With the exception of diet and lifestyle changes the current treatment for diabetes are ineffective. The problem gets worse and you need to take more medication untill one o the side efects kills you. However diabetes type 2 is not a
fixed sentence. Just last week I saw a person who described to me that they
used to have diabetes type 2. He had lost 20 kilograms and had gone on a
nutrient dense, no carbohydrate diet and changed their attitude to their
illness and their lifestyle. Almost every week I hear of people reversing their
diabetes not to mention the dozen or so books and DVDs on the topic. .
Despite the fact that we know the causes of diabetes type 2 as lifestyle and diet factors the rate of this disease continue to skyrocket. The prevalence of diabetes
and in-particular type 2, which accounts for 90-95% of all diabetes cases, is rapidly increasing
world wide. It is estimated that in 1995 there were around 118-135 million
people world wide living with diabetes, predominately type 2. World Health
Organisation projections are for increases in the incidence of type2 diabetes
from 171 million to 366 million people globally by the year 2030 but these
estimates are probably underestimated because they are based on current rates
of obesity. Other reports have put the figure at
around 400 million by the year 2025, "(Halban et al. 2006)". A major
Australian study found the prevalence of diabetes in Australia has doubled over
the past 20 years to over 7% of adult Australians with around 90% of those
cases being type 2.
The current surge in diabetes mellitus appears to have emerged around 30
years ago; particularly worrying is the increase in juvenile type 2 diabetes
that was almost unheard of 20 years ago. At the
same time the incidence of associated factors like obesity and pre‑cursers such
as metabolic syndrome have also risen. In 1992 Diabetes
type 2 in children only
accounted for 2-4% of diabetes but by 1994 it accounted for 16% of diagnoses in
children, particularly in ethnic minority group.
Perhaps it is time we took some action. So here are some solutions below including a report from the orthomolecular medicine group. I have reprinted it with their permission and with a link to their website. It is well worth a visit and to get their newsletter.
But to start with the simplest solution. Some friends of mine Rob and Ellen recently asked me why does sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) decrease their blood sugar. Interestingly there is a lot on the internet on this topic and well worth a try.
http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml
Substituting Vitamins and Supplements for Pharmaceuticals in Type 2 Diabetes
Commentary by Stuart Lindsey, PharmD
(OMNS May 28, 2012) Just when you
thought it was safe to go back into the drugstore, we are going to
question authority yet again. Readers may remember Dr. Stuart Lindsey as
the Frustrated Pharmacist (http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v08n05.shtml).
He's back and at it once more, this time presenting an important
supplement-based approach to type 2 diabetes. This essay presents ideas
that are very possibly a large part of the solution. As with all OMNS
releases, it is not meant to substitute for medical advice. Persons
should consult their own doctor before making any health decision. -
Andrew W. Saul, Editor
The current treatment of diabetes is
among the least successful in medicine, despite billions of dollars
spent on research. Many scientists make a career of studying diabetes.
Medicine has succeeded in making diabetes very expensive for the patient
while making the disease a cash cow for the numerous businesses that
cater to the diabetic. We should expect to see some improvement in
diabetic treatment, but in fact the basic protocols haven't changed much
in twenty years. Is research getting close to a solution? In my opinion
as a practicing pharmacist, the answer is no.
For fifteen years I was the pharmacy
manager for an independent neighborhood drug store. I saw the results of
many people over the long term as they were introduced to the
"sugar-med treadmill." After prolonged consumption of their diabetic
medications, their health did not improve. This was disturbing to me.
The long term diabetics all seemed to have the same group of symptoms:
they were overweight (due to hyper-insulinemia), edematous (having
swelling under the skin), and they all suffered from poor exercise
tolerance and had a generally unhealthy appearance. Many of them had
peripheral neuropathy (malfunction of nerves), often associated with
pain in their hands and feet. Only rarely did they believe their
diabetes treatment was actually improving their health.
My interest in the lack of results from
standard treatment of diabetes came into sharp focus when pain in my
feet led to my being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. From my
observations at work, I already knew that the drug treatments for
peripheral neuropathy were questionable. Introducing amitriptyline,
gabapentin and Lyrica, which are sedatives and pain killers, made the
people sleep a lot. Medically, it's obvious that sedating nerves doesn't
solve anything. When such patients step up to daily long term narcotics
and finally get some pain relief, they still haven't solved their
problems.
Current medical practice relies on the
HgbA1c (glycated hemoglobin) level as a measure of blood sugar over
several months. The glycated hemoglobin is caused by high levels of
sugar binding to hemoglobin inside red blood cells. When it builds up,
this means that the body's biochemicals and organs are being damaged by
too much sugar. It was interesting to note how many of the diabetic
patients were in the normal range (i.e. HgbA1c < 6.5) but were still
in agony over their feet. The problem was that seeing a normal value of
HgbA1c, the doctor would hesitate to change the treatment. Apparently,
severe foot pain wasn't a symptom that needed attention.
