A REAL Cure for Diabetes

I'm not diagnosed with anything yet, but I have impaired glucose tolerance ie higher than usual post prandial readings. There isn't a Prediabetes option on the profile settings so i dont put anything. I think this has been going on for some time so I am disinclined to think LADA, but I don't know at this stage. I am inclined to think that the ketones were showing because of too few kcal. I was in 800-900 kcal range at the weekend and although I don't pay attention to calories I use MyFitnessPal which adds them up automatically. My assumption is that too few calories meant that I had to get fuel from somewhere ie fat or even muscle.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

janeecee said:

I am inclined to think that the ketones were showing because of too few kcal. I was in 800-900 kcal range at the weekend and although I don't pay attention to calories I use MyFitnessPal which adds them up automatically. My assumption is that too few calories meant that I had to get fuel from somewhere ie fat or even muscle.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Click to expand...

That sounds like it could be the culprit Re Ketones..I sincerely wish I could advise about the insulin resistance but have no personal experience of that to share unfortunately as my troubles were simply due to lack of insulin per se..tricky one this..especially for you which isn't good..wish I could help more.

Thanks, Paul. I'm between the devil and the deep blue sea. If I could do more physical activity I would. I think it is the root cause of my problem but I can only do what I can do.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

gezzathorpe said:

Hi, I get the point that spikes and fasting levels are higher with diabetics according to the charts . The charts how that non-diabetics can also have spikes, so is it the 'spikyness' that causes damage or the period of persistently high bGs which is not shown in the charts for either diabetics or non-diabetics. And where is the evidence to show that the diabetic pattern on the charts is damaging?

Click to expand...

It is the area under the curves that is important. The area, between the zero baseline and the blue curve is less than the area between the zero baseline and the red curve. The difference between the two areas represents the extra glucose in the blood, in this example, throughout the day. If the pattern is repeated day after day, that is what is called hyperglycemia, a condition in which an excessive amount of glucose circulates in the blood plasma.

Yorksman said:

gezzathorpe said:

Hi, I get the point that spikes and fasting levels are higher with diabetics according to the charts . The charts how that non-diabetics can also have spikes, so is it the 'spikyness' that causes damage or the period of persistently high bGs which is not shown in the charts for either diabetics or non-diabetics. And where is the evidence to show that the diabetic pattern on the charts is damaging?

Click to expand...

It is the area under the curves that is important. The area, between the zero baseline and the blue curve is less than the area between the zero baseline and the red curve. The difference between the two areas represents the extra glucose in the blood, in this example, throughout the day. If the pattern is repeated day after day, that is what is called hyperglycemia, a condition in which an excessive amount of glucose circulates in the blood plasma.

Click to expand...

The problem with that chart is that the time values are not constant, 06:00-12:00-14:00-18:00-22:00. I wonder how many people on this site are between 180 & 210 (10-11.7 mmol/L) for three hours in the afternoon bottoming out at around 7 mmol/L? In my case, I have no excess glucose for 20 hours in every day. Are the remain 4 hours split across the day enough to cause problems? This chart visually gives the impression that there is almost always excessive glucoze in the blood and is misleading if you don't look at the X-axis carefully. It also shows the margin of error marks for diabetes but not for normal and so, for some reason, is incomplete. Allowing for the same margin of error the 'gaps' could be smaller. Do you agree?

Whether spikes cause damage over and above their contribution to overall glucose levels is something that is hotly debated amongst researchers.
There are lots of papers on both sides
Here, about halfway down is the summary of a debate in 2008 from two with opposing views. (Kilpatrick and Monnier)
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/conten ... /2965.full

and here: a summary of the evidence in 2010.
http://edrv.endojournals.org/content/31/2/171.long

Overall lowering of glucose is of pivotal importance in the treatment of diabetes, with proven beneficial effects on microvascular and macrovascular outcomes. Still, patients with similar glycosylated hemoglobin levels and mean glucose values can have markedly different daily glucose excursions. The role of this glucose variability in pathophysiological pathways is the subject of debate. It is strongly related to oxidative stress in in vitro, animal, and human studies in an experimental setting. However, in real-life human studies including type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients, there is neither a reproducible relation with oxidative stress nor a correlation between short-term glucose variability and retinopathy, nephropathy, or neuropathy. On the other hand, there is some evidence that long-term glycemic variability might be related to microvascular complications in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Regarding mortality, a convincing relationship with short-term glucose variability has only been demonstrated in nondiabetic, critically ill patients.

