Type 2 diabetes.
Another idea is simply that the genes for autoimmunity are NOT beneficial at all, and simply are a bad genetic outcome of having parents with too similar immune systems, which are thought to equal less healthy offspring.
It is a MYTH that all people are born with the ability to prosper and adapt. That is the whole point of natural selection. People WILL become ill and die. The weak, those with "bad" genetics for the current environment, and those with poor/faulty immune systems and organs will die to prevent spreading those genes and mutations.
Think about it. Is there any benefit to someone being born with a serious heart defect? Or Down's Syndrome? Not likely.
It is natural for some people to be the ones that get weeded out by natural selection. Sometimes a bad genetic combo is exactly that.
Yes, some disease provide protection from other diseases, but only if the person has the genes from ONE parent (i.e. Sickle Cell Anemia and Malaria). Have both copies of the gene, and you have SCA and will die from that.
In Type 1 diabetes, we have no way of knowing if it IS a defective maladaptive response to the environment, or if there was some benefit if you were a carrier for the disease, but did not express it.
In allergies, most would say it is simple a maladaptive "defective" response, because a glass of milk may kill me, but most people's immune systems would not respond that way.
In autoimmune diseases, it makes sense to view it a similar way. Since Type 1 diabetes is fatal without treatment, there is no real advantage to having it. Again, perhaps carriers of some of the genetics involved or those who did not express the disease were protected from a virus, such as the Plague. But in our current environment, there is likely no benefit to being a carrier, as far as we know.
Reply to this
INSULIN VACCINATION OR ALLERGY? WHY THE WORD KNITPICKING?
Sarah wrote: So many people mistakenly think they have "allergies" when they don't. To declare you have an "insulin allergy" is somewhat sensational based on your facts. Has your doctor SAID you have an allergy to insulin?
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/02/04/allies-voice-diabetes-does-not-discriminate--so-why-should-mississippi.aspx#comment-849745
Hi Sarah,
How do you know what allergies I have or don't have? Do you just make things up as you go along to get attention? Allergy is a loose term, in common use, to refer to autoimmunity and other 'reactions'. What would convince you—a RAST test? A skin test? A pulse test? Alternative testing? Food challenges?
Alleging that you have some 'special' allergy but I don't -- sounds very Munchausens.
I've had MANY tests over the years-- RAST testing proved food allergies. Skin testing proved allergies to foods, pollens, and animal dander. Pulse testing showed allergies to chemicals such as hydrocarbons, phenol, and chlorine. Alternative testing also suggested allergies. Fortunately, I have outgrown many of my allergies, but for most of my life I have been plagued with symptoms. With my family history--all my siblings have allergies, my sister is atopic, my dad had asthma, my sons have multiple allergies--I would not be the least bit surprised if my reaction to insulin in fact an allergy.
"Insulin allergy in patients with diabetes mellitus … is suspected upon noticing IMMEDIATE symptoms following insulin injections."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18186805?ordinalpos=200&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
I was only on insulin for a short time during my 9th month of my pregnancy. I suspected that I had an allergy to insulin because I had IMMEDIATE symptoms following injections. I felt indescribably horrible-- fast pulse, shortness of breath,