I decided to explore the whole HgbA1c
issue. The biggest argument you see in diabetes is that diabetes is a
'disposal' issue. A high level of blood sugar is a type of metabolic
malfunction that needs to be corrected. Blood sugar has a geography
problem. The body seems driven to urinate the sugars out of the body
instead of jamming the sugars across supposedly malfunctioning membranes
and burning the sugars intracellularly. Medical practice can apply
insulin and many types of drugs to insure that the body's tissues
metabolize the sugars. Most current diabetic research is targeted at
'breaching the barrier' and making the supposedly malfunctioning
membranes more permeable to carbohydrates. When those extra sugar
calories are crammed into cells you get advanced glycation end-products
(AGE's) that are a threat to the body.
In 2005, a UK researcher named Paul
Thornalley wrote a paper detailing how many diabetic symptoms are due to
a deficiency of thiamine (B-1).[1] Elevated blood sugar promotes a type
of toxicity in the kidneys that causes thiamine to be excreted by the
kidney at a rate much higher (sixteen to twenty-five times higher) than
normal, leading to an acute deficiency of thiamine. From other studies,
it is known that deficiencies in all B vitamins, as well as vitamin C
and D are common in diabetics.[2] This can cause most of the symptoms of
type 2 diabetes, which include: polyneuropathy, nephropathy (kidney
damage), retinopathy (eye damage) and eventually heart failure. This
raises the question of whether the symptoms are from diabetes or acute
beriberi?
When I was diagnosed with type II
diabetes, I immediately balked at taking the standard diabetic drugs. My
doctor wanted to place me on statins, metformin and Byetta, all of
which I refused to take. Having researched Dr. Thornalley's theory of
diabetes being an acute thiamine deficiency, I started a regimen of
vitamin and mineral supplements. Although the pain in my feet was quite
severe, I wanted to avoid the regular drug regimen because it relied
upon taking lots of pain killers that don't cure the problem. I reasoned
that when the body's B vitamin levels are depleted due to high blood
sugar, replenishing body stores through diet alone is difficult, so
supplementation will be necessary.
I started taking a dietary supplement of
thiamine (benfotiamine, 250mg 4x/day). I also added of vitamin B-6
(250mg/day) and pyridoxal 5 phosphate (P5P, 100mg/day) magnesium
(aspartate, citrate, malate, or chloride) and acetyl-l-carnitine (1000
mg/day) depending on the severity of my peripheral neuropathy symptoms.
More recently I've learned of the importance of taking vitamin C to
reduce inflammation and prevent oxidation from high blood sugar
levels.[2] My doctor did not approve of my self-treatment but was
curious. I told him that I was willing to go back to the standard of
care if this didn't work.
"Positive factors for treating type 2 diabetes are magnesium,
exercise, weight control, chromium, dietary fiber, the B-vitamins,
vitamin E, vanadium, vitamin C, and complex carbohydrates. I have been
using the positive factors for the past 40 years. When patients followed
such a program, the results are very good." Abram Hoffer, MD, PhD [3]
The most overt of the neuropathy
symptoms started to subside rapidly. Within a week, the shooting pains
in my ankles were mostly gone. All of the other symptoms of numbness of
the toes and overall pain of the feet including the "boot effect" (the
feeling that you have your boots or socks on) were mostly gone in three
weeks. Now I know this treatment may not be a cure for diabetes. But it
is a valid and reasonably inexpensive way to control the symptoms,
which are held at bay as long as you keep your thiamine levels high. If
you quit taking thiamine and the other B vitamins, the symptoms come
roaring back.
I looked for the inevitable
deterioration of my health that had been predicted. Ignore your blood
sugar levels at your peril I was told. I was going to have kidney
problems, my pancreas would stop cooperating and my vision would become
blurry as the elevated sugars damaged my retinas. But the only sign of
an active problem was the neuropathies in my feet which were quite
painful at times: numbness of my toe area and shooting pains in my foot
joints. I also had the feeling that the circulation of my feet was poor
as my feet were always cold.
After two years I finally got blood
tests. I still felt very good having lost some weight, with no vision
problems, and my energy level and psychological attitude were all fine.I
was actually afraid to look at the results and finding out that I had
finally outsmarted myself and got hurt. There is a quite a propaganda
machine built around the treatment of diabetes. As I drove over to
retrieve my blood tests I did a mental check of how I felt. I decided I
couldn't have a lot wrong with me as I just felt too good. My blood
tests were amazingly free of problems related to elevated blood sugar,
and I had few other related discernible health defects. This thiamine
treatment did not change my HgbA1c (which is currently 9.1, and that is
high) or my resting blood sugars (fasting blood sugars still between
180-190, and those also are high). Values like these are supposed to
indicate a poor quality of health. My recent blood tests indicated:
Creatinine, urine 86.7mg/dl. Scale 20-370; low normal.
Microalbumin/Creatinine ratio 9.2mg/GCr. Scale 0-30; low normal.
