Our Deadly Diabetes Deception: Cures vs Treatments

[Guest guest]

Our De adly Diabetes Deception: Cures vs Treatments

 

http://www.laleva.org/eng/2004/07/our_deadly_diabetes_deception_cures_vs_treatme\

nts.html

 

Greed and dishonest science have promoted a lucrative worldwide epidemic of

diabetes that honesty and good science can quickly reverse by naturally

restoring the body's blood-sugar control mechanism.

 

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 11, Number 4 (June-July 2004)

PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. editor

Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381

From our web page at: http://www.nexusmagazine.com

 

by Thomas Smith © 2004

PO Box 7685

Loveland, CO 80537 USA

Email: Valley

Website: http://www.Healingmatters.com

 

Introduction

If you are an American diabetic, your physician will never tell you that most

cases of diabetes are curable. In fact, if you even mention the " cure " word

around him, he will likely become upset and irrational. His medical school

training only allows him to respond to the word " treatment " . For him, the " cure "

word does not exist. Diabetes, in its modern epidemic form, is a curable disease

and has been for at least 40 years. In 2001, the most recent year for which US

figures are posted, 934,550 Americans died from out-of-control symptoms of this

disease.1

 

Your physician will also never tell you that, at one time, strokes, both

ischaemic and haemorrhagic, heart failure due to neuropathy as well as both

ischaemic and haemorrhagic coronary events, obesity, atherosclerosis, elevated

blood pressure, elevated cholesterol, elevated triglycerides, impotence,

retinopathy, renal failure, liver failure, polycystic ovary syndrome, elevated

blood sugar, systemic candida, impaired carbohydrate metabolism, poor wound

healing, impaired fat metabolism, peripheral neuropathy as well as many more of

today's disgraceful epidemic disorders were once well understood often to be but

symptoms of diabetes.

If you contract diabetes and depend upon orthodox medical treatment, sooner or

later you will experience one or more of its symptoms as the disease rapidly

worsens. It is now common practice to refer to these symptoms as if they were

separable, independent diseases with separate, unrelated treatments provided by

competing medical specialists.

It is true that many of these symptoms can and sometimes do result from other

causes; however, it is also true that this fact has been used to disguise the

causative role of diabetes and to justify expensive, ineffective treatments for

these symptoms.

Epidemic Type II diabetes is curable. By the time you get to the end of this

article, you are going to know that. You're going to know why it isn't routinely

being cured. And, you're going to know how to cure it. You are also probably

going to be angry at what a handful of greedy people have surreptitiously done

to the entire orthodox medical community and to its trusting patients.

 

The Diabetes Industry

Today's diabetes industry is a massive community that has grown step by step

from its dubious origins in the early 20th century. In the last 80 years it has

become enormously successful at shutting out competitive voices that attempt to

point out the fraud involved in modern diabetes treatment. It has matured into a

religion. And, like all religions, it depends heavily upon the faith of the

believer. So successful has it become that it verges on blasphemy to suggest

that, in most cases, the kindly high priest with the stethoscope draped

prominently around his neck is a charlatan and a fraud. In the large majority of

cases, he has never cured a single case of diabetes in his entire medical

career.

The financial and political influence of this medical community has almost

totally subverted the original intent of our regulatory agencies. They routinely

approve death-dealing, ineffective drugs with insufficient testing. Former

commissioner of the FDA, Dr Herbert Ley, in testimony before a US Senate

hearing, commented: " People think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the

FDA is doing and what the public thinks it's doing are as different as night and

day. " 2

The financial and political influence of this medical community dominates our

entire medical insurance industry. Although this is beginning to change, in

America it is still difficult to find employer group medical insurance to cover

effective alternative medical treatments. Orthodox coverage is standard in all

states. Alternative medicine is not. For example, there are only 1,400 licensed

naturopaths in 11 states compared to over 3.4 million orthodox licensees in 50

states.3 Generally, only approved treatments from licensed, credentialled

practitioners are insurable. This, in effect, neatly creates a special kind of

money that can only be spent within the orthodox medical and drug industry. No

other industry in the world has been able to manage the politics of convincing

people to accept so large a part of their pay in a form that often does not

allow them to spend it as they see fit.

