• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Type 1 - Cured ?


Insulin is not needed for many cells including brain cells and liver cells but if the cell only uses GLUT4 transporters then it needs insulin and muscle cells fall into that category.

A recent study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23653323
did show a difference but it was not that they did not have insulin. It showed that t2D with DKA had a progressive decrease in insulin secretion, while people with ketosis prone diabetes (KPD) AND who were new onset, who had DKA had recovered insulin secretory function over time and did not need to inject insulin.

Not everyone can recover from DKA without insulin. Some patients need temporary insulin treatment,
 
Most researchers consider that there are two intracellular pools of GLUT4, one stimulated by insulin, the other by muscle contraction. Normally they are thought to be additive in effect.
A 1995 paper
Contraction stimulates translocation of glucose transporter GLUT4 in skeletal muscle through a mechanism distinct from that of insulin
http://www.pnas.org/content/92/13/5817.full.pdf
a much more detailed recent one Exercise, GLUT4, and Skeletal Muscle Glucose Uptake
http://physrev.physiology.org/content/93/3/993


Of course one wouldn't go out for a run with no insulin on board but It does means that during (anaerobic) exercise we can get glucose into the muscle by movement alone. One still has to control the release of glucose from the liver not easily done in someone with little or no insulin. Injected insulin can't be stopped so too high a level of insulin can quickly lead to hypos during exercise. On the other hand if one has had not enough prior insulin and resultant very high glucose levels, then the cells certainly may not be able to take in enough quickly enough, the liver will deliver more glucose and glucose levels will rise even higher.
Insulin pumps help a lot but it's still hard to get it right every time. Personally, I can exercise for long periods with a tiny (0.1-0.2 units of insulin an hour) and still have to take in some carbohydrates (on a long mountain walk , I may not always take insulin at lunch, if I do it will be much less than normal.) If I tried to use such a tiny amount of insulin whilst sat at the computer or watching television then my levels would shoot up.

I don't think that I have suggested that everyone could recover from DKA without insulin. People with KPD have a condition in which the presence or absence of sufficient insulin to prevent DKA seems to be intermittent. They most certainly require insulin when in DKA.
 

You didn't, Kyrani was just using a "straw man" tactic. Stating the obvious and implying that others don't know it.
 

You made the statement that "glucose can get into a cell without insulin" What you really meant to say was during exercise there is evidence that glucose can get into muscle cells via an alternative route. This is a special case.

Then in the next sentence you talk about people with DKA recovering and needing no insulin. It appeared that you used the first argument to justify the second. That is why I made my remark.

PS thanks for the articles. They are very interesting.
 
I accept that it could read like that out of context , it was a quick reply to E Dave However since you also quoted his original post on another diabetes forum today you must have seen that exercise was the context.
 
kyrani99 said:
Then in the next sentence you talk about people with DKA recovering and needing no insulin. It appeared that you used the first argument to justify the second. That is why I made my remark.
Click to expand...
I don't think it appeared that way to anyone else, Kyrani. But then, we are not trying to find fault, where there is none. :-/
 
Kyrani,

I have extensively read your blogs & followed relevant links posted.
Your experiment regarding susceptibility to suggestion with mediums on your web site. I actually was involved in under different circumstances a number of years ago...
Like the pharmaceutical companies & the cohorts that are demonised in your theory. Your own ideology in essence leaves no room for expansion.
It's like the Schrödinger cat thing or a Chinese finger trap when it comes to questioning your theory in depth to gain a better understanding.
Yes, I can agree with what you say about medical firms monopolising treatment..

As much as I enjoy your posts..... In short what you promote could easily be interpreted as the very thing you uphold as the enemy.

I respect the other posters here & what I am about to say will come under scrutiny to which a reply might be imminent....