Creatinine and microalbumineria values
are the so called "Canary in the Coal Mine" indicators. The kidneys are
supposed to go first when Advanced Glycation Endproducts (AGEs) have
started your march to health failure because you didn't keep your HgbA1c
values within range. I think my two-plus years is long enough for this
to play out. I had my eyes checked for sugar damage to my retinas. I
have no sugar damage to my eyes whatsoever. I am 61 years old and have
20-25 vision in both eyes. Jonathan Wright, MD, is among those who have
noted that skin tags may be connected to diabetes; interestingly
enough the skin tags on my arms have all disappeared.
However, my health hasn't failed due to
hyperglycemia, although it is still a problem. In my case, the unusual
positive results are evidently due to my nutritional approach. I
substituted supplements of several essential nutrients for
pharmaceuticals and stayed in relatively good health. And I continue to
try supplementing with other nutrients such as antioxidants which are
known to help prevent diabetes. [2] This suggests that the health issues
are actually caused by nutritional deficiencies that can be easily
prevented.
I am hoping this simple (and non-toxic)
experiment on myself will lead the field to discussing the validity of
substituting vitamins in diabetes treatment. The treatment of diabetes
as it now stands is complicated and expensive. I am spending about
$130/month on supplements, and during this two year experiment I have
not given my doctor a single dime for advice on how to regulate my
HgbA1c value. I imagine I've saved more than twice that amount by
avoiding paying for drugs and doctor visits. Is this justified? If my
health remains good and I have no other serious problems, I believe it
is.
If all diabetics would supplement with B
vitamins and vitamins C, D, and E, and minerals such as calcium and
magnesium, they would lessen their problems with insulin and blood
sugar, and the other serious symptoms of diabetes.[2] The reason is that
most people in our society, especially including diabetics, have
deficiencies of these essential nutrients that are known to be related
to diabetes. But this essay is also an attempt to unseat some basic
tenets of the medical fiasco known as diabetes. The prevalence in 2011
of type II world-wide according to the World Health Organization (WHO)
is 346 million, and some 3.4 million people dies in 2004 as a
consequence of the disease. The WHO predicts that the deaths
attributable to diabetes will double between 2005 and 2030. [4] With
this kind of projection a "Manhattan Project" kind of response seems
necessary.
So what is the intellectual problem that
seems so intractable to the medical research community? The standard
treatments to lower blood sugar and HgbA1c were recently tested in
medical trials. The ACCORD trials were meant to validate once and for
all that the closer a patient got to a HgbA1c level of 6% the healthier a
person became. Instead there was 22% increase in mortality from heart
failure.[5] This unexpected value caused the FDA to terminate the trial
midstream. Is it possible that the HgbA1c value should not be a primary
goal in evaluating diabetes treatments?
If you go to PubMed and enter the
keywords "thiamine deficiency" and "diabetes" you will get dozens of
references that describe how many symptoms of diabetes are caused by a
thiamine deficiency it generates. Deficiencies of B vitamins and other
essential nutrients are important in diabetes.[2] This should be
required reading for all doctors who treat or research diabetes.
Currently in conventional management of diabetes, supplement based
nutrition therapy is utterly neglected. The National Diabetes Fact Sheet
reported that in 2007, the direct medical costs of diabetes nationally
was estimated at $116 billion (USD). [6]
Diabetic patients can feel overwhelmed
by a diagnosis of hyperglycemia, but are often comforted by the
complicated explanations and sudden increase in activity and attention
directed at them. The possibility that they are being misled just
doesn't come up. Even if patients decide to do their own research it can
be confusing. The cause of diabetes is basically unknown, but they are
told that with some major alterations to one's lifestyle and lots of
drugs liberally applied they can lead a relatively normal life. However
for the truly curious, a large block of mainstream nutrition ideas of
which the doctors are mostly ignorant can be freely accessed on the
internet. When a patient presents this alternative information to the
doctor today, they are comforted and told that they are already getting
the cutting edge treatment. But even three years after the revelations
of the ACCORD trials there has been no major correction of the type II
treatment protocols that addresses the unexplained mortality issues
revealed by the trials.
Even if my vitamin arguments are only
partially correct, the implications for mainstream medicine are
staggering. These ideas need wide discussion the field, because patients
with diabetes need some new ideas.
For further reading:
Melvyn R. Werbach's Nutritional Influences on Illness
contains a valuable review of research indicating the therapeutic value
of supplements, and their specific dosages, for diabetics. Third Line
Press, 2nd Edition, 1996 ISBN-10: 0961855053; ISBN-13: 978-0961855055.
References:
1. Thornalley PJ: The potential role of thiamine (vitamin B-1) in diabetic complications. Curr Diabetes Rev, 2005; 1:287-298
2. Brighthope IE (2012) The Vitamin Cure for Diabetes: Prevent and Treat Diabetes Using Nutrition and Vitamin Supplementation. Basic Health Publications ISBN-13: 978-1591202905.
5. Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk
in Diabetes Study Group, Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al:
Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type II diabetes. N Engl J Med,
2008; 358: 2545-2559.
(Much of this article is drawn from Lindsey SL Substituting vitamins and supplements for pharmaceuticals in type 2 diabetes J Orthomolecular Med 2012, 27:1; p 5-8. We thank the Journal for permission to reprint it here in edited form .)