The financial and political influence of this medical community completely

controls virtually every diabetes publication in the country. Many diabetes

publications are subsidised by ads for diabetes supplies. No diabetes editor is

going to allow the truth to be printed in his magazine. This is why the diabetic

only pays about one-quarter to one-third of the cost of printing the magazine he

depends upon for accurate information. The rest is subsidised by diabetes

manufacturers with a vested commercial interest in preventing diabetics from

curing their diabetes. When looking for a magazine that tells the truth about

diabetes, look first to see if it is full of ads for diabetes supplies.

And then there are the various associations that solicit annual donations to

find a cure for their proprietary disease. Every year they promise that a cure

is just around the corner—just send more money! Some of these very same

associations have been clearly implicated in providing advice that promotes the

progress of diabetes in their trusting supporters. For example, for years they

heavily promoted exchange diets,4 which are in fact scientifically worthless—as

anyone who has ever tried to use them quickly finds out. They ridiculed the use

of glycaemic tables, which are actually very helpful to the diabetic. They

promoted the use of margarine as heart healthy, long after it was well

understood that margarine causes diabetes and promotes heart failure.5

If people ever wake up to the cure for diabetes that has been suppressed for 40

years, these associations will soon be out of business. But until then, they

nonetheless continue to need our support.

For 40 years, medical research has consistently shown with increasing clarity

that diabetes is a degenerative disease directly caused by an engineered food

supply that is focused on profit instead of health. Although the diligent can

readily glean this information from a wealth of medical research literature, it

is generally otherwise unavailable. Certainly this information has been, and

remains, largely unavailable in the medical schools that train our retail

doctors.

Prominent among the causative agents in our modern diabetes epidemic are the

engineered fats and oils that are sold in today's supermarkets.

The first step to curing diabetes is to stop believing the lie that the disease

is incurable.

 

Diabetes History

In 1922, three Canadian Nobel Prize winners, Banting, Best and Macleod, were

successful in saving the life of a fourteen-year-old diabetic girl in Toronto

General Hospital with injectable insulin.6 Eli Lilly was licensed to manufacture

this new wonder drug, and the medical community basked in the glory of a job

well done.

It wasn't until 1933 that rumours about a new rogue form of diabetes surfaced.

This was in a paper presented by Joslyn, Dublin and Marks and printed in the

American Journal of Medical Sciences. This paper, " Studies on Diabetes

Mellitus " ,7 discussed the emergence of a major epidemic of a disease which

looked very much like the diabetes of the early 1920s, only it did not respond

to the wonder drug, insulin. Even worse, sometimes insulin treatment killed the

patient.

This new disease became known as " insulin-resistant diabetes " because it had the

elevated blood sugar symptom of diabetes but responded poorly to insulin

therapy. Many physicians had considerable success in treating this disease

through diet. A great deal was learned about the relationship between diet and

diabetes in the 1930s and 1940s.

Diabetes, which had a per-capita incidence of 0.0028% at the turn of the

century, had by 1933 zoomed 1,000% in the United States to become a disease seen

by many doctors.8 This disease, under a variety of aliases, was destined to go

on to wreck the health of over half the American population and incapacitate

almost 20% by the 1990s.9

In 1950, the medical community became able to perform serum insulin assays.

These assays quickly revealed that this new disease wasn't classic diabetes; it

was characterised by sufficient, often excessive, blood insulin levels.

The problem was that the insulin was ineffective; it did not reduce blood sugar.

But since the disease had been known as diabetes for almost 20 years, it was

renamed Type II diabetes. This was to distinguish it from the earlier Type I

diabetes, caused by insufficient insulin production by the pancreas.

Had the dietary insights of the previous 20 years dominated the medical scene

from this point and into the late 1960s, diabetes would have become widely

recognised as curable instead of merely treatable. Instead, in 1950, a search

was launched for another wonder drug to deal with the Type II diabetes problem.