My answer is simple, we live longer these days thanks to medicine.
A hundred years ago I would have died at the age of 8. "Natural selection" would have played its part. Like the millions of years previous.
If others in my predicament had the ability to "self heal"? Then diabetes would pretty much be all but stamped out by now & classed as a minor ailment. Like a cold. Yes viruses can mutate but that's a reaction to modern vaccines.. All part of the Natural selection with regards to the virus too.
You right in one respect. Our minds can heal, but not by turning our back on what we created to do the job In favour of an ancient belief system.
Which takes me round again. Eventually we would have evolved with no genetic disposition for Diabetes.... Or it's possible the auto immune mullarky would mutate to accommodate..?
No one really gives a **** about a fruit fly, it's possible these experiments are in practice on the bassis of my aforementioned idea, but I'm not going to fight my statment to the death if @Spiker sees a flaw in my logic. " Give thought to the thought.!
Your self healing may well be the remnant of an ancient thought dead genetic linage like Neanderthal..? Or some lost Amazon tribe??
The future is full of possibilities.. Not all of em are in our favour.. My smart money is on dolphins!
 

1) yes one would, or at least effectively next to none. Last night's basal and then a2-hour fasted bike ride. Required about 15g carbs.

2) see above, also lowering carbs adn exercising gives a better ability to utilise fats, as does good base-building (possibly in my favour)

3) too bloody right

4) yesterday's ride, 1U basal, 45g breakfast, 110g during 3hr 30 riding, no rise in BG, stayed just about where I wanted it.

I'd love to let a physiologist loose on me and see exactly why they think I can work on so little carbs for endurance. I don't think I'm keto adapted, or at least I have no measurable ketones by finger prick sample. I'm on about 30-40g/hr when running or riding, less than half what the textbooks would say for my pace/speed.
 
1) yes one would, or at least effectively next to none. Last night's basal and then a2-hour fasted bike ride. Required about 15g carbs
Click to expand...
Your last nights basal would be still working plus any insulin that you still produce.
I can understand what you are saying, probably I never had the 'guts' to cut out insulin entirely because I was told not to and because it was exercise without insulin that caused the DKA that precipitated my diagnosis.
That's why I reduce insulin to tiny levels whilst exercising because I feel that someone who doesn't have diabetes doesn't completely switch it off, it's reduced but it's needed for a variety of functions.
Time flies, I can't believe how long it is since I was diagnosed and I feel that it is usually less of a problem now. I still need very few carbs for exercise but I still need them regularly, even with small amounts of basal (less than you, I drip feed at 1 dextrose tab at a time but my exercise is also less intense)
It maybe easier because I have less residual beta cell function, or because I have learned to deal with it or maybe I became more insulin resistant because I am older and a bit less active.
Too many variables (and this post is hugely speculative)
 
Spiker said:
I don't think it appeared that way to anyone else, Kyrani. But then, we are not trying to find fault, where there is none. :-/
Click to expand...

I responded according to how I read it. It sounded like a logical argument was being made to me. Who is out to find fault? I don't see it as "fault". I simply wanted to clear up the matter of "glucose can get into a cell without insulin".

However it did him the opportunity to give us some interesting articles so where's the harm? I don't understand you.
 
Jaylee said:
Kyrani,


Like the pharmaceutical companies & the cohorts that are demonised in your theory. Your own ideology in essence leaves no room for expansion.

In short what you promote could easily be interpreted as the very thing you uphold as the enemy.
Click to expand...

could you please explain what you mean here a bit further.
How does my ideology leave no room for expansion?
And in the second remark how can what I promote be interpreted as the enemy?

I want to say one thing here: I do not see the medical industry as all bad at all. I see corruption that makes me angry because people's lives are at stake. But I am also accepting of medicine and there have been many great advances. Insulin is one of those. It is very good for people to survive, of course. But if there is a possible way to heal or to be less dependent on insulin then I think that should be pursued.

Jaylee said:
You right in one respect. Our minds can heal, but not by turning our back on what we created to do the job In favour of an ancient belief system."
Click to expand...

