ads

Wednesday, 6 March 2019

Morning Thinking. March 6, 2019

Sugar is 79 mg/dl. Finally it is normal.Lastly it was 114 mg/dl with my usual dose of 460 units of insulin dose. I worried I have to increase insulin dose, and God know where it is go.
     I got book, Early Diabetes. What I expected it is something about early diagnosed diabetes. It is not. It is infants to diabetic's mothers. Really, one must be very careful with terminology. When I read: 'early diabetes' I do not think it is pregnancy or infancy. Also I do not think it is rats and rat's pregnancy. What is good in all that studies, one can study all the life, and present any results one wish to present. Really, who care how pregnant rat develop diabetes?
      In contrary with rats diabetics do not have that luxury to study early diabetes development. BTW, why 'early' associated with infancy? 'Early' is just early stage of development regardless of age. So, if diabetes diagnosed in age of 80 then it is better to take a look when diabetes started in this individual. But no, people are out of interest and out of study. Rats are more convenient. And cheap. Easy to breed, faster to grow. Are rats and humans the same? If so then how?
      Diabetes differentiated by types. No one know how to diagnose any time of diabetes. More then that types of diabetes are not clearly defined.Diabetes type 2 which presented as type of diabetes when immune system attack own beta cells. Is there are early stage of this diabetes type development? When and how this process started?  How development of diabetes going? What is early stage? When it is last stage? How diabetic was born? How diabetic died? At what age? With what treatment? How treatment for diabetes type 2 was effective or not?
      With so many studies of rats and dogs, there is no one study how diabetes type 1 was developed and where it come from? The same we can say about type 2 diabetes. 95% of diabetic population.  Did someone every thought why there are 95% of diabetics are type 2, non insulin dependent type of diabetes? For me it looks a little bit out of reason. Diabetes which was fatal before insulin discovery, now it is presented by Dr. Oz, or ADA, or any other con men, reversible with Starvation diet. It is 95% of diabetic population. In spite of any recommendations by any one MD no one diet cured diabetes type 2.
      Is this possible to reverse diabetes type 2 with diet? Well, to start let us try to find any collected data how one was cured with diet, reversed diabetes type 2 with diet, and how one doing right now, years after being revered or cured. No one published data. So, there are two options:
There is no any one who reversed diabetes type 2 with diet;
There is no one who treated diabetic type 2 and cured it with diet.
It is a little bit confusing. Yes. So, one point is, to reverse diabetes type 2 with diet is not possible. And second point, all who pretend they treated diabetics type 2 and their treatment was so active and so successful that their diabetics reversed or cured diabetes type 2. All of them, Dr.Oz, Pr. Taylor, ADA including simple Con Men.
      And finally what I wish to say, there are still no one prove that diabetes type 2 caused by obesity. No one prove for that. It is presumed that obesity caused diabetes type 2 because of diabetes type 2 lead to edema and severe limphodema. Also diabetes leads to severe not avoidable hunger. To try to still alive diabetic must to eat. What is interesting, both conditions, high sugar or low sugar lead to the same complication, hunger, severe hunger. Another surprise is that both conditions, as high such low sugar hunger can be avoided with injected dose of insulin.  In both conditions long acting insulin injections is best shot to recovery. Try to recovery with any diet. Maybe someone will be brave to take this study and be guinea pig. This studies are not for me.


via Ravenvoron

No comments:

Post a Comment