 

Cure versus Treatment

This new, ideal, wonder drug would be effective, like insulin, in remitting

obvious adverse symptoms of the disease but not effective in curing the

underlying disease. Thus it would be needed continually for the remaining life

of the patient. It would have to be patentable; that is, it could not be a

natural medication because these are non-patentable. Like insulin, it would have

to be highly profitable to manufacture and distribute. Mandatory government

approvals would be required to stimulate physicians to prescribe it as a

prescription drug. Testing required for these approvals would have to be

enormously expensive to prevent other, unapproved, medications from becoming

competitive.

This is the origin of the classic medical protocol of " treating the symptoms " .

By doing this, both the drug company and the doctor could prosper in business,

and the patient, while not being cured of his disease, was sometimes temporarily

relieved of some of his symptoms.

Additionally, natural medications that actually cured disease would have to be

suppressed. The more effective they were, the more they would need to be

suppressed and their proponents jailed as quacks. After all, it wouldn't do to

have some cheap, effective, natural medication cure disease in a

capital-intensive monopoly market specifically designed to treat symptoms

without curing disease.

Often the natural substance really did cure disease. This is why the force of

law has been and is being used to drive the natural, often superior, medicines

from the marketplace, to remove the " cure " word from the medical vocabulary and

to undermine totally the very concept of a free marketplace in the medical

business.

Now it is clear why the " cure " word is so vigorously suppressed by law. The FDA

has extensive Orwellian regulations that prohibit the use of the " cure " word to

describe any competing medicine or natural substance. It is precisely because

many natural substances do actually both cure and prevent disease that this word

has become so frightening to the drug and orthodox medical community.

 

The Commercial Value of Symptoms

After the drug development policy was redesigned to focus on ameliorating

symptoms rather than curing disease, it became necessary to reinvent the way

drugs were marketed. This was done in 1949 in the midst of a major epidemic of

insulin-resistant diabetes.

So, in 1949, the US medical community reclassified the symptoms of diabetes10

along with many other disease symptoms into diseases in their own right. With

this reclassification as the new basis for diagnosis, competing medical

speciality groups quickly seized upon related groups of symptoms as their own

proprietary symptoms set.

Thus the heart specialist, endocrinologist, allergist, kidney specialist and

many others started to treat the symptoms for which they felt responsible. As

the underlying cause of the disease was widely ignored, all focus on actually

curing anything was completely lost.

Heart failure, for example, which had previously been understood often to be but

a symptom of diabetes, now became a disease not directly connected to diabetes.

It became fashionable to think that diabetes " increased cardiovascular risk " .

The causal role of a failed blood-sugar control system in heart failure became

obscured.

Consistent with the new medical paradigm, none of the treatments offered by the

heart specialist actually cures, or is even intended to cure, their proprietary

disease. For example, the three-year survival rate for bypass surgery is almost

exactly the same as if no surgery was undertaken.11

Today, over half of the people in America suffer from one or more symptoms of

this disease. In its beginnings, it became well known to physicians as Type II

diabetes, insulin-resistant diabetes, insulin resistance, adult-onset diabetes

or, more rarely, hyperinsulinaemia.

According to the American Heart Association, almost 50% of Americans suffer from

one or more symptoms of this disease. One third of the US population is morbidly

obese; half of the population is overweight. Type II diabetes, also called

adult-onset diabetes, now appears routinely in six-year-old children.

Many degenerative diseases can be traced to a massive failure of the endocrine

system. This was well known to the physicians of the 1930s as insulin-resistant

diabetes. This basic underlying disorder is known to be a derangement of the

blood-sugar control system by badly engineered fats and oils. It is exacerbated

and complicated by the widespread lack of other essential nutrition that the

body needs to cope with the metabolic consequences of these poisons.

All fats and oils are not equal. Some are healthy and beneficial; many, commonly

available in the supermarket, are poisonous. The health distinction is not

between saturated and unsaturated, as the fats and oils industry would have us

believe. Many saturated oils and fats are highly beneficial; many unsaturated

oils are highly poisonous. The important health distinction is between natural

and engineered.

There exists great dishonesty in advertising in the fats and oils industry. It

is aimed at creating a market for cheap junk oils such as soy, cottonseed and

rapeseed oils.