I agree. But I now see that we disagree I think on some basics and maybe that is why we don't see each other's views fully. I see the mind as a non-physical reality that underpins the physical reality. I believe, from my experiences, that we each have our own private mind but we also all mentally interact and that allows us to perceive ideas that are someone else's suggestions. This makes a huge difference because while we believe an idea is of our own making we become involved in trying to work out why we thought that idea and that leads nowhere. If however we recognize the idea is just a suggestion then we can discard it without effort.

Another area we disagree on is evolutionary theory. I don't buy it. There is so much complexity in a single cell that it would have taken longer than the age of the universe for it to have evolved from random processes and natural selection. I also don't buy it because I have seen the case of cancer many times over in my body and I have been able to remiss them. But I won't get into that because that would take a blog to say not a post.

For the record I do care about the fruit fly, it's a living creature and has a right to live free and unharmed.

Yes, Give thought to the thought.! For this reason.
The biology is purpose-driven. I strongly reject the idea that we are just robots. Ideas and more particularly beliefs cause us to react and that reaction is somatic!
Kyrani
 

My apologies Kyrani. I was referring to many of your glorious blog theories regarding conspiracy with the pharma industry & medical professionals you posted on your site dating back a couple of years... Your therory back then highlighted financial gain being the main motive, also including a "toxic subculture" subliminally suggesting we are I'll in order to create more customers.... (Keeping this short if OK with you?)
You felt focusing on self healing techniques would do away with disease. Thus the associated treatment.

So, in focus on the pyramid.

I now accept I have misinterpreted your present view on this thread as that of the theory you so eloquently expressed in your personal blog.
Which in hindsight realise Is not the view you now hold here on this forum, due to the great advice offered on here in diabetes care..!

I after much consideration, also feel I could live with the fruit fly!
 

I don't know about the medical industry wanting to create more customers but taking advantage of the situation, which is just business really.

I only arrived at the conspiracy theory because there are many who are seriously hassling me and some are professional people.

Seeing that ideas we hold can affect our physiology and being able to overcome this will do away with disease. The new era!

PS I'm glad you have good feeling for the fruit fly too!! (probably the first time I used one of these.
 
kyrani99 said:
I only arrived at the conspiracy theory because there are many who are seriously hassling me and some are professional people.
Click to expand...

You refer to your blogs shocking attempted assault on your two dogs by such professionals which you highlighted as the depths of this harassment...

I knew a guy who owned a dog. (It was a beautiful Great Dane I think?) & he had a similar problem with criminal gang harassment..
It pretty much made him & the dog a nervous wreck resulting in inconsolable panic attacks & a need to over eat comfort food to resolve this issue,..

Your probably made of stronger stuff..!
 
Heathenlass said:
Thank you, @phoenix, that's interesting .

Would the anti rejection therapies used in organ transplantation have a protective effect in transplanted or regenerated beta cells ?

Signy
Click to expand...
Similar anti rejection approaches are required, and used, in both cases, but are typically blunt instruments that have a general effect on the immune system, causing immunosuppression. Much more than the immune weakness we already have as diabetics. :-(
 
Nathan Thomas said:
Hi, I was taken into hospital after collapsing [...] confirmed type 1 having calculated a 60% pancreas/insulin function.
Click to expand...

@Nathan Thomas, 60% pancreatic function sounds very high for a T1 admitted after hyperglycemic collapse. I would strongly suspect that a diagnosis of conventional T1 is not correct, and that conventional insulin T1 therapy is highly inappropriate if you still have 60% insulin production. Do you have your lab results with the antibody scores and blood insulin concentration?

While it's unorthodox, you would be an excellent candidate to treat by carbohydrate restriction only, maybe a minimal basal insulin dose, and see what happens.

I'm worried though that you say you had high BG and then were readmitted with dizzy spells after discontinuing insulin. That strongly suggests you do need to continue at least small amounts of basal insulin, or you will make yourself ill. But that's not obviously consistent with having 60% pancreatic function. Unless the dizzy spells were right after eating? In which case you may have lost the fast phase 1 insulin response but still have the slower phase 2 response. This is fairly common in the newly diagnosed.

Are you sure about this 60% number?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…