Click to expand...

phoenix said:

Whether spikes cause damage over and above their contribution to overall glucose levels is something that is hotly debated amongst researchers.
There are lots of papers on both sides
Here, about halfway down is the summary of a debate in 2008 from two with opposing views. (Kilpatrick and Monnier)
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/conten ... /2965.full

and here: a summary of the evidence in 2010.
http://edrv.endojournals.org/content/31/2/171.long

Overall lowering of glucose is of pivotal importance in the treatment of diabetes, with proven beneficial effects on microvascular and macrovascular outcomes. Still, patients with similar glycosylated hemoglobin levels and mean glucose values can have markedly different daily glucose excursions. The role of this glucose variability in pathophysiological pathways is the subject of debate. It is strongly related to oxidative stress in in vitro, animal, and human studies in an experimental setting. However, in real-life human studies including type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients, there is neither a reproducible relation with oxidative stress nor a correlation between short-term glucose variability and retinopathy, nephropathy, or neuropathy. On the other hand, there is some evidence that long-term glycemic variability might be related to microvascular complications in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Regarding mortality, a convincing relationship with short-term glucose variability has only been demonstrated in nondiabetic, critically ill patients.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Great stuff ... thanks! As always, the answer must be '42'!

gezzathorpe said:

The problem with that chart is that the time values are not constant, 06:00-12:00-14:00-18:00-22:00. I wonder how many people on this site are between 180 & 210 (10-11.7 mmol/L) for three hours in the afternoon bottoming out at around 7 mmol/L? In my case, I have no excess glucose for 20 hours in every day. Are the remain 4 hours split across the day enough to cause problems? This chart visually gives the impression that there is almost always excessive glucoze in the blood and is misleading if you don't look at the X-axis carefully. It also shows the margin of error marks for diabetes but not for normal and so, for some reason, is incomplete. Allowing for the same margin of error the 'gaps' could be smaller. Do you agree?

Click to expand...

You'd have to source and refer to the original article in MedScape for the details of both the subject and diet from which the measurement is taken. The horizontal axis does not need to be linear. It usually is in simplified graphs but it is by no means universal. This one is arranged to show meal times. Uniform makes it easier to calculate the area under a curve using calculus but this is only used for the purposes of explanation for which, presumably, you'd have to refer to the text. The lines you refer to are arrows, not error bars. Error bars have terminals at either end. If you zoom in, you can see the arrow points.

gezzathorpe said:

This chart visually gives the impression that there is almost always excessive glucoze in the blood and is misleading if you don't look at the X-axis carefully.

Click to expand...

There is in most diabetics, that's why diabetics have higher HBA1c readings. Glucose does not bind easily to haemoglobin and only eventually binds because of constant high plasma levels. Even high spikes of short duration wouldn't do it.

"Hyperglycemia, or high blood sugar is a condition in which an excessive amount of glucose circulates in the blood plasma. A subject with a consistent range between 100 and 126 (American Diabetes Association guidelines) is considered hyperglycemic, while above 126 mg/dl or 7 mmol/l is generally held to have diabetes. Chronic levels exceeding 7 mmol/l (125 mg/dl) can produce organ damage. Chronic hyperglycemia can be measured via the HbA1c test."

Yorksman said:

gezzathorpe said:

The problem with that chart is that the time values are not constant, 06:00-12:00-14:00-18:00-22:00. I wonder how many people on this site are between 180 & 210 (10-11.7 mmol/L) for three hours in the afternoon bottoming out at around 7 mmol/L? In my case, I have no excess glucose for 20 hours in every day. Are the remain 4 hours split across the day enough to cause problems? This chart visually gives the impression that there is almost always excessive glucoze in the blood and is misleading if you don't look at the X-axis carefully. It also shows the margin of error marks for diabetes but not for normal and so, for some reason, is incomplete. Allowing for the same margin of error the 'gaps' could be smaller. Do you agree?

Click to expand...

You'd have to source and refer to the original article in MedScape for the details of both the subject and diet from which the measurement is taken. The horizontal axis does not need to be linear. It usually is in simplified graphs but it is by no means universal. This one is arranged to show meal times. Uniform makes it easier to calculate the area under a curve using calculus but this is only used for the purposes of explanation for which, presumably, you'd have to refer to the text. The lines you refer to are arrows, not error bars. Error bars have terminals at either end. If you zoom in, you can see the arrow points.

gezzathorpe said:

This chart visually gives the impression that there is almost always excessive glucoze in the blood and is misleading if you don't look at the X-axis carefully.

Click to expand...

There is in most diabetics, that's why diabetics have higher HBA1c readings. Glucose does not bind easily to haemoglobin and only eventually binds because of constant high plasma levels. Even high spikes of short duration wouldn't do it.

"Hyperglycemia, or high blood sugar is a condition in which an excessive amount of glucose circulates in the blood plasma. A subject with a consistent range between 100 and 126 (American Diabetes Association guidelines) is considered hyperglycemic, while above 126 mg/dl or 7 mmol/l is generally held to have diabetes. Chronic levels exceeding 7 mmol/l (125 mg/dl) can produce organ damage. Chronic hyperglycemia can be measured via the HbA1c test."

Click to expand...