With an informed and aware public, these oils would have no market at all, and

the USA—indeed, the world—would have far fewer cases of diabetes.

 

Epidemiological Lifestyle Link

As early as 1901, efforts had been made to manufacture and sell food products by

the use of automated factory machinery because of the immense profits that were

possible. Most of the early efforts failed because people were inherently

suspicious of food that wasn't farm fresh and because the technology was poor.

As long as people were prosperous, suspicious food products made little headway.

Crisco,12 the artificial shortening, was once given away free in 21â?„2 lb cans

in an unsuccessful effort to influence American housewives to trust and buy the

product in preference to lard.

Margarine was introduced and was bitterly opposed by the dairy states in the

USA. With the advent of the Depression of the 1930s, margarine, Crisco and a

host of other refined and hydrogenated products began to make significant

penetration into the food markets of America. Support for dairy opposition to

margarine faded during World War II because there wasn't enough butter for the

needs of both the civilian population and the military.13 At this point, the

dairy industry, having lost much support, simply accepted a diluted market share

and concentrated on supplying the military.

Flax oils and fish oils, which were common in the stores and considered dietary

staples before the American population became diseased, have disappeared from

the shelf. The last supplier of flax oil to the major distribution chains was

Archer Daniels Midland, and it stopped producing and supplying the product in

1950.

More recently, one of the most important of the remaining, genuinely beneficial,

fats was subjected to a massive media disinformation campaign that portrayed it

as a saturated fat that causes heart failure. As a result, it has virtually

disappeared from the supermarket shelves. Thus was coconut oil removed from the

food chain and replaced with soy oil, cottonseed oil and rapeseed oil.14 Our

parents and grandparents would never have swapped a fine, healthy oil like

coconut oil for these cheap, junk oils. It was shortly after this successful

media blitz that the US populace lost its war on fat. For many years, coconut

oil had been our most effective dietary weight-control agent.

The history of the engineered adulteration of our once-clean food supply exactly

parallels the rise of the epidemic of diabetes and hyperinsulinaemia now

sweeping the United States as well as much of the rest of the world.

The second step to a cure for this disease epidemic is to stop believing the lie

that our food supply is safe and nutritious.

 

The Nature of the Disease

Diabetes is classically diagnosed as a failure of the body to metabolise

carbohydrates properly. Its defining symptom is a high blood-glucose level. Type

I diabetes results from insufficient insulin production by the pancreas. Type II

diabetes results from ineffective insulin. In both types, the blood-glucose

level remains elevated. Neither insufficient insulin nor ineffective insulin can

limit post-prandial (after-eating) blood sugar to the normal range. In

established cases of Type II diabetes, these elevated blood sugar levels are

often preceded and accompanied by chronically elevated insulin levels and by

serious distortions of other endocrine hormonal markers.

The ineffective insulin is no different from effective insulin. Its

ineffectiveness lies in the failure of the cell population to respond to it. It

is not the result of any biochemical defect in the insulin itself. Therefore, it

is appropriate to note that this is a disease that affects almost every cell in

the 70 trillion or so cells of the body. All of these cells are dependent upon

the food that we eat for the raw materials they need for self repair and

maintenance.

The classification of diabetes as a failure to metabolise carbohydrates is a

traditional classification that originated in the early 19th century when little

was known about metabolic diseases or processes.15 Today, with our increased

knowledge of these processes, it would appear quite appropriate to define Type

II diabetes more fundamentally as a failure of the body to metabolise fats and

oils properly. This failure results in a loss of effectiveness of insulin and in

the consequent failure to metabolise carbohydrates. Unfortunately, much medical

insight into this matter, except at the research level, remains hampered by its

19th-century legacy.

Thus Type II diabetes and its early hyperinsulinaemic symptoms are whole-body

symptoms of this basic cellular failure to metabolise glucose properly. Each

cell of the body, for reasons which are becoming clearer, finds itself unable to

transport glucose from the bloodstream to its interior. The glucose then remains

in the bloodstream, or is stored as body fat or as glycogen, or is otherwise

disposed of in urine.

It appears that when insulin binds to a cell membrane receptor, it initiates a

complex cascade of biochemical reactions inside the cell. This causes a class of

glucose transporters known as GLUT4 molecules to leave their parking area inside

the cell and travel to the inside surface of the plasma cell membrane.

When in the membrane, they migrate to special areas of the membrane called

caveolae areas.16 There, by another series of biochemical reactions, they

identify and hook up with glucose molecules and transport them into the interior

of the cell by a process called endocytosis. Within the cell's interior, this

glucose is then burned as fuel by the mitochondria to produce energy to power

cellular activity. Thus these GLUT4 transporters lower glucose in the

bloodstream by transporting it out of the bloodstream into all the cells of the

body.

Many of the molecules involved in these glucose- and insulin-mediated pathways

are lipids; that is, they are fatty acids. A healthy plasma cell membrane, now

known to be an active player in the glucose scenario, contains a complement of

cis-type w=3 unsaturated fatty acids.17 This makes the membrane relatively fluid

and slippery. When these cis- fatty acids are chronically unavailable because of

our diet, trans- fatty acids and short- and medium-chain saturated fatty acids

are substituted in the cell membrane. These substitutions make the cellular

membrane stiffer and more sticky, and inhibit the glucose transport mechanism.18

Thus, in the absence of sufficient cis omega 3 fatty acids in our diet, these

fatty acid substitutions take place, the mobility of the GLUT4 transporters is

diminished, the interior biochemistry of the cell is changed and glucose remains

elevated in the bloodstream.

Elsewhere in the body, the pancreas secretes excess insulin, the liver

manufactures fat from the excess sugar, the adipose cells store excess fat, the

body goes into a high urinary mode, insufficient cellular energy is available

for bodily activity and the entire endocrine system becomes distorted.

Eventually, pancreatic failure occurs, body weight plummets and a diabetic

crisis is precipitated.

Although there remains much work to be done to elucidate fully all of the steps

in all of these pathways, this clearly marks the beginning of a biochemical

explanation for the known epidemiological relationship between cheap, engineered

dietary fats and oils and the onset of Type II diabetes.

 

Orthodox Medical Treatment

After the diagnosis of diabetes, modern orthodox medical treatment consists of

either oral hypoglycaemic agents or insulin.

 

• Oral hypoglycaemic agents

In 1955, oral hypoglycaemic drugs were introduced. Currently available oral

hypoglycaemic agents fall into five classifications according to their

biophysical mode of action.19 These classes are: biguanides; glucosidase

inhibitors; meglitinides; sulphonylureas; and thiazolidinediones.

The biguanides lower blood sugar in three ways. They inhibit the normal release

by the liver of its glucose stores, they interfere with intestinal absorption of

glucose from ingested carbohydrates, and they are said to increase peripheral

uptake of glucose.

The glucosidase inhibitors are designed to inhibit the amylase enzymes produced

by the pancreas and which are essential to the digestion of carbohydrates. The

theory is that if the digestion of carbohydrates is inhibited, the blood sugar

level cannot be elevated.

The meglitinides are designed to stimulate the pancreas to produce insulin in a

patient that likely already has an elevated level of insulin in their

bloodstream. Only rarely does the doctor even measure the insulin level. Indeed,

these drugs are frequently prescribed without any knowledge of the pre-existing

insulin level. The fact that an elevated insulin level is almost as damaging as

an elevated glucose level is widely ignored.

The sulphonylureas are another pancreatic stimulant class designed to stimulate

the production of insulin. Serum insulin determinations are rarely made by the

doctor before he prescribes these drugs. They are often prescribed for Type II

diabetics, many of whom already have elevated ineffective insulin. These drugs

are notorious for causing hypoglycaemia as a side effect.

The thiazolidinediones are famous for causing liver cancer. One of them,

Rezulin, was approved in the USA through devious political infighting, but

failed to get approval in the UK because it was known to cause liver cancer. The

doctor who had responsibility to approve it at the FDA refused to do so. It was

only after he was replaced by a more compliant official that Rezulin gained

approval by the FDA. It went on to kill well over 100 diabetes patients and

cripple many others before the fight to get it off the market was finally won.