I reckon they are error bars. They can have arrows (in EXCEL speak ... ERROR BARS, FORMAT ERROR BAR, LINE STYLE, ARROWS). If they are not error bars then what are they saying? It's very frustrating to read charts which are not self-explanatory.
A picture is supposed to paint a thousand words .... (Bread ... sixties I think?)

phoenix said:

Whether spikes cause damage over and above their contribution to overall glucose levels is something that is hotly debated amongst researchers.

Click to expand...

The papers you refer to discuss whether it is process of fluctuation itself that causes the problem, the constant up and down, with a greater range in diabetics, by overstressing the oxidative process, ie the ability to readily detoxify the reactive intermediates or to repair the resulting damage. This is more to do with why high blood sugar levels cause damage than calculating the level of of blood sugar itself.

gezzathorpe said:

If they are not error bars then what are they saying? It's very frustrating to read charts which are not self-explanatory.
A picture is supposed to paint a thousand words .... (Bread ... sixties I think?)

Click to expand...

The chart tells you that the reference is Polonsky KS et al in the New England Journal of Medicine, 1988 Volume 318 pages 1231 to 1239.

Yorksman said:

gezzathorpe said:

If they are not error bars then what are they saying? It's very frustrating to read charts which are not self-explanatory.
A picture is supposed to paint a thousand words .... (Bread ... sixties I think?)

Click to expand...

The chart tells you that the reference is Polonsky KS et al in the New England Journal of Medicine, 1988 Volume 318 pages 1231 to 1239.

Click to expand...

No wonder he was careless with the chart ... he must have been b.gg....d by the time he had got to that page. :crazy:

Ok so this simply raw program is all about type 2 people. I would not try this as a type 1 its suicide tbf

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

No, DanielBail, the OP is Type 1 and has been for a number of years.

I'm afraid us Type 2s have as usual strayed off the point a bit. Mea culpa!

I think I tend to agree with you about the raw food - though I believe it is possible for a Type 1 to reduce their insulin intake by a careful diet - eg Dr Richard Bernstein.

Viv 8)

T2 definitely not a lifestyle choice - at 5'5 and steady 8.5 -9 stone not into junk food or booze I am afraid my hackles rise at any references at it JUST being a choice - mine is genetic and yes I was shocked at diagnoses as was my brother who borders on health fanatic! I am certainly not, nor ever have been indolent either. I know there are others like me on this forum, who feel as I do. For example check out post on skinny T2s.

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Viv - of course T1's can reduce their insulin intake, but we also could by drinking whiskey to excess, not sure that's advisable either. The point is that it is by no means a cure!

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Mr Happy said:

Viv - of course T1's can reduce their insulin intake, but we also could by drinking whiskey to excess, not sure that's advisable either. The point is that it is by no means a cure!

Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Click to expand...

I agree with you, Mr Happy - and DanielBail. I'm just trying to be restrained in my replies :wink:

Viv 8)

Just remember, Pharmaceutical companies never want to cure you of anything. Everything they do is to keep you living longer so someone has to keep paying for the medication.

Click to expand...

Totally AGREE.

I would also say that the medications themselves very often cause other serious long term health issues, which again leads to the pharmaceutical industry providing more products, which leads to more money for them.

With the amount of chemicals that we are indirectly forced fed through pumped up chickens/meat and commercially farmed products, our body has no way of operating efficently. It's a spanner in the works! The best cure is prevention of the governments approval of so called "safe chemicals"going into our body but the problem is to do that we have to stop shopping and only eat what we can produce personally, and let's face it that is not a viable option either.

Pharmaceutical and chemical companies as a group create the problems and they manage it very efficently, just like a commercial poultry farmer manages his stock, our body is their stock, they do as they wish with us and the govenment is in their pocket, making the laws to help themselves. Nice setup!

A real cure for diabetes is not a single thing but a combination of actions and steps taken by individuals, but when there is so much power and money used by these corporations to protect their control over their "stock" (us) and the profits we bring as that stock, there will never be a cure for diabetes other than taking preventative steps as much as possible.

I was fit and active and not overweight before being diagnosed with type 2 I did both yoga and pilates weekly. My type 2 seems to be caused by polycystic ovarian disease, a well known side effect of pco. 18 months after diagnosis I developed a prolapsed spinal disk and now have degenerative disk disease which is what makes it a struggle to walk, exercise has become virtually impossible, that's what has made me unfit!

Well, Brit90, I was quite surprised to read of "a real cure for diabetes" and yes it was quite a challenging article to say the least, but well done on you !

I juice and drink raw vegetables and fruit with ginger nearly every single day and enjoy it tremendously and yes, it does work extremely quick on blood sugar levels. Within 2 hours it is up and then down so I am forever testing and keeping tabs so to speak. :crazy:

An exercise routine followed with good balanced snacks on a regular basis.

But now having said that, and after 43 years of being an insulin dependent diabetic who has cheated and taken more chances than I can imagine, we become accustomed to other folk telling us what we must and must not do according to medical text ! :shock:

Raw vegetables are good for you as well as fruit, granted but, this may not be the ultimate cure for diabetes so please be careful and keep testing your blood glucose levels.