Rezulin was designed to stimulate the uptake of glucose from the bloodstream by

the peripheral cells and to inhibit the normal secretion of glucose by the

liver. The politics of why this drug ever came onto market, and then remained in

the market for such an unexplainable length of time with regulatory agency

approval, is not clear.20 As of April 2000, lawsuits commenced to clarify this

situation.21

 

• Insulin

Today, insulin is prescribed for both the Type I and Type II diabetics.

Injectable insulin substitutes for the insulin that the body no longer produces.

Of course, this treatment, while necessary for preserving the life of the Type I

diabetic, is highly questionable when applied to the Type II diabetic.

It is important to note that neither insulin nor any of these oral hypoglycaemic

agents exerts any curative action whatsoever on any type of diabetes. None of

these medical strategies is designed to normalise the cellular uptake of glucose

by the cells that need it to power their activity.

The prognosis with this orthodox treatment is increasing disability and early

death from heart or kidney failure or the failure of some other vital organ.

 

Alternative Medical Treatment

The third step to a cure for this disease is to become informed and to apply an

alternative methodology that is soundly based upon good science.

Effective alternative treatment that directly leads to a cure is available today

for some Type I and for many Type II diabetics. About 5% of the diabetic

population suffers from Type I diabetes; about 95% has Type II diabetes.22

Gestational diabetes is simply ordinary diabetes contracted by a woman who is

pregnant.

For the Type I diabetic, an alternative methodology for the treatment of Type I

diabetes is now available. It was developed in modern hospitals in Madras,

India, and subjected to rigorous double-blind studies to prove its efficacy.23

It operates to restore normal pancreatic beta cell function so that the pancreas

can again produce insulin as it should. This approach apparently was capable of

curing Type I diabetes in over 60% of the patients on whom it was tested. The

major complication lies in whether the antigens that originally led to the

autoimmune destruction of these beta cells have disappeared from or remain in

the body. If they remain, a cure is less likely; if they have disappeared, the

cure is more likely. For reasons already discussed, this methodology is not

likely to appear in the United States any time soon, and certainly not in the

American orthodox medical community.

The goal of any effective alternative program is to repair and restore the

body's own blood-sugar control mechanism. It is the malfunctioning of this

mechanism that, over time, directly causes all of the many debilitating symptoms

that make orthodox treatment so financially rewarding for the diabetes industry.

For Type II diabetes, the steps in the program are:24

 

• Repair the faulty blood sugar control system. This is done simply by

substituting clean, healthy, beneficial fats and oils in the diet for the

pristine-looking but toxic trans-isomer mix found in attractive plastic

containers on supermarket shelves. Consume only flax oil, fish oil and

occasionally cod liver oil until blood sugar starts to stabilise. Then add back

healthy oils such as butter, coconut oil, olive oil and clean animal fat. Read

labels; refuse to consume cheap junk oils when they appear in processed food or

on restaurant menus. Diabetics are chronically short of minerals; they need to

add a good-quality, broad-spectrum mineral supplement to the diet.

 

• Control blood sugar manually during the recovery cycle. Under medical

supervision, gradually discontinue all oral hypoglycaemic agents along with any

additional drugs given to counteract their side effects. Develop natural

blood-sugar control by the use of glycaemic tables, by consuming frequent small

meals (including fibre-rich foods), by regular post-prandial exercise, and by

the complete avoidance of all sugars along with the judicious use of only

non-toxic sweeteners.25 Avoid alcohol until blood sugar stabilises in the normal

range. Keep score by using a pinprick-type glucose meter. Keep track of

everything you do with a medical diary.

 

• Restore a proper balance of healthy fats and oils when the blood sugar

controller again works. Permanently remove from the diet all cheap, toxic, junk

fats and oils as well as the processed and restaurant foods that contain them.

When the blood sugar controller again starts to work correctly, gradually

introduce additional healthy foods to the diet. Test the effect of these added

foods by monitoring blood sugar levels with the pinprick-type blood sugar

monitor. Be sure to include the results of these tests in your diary also.

 

• Continue the program until normal insulin values are also restored after blood

sugar levels begin to stabilise in the normal region. Once blood sugar levels

fall into the normal range, the pancreas will gradually stop overproducing

insulin. This process will typically take a little longer and can be tested by

having your physician send a sample of your blood to a lab for a serum insulin

determination. A good idea is to wait a couple of months after blood sugar

control is restored and then have your physician check your insulin level. It's

nice to have blood sugar in the normal range; it's even nicer to have this

accomplished without excess insulin in the bloodstream.

 

• Separately repair the collateral damage done by the disease. Vascular problems

caused by a chronically elevated glucose level will normally reverse themselves

without conscious effort. The effects of retinopathy and of peripheral

neuropathy, for example, will usually self repair. However, when the fine

capillaries in the basement membranes of the kidneys begin to leak due to

chronic high blood glucose, the kidneys compensate by laying down scar tissue to

prevent the leakage. This scar tissue remains even after the diabetes is cured,

and is the reason why the kidney damage is not believed to self repair.

 

A word of warning… When retinopathy develops, there may be a temptation to have

the damage repaired by laser surgery. This laser technique stops the retinal

bleeding by creating scar tissue where the leaks have developed. This scar

tissue will prevent normal healing of the fine capillaries in the eye when the

diabetes is reversed. By reversing the diabetes instead of opting for laser

surgery, there is an excellent chance that the eye will heal completely.

However, if laser surgery is done, this healing will always be complicated by

the scar tissue left by the laser.

The arterial and vascular damage done by years of elevated sugar and insulin and

by the proliferation of systemic candida will slowly reverse due to improved

diet. However, it takes many years to clean out the arteries by this form of

oral chelation. Arterial damage can be reversed much more quickly by using

intravenous chelation therapy.26 What would normally take many years through

diet alone can often be done in six months with intravenous therapy. This is

reputed to be effective over 80% of the time. For obvious reasons, don't expect

your doctor to approve of this, particularly if he's a heart specialist.

 

Recovery Time

The prognosis is usually swift recovery from the disease and restoration of

normal health and energy levels in a few months to a year or more. The length of

time that it takes to effect a cure depends upon how long the disease was

allowed to develop.

For those who work quickly to reverse the disease after early discovery, the

time is usually a few months or less. For those who have had the disease for

many years, this recovery time may lengthen to a year or more. Thus, there is

good reason to get busy reversing this disease as soon as it becomes clearly

identified.

By the time you get to this point in this article, and if we've done a good job

of explaining our diabetes epidemic, you should know what causes it, what

orthodox medical treatment is all about, and why diabetes has become a national

and international disgrace.

Of even greater importance, you have become acquainted with a self-help program

that has demonstrated great potential to actually cure this disease. ∞

 

About the Author:

Thomas Smith is a reluctant medical investigator, having been forced into curing

his own diabetes because it was obvious that his doctor would not or could not

cure it.

He has published the results of his successful diabetes investigation in his

self-help manual, Insulin: Our Silent Killer, written for the layperson but also

widely valued by the medical practitioner. This manual details the steps

required to reverse Type II diabetes and references the work being done with

Type I diabetes. The book may be purchased from the author at PO Box 7685,

Loveland, Colorado 80537, USA (North American residents send $US25.00; overseas

residents should contact the author for payment and shipping instructions).

Thomas Smith has also posted a great deal of useful information about diabetes

on his website, http://www.Healingmatters. com. He can be contacted by telephone

at +1 (970) 669 9176 and by email at valley.

 

Endnotes:

1. National Center for Health Statistics, " Fast Stats " , Deaths/Mortality

Preliminary 2001 data

2. Dr Herbert Ley, in response to a question from Senator Edward Long about the

FDA during US Senate hearings in 1965

3. Eisenberg, David M., MD, " Credentialing complementary and alternative medical

providers " , Annals of Internal Medicine 137(12):968 (December 17, 2002)

4. American Diabetes Association and the American Dietetic Association, The

Official Pocket Guide to Diabetic Exchanges, McGraw-Hill/Contemporary

Distributed Products, newly updated March 1, 1998

5. American Heart Association, " How Do I Follow a Healthy Diet? " , American Heart

Association

National Center (7272 Greenville Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75231-4596, USA),

http://www.americanheart.org

6. Brown., J.A.C., Pears Medical Encyclopedia Illustrated, 1971, p. 250

7. Joslyn, E.P., Dublin, L.I., Marks, H.H., " Studies on Diabetes Mellitus " ,

American Journal of Medical Sciences 186:753-773 (1933)

8. " Diabetes Mellitus " , Encyclopedia Americana, Library Edition, vol. 9, 1966,

pp. 54-56

9. American Heart Association, " Stroke (Brain Attack) " , August 28, 1998,

http://www.amhrt.org/ScientificHStats98/05stroke.html;

American Heart Association, " Cardiovascular Disease Statistics " , August 28,

1998, http://www.amhrt.org/Heart_and_Stroke_A_Z_Guide/cvds.html;

" Statistics related to overweight and obesity " ,

http://niddk.nih.gov/health/nutrit/pubs/statobes.htm;

http://www.winltdusa.com/about/infocenter/healthnews/articles/obesestats.htm

10. " Diabetes Mellitus " , Encyclopedia Americana, ibid., pp. 54-55

11. The Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Co-operative Study Group,

" Eleven-year survival in the Veterans Administration randomized trial of

coronary bypass surgery for stable angina " , New Eng. J. Med. 311:1333-1339

(1984); Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS), " A randomized trial of coronary

artery bypass surgery: quality of life in patients randomly assigned to

treatment groups " , Circulation 68(5):951-960 (1983)

12. Trager, J., The Food Chronology, Henry Holt & Company, New York, 1995 (items

listed by date)

13. " Margarine " , Encyclopedia Americana, Library Edition, vol. 9, 1966, pp.

279-280

14. Fallon, S., Connolly, P., Enig, M.C., Nourishing Traditions, Promotion

Publishing, 1995;

Enig, M.C., " Coconut: In Support of Good Health in the 21st Century " ,

http://www.livecoconutoil.com/maryenig.htm

15. Houssay, Bernardo, A., MD, et al., Human Physiology, McGraw-Hill Book

Company, 1955, pp. 400-421

16. Gustavson, J., et al., " Insulin-stimulated glucose uptake involves the

transition of glucose transporters to a caveolae-rich fraction within the plasma

cell membrane: implications for type II diabetes " , Mol. Med. 2(3):367-372 (May

1996)

17. Ganong, William F., MD, Review of Medical Physiology, 19th edition, 1999, p.

9, pp. 26-33

18. Pan, D.A. et al., " Skeletal muscle membrane lipid composition is related to

adiposity and insulin action " , J. Clin. Invest. 96(6):2802-2808 (December 1995)

19. Physicians' Desk Reference, 53rd edition, 1999

20. Smith, Thomas, Insulin: Our Silent Killer, Thomas Smith, Loveland, Colorado,

revised 2nd

edition, July 2000, p. 20

21. Law Offices of Charles H. Johnson & Associates (telephone 1 800 535 5727,

toll free in North America)

22. American Heart Association, " Diabetes Mellitus Statistics " ,

http://www.amhrt.org

23. Shanmugasundaram, E.R.B. et al. (Dr Ambedkar Institute of Diabetes, Kilpauk

Medical College Hospital, Madras, India), " Possible regeneration of the Islets

of Langerhans in Streptozotocin-diabetic rats given Gymnema sylvestre leaf

extract " , J. Ethnopharmacology 30:265-279 (1990);

Shanmugasundaram, E.R.B. et al., " Use of Gemnema sylvestre leaf extract in the

control of blood glucose in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus " , J.

Ethnopharmacology 30:281-294 (1990)

24. Smith, ibid., pp. 97-123

25. Many popular artificial sweeteners on sale in the supermarket are extremely

poisonous and dangerous to the diabetic; indeed, many of them are worse than the

sugar the diabetic is trying to avoid; see, for example, Smith, ibid., pp.

53-58.

26. Walker, Morton, MD, and Shah, Hitendra, MD, Chelation Therapy, Keats

Publishing, Inc., New Canaan, Connecticut, 1997, ISBN 0-87983-730-6