I took all white carbs and refined sugars out of my diet after my A1C kept creeping up. My Dr said I needed metformin! I also started daily fast walking when my blood pressure rose high after much stress from a family loss. Dr wanted to put me on blood pressure meds. I was in a medical downhill spin. Now I’m healthy, much lower healthy numbers and no meds. I didn’t need meds, just lifestyle changes. That should have been my drs first suggestion. Why do drs always recommend meds first? I now have a new dr. and I think about how my healthy life is “my responsibility”. Meds aren’t my answer, choices are. It’s not easy to always eat healthy, but I’d rather feel good and stay on the right track. Many times it’s in our power to make good decision! We just have to do it ourselves!
Years ago I saw an ENT about reflux. He put me on a PPI and planned to see me in six months (and then apparently forever). The PPI left me bloated and feeling poorly, so I read up and made a couple lifestyle changes. I saw him once more, and when I asked he told me that "most patients don't want to consider lifestyle changes." OK Doc. Sure. Whatever you say.
SMH. iIn January a doctor prescribed an antibiotic that came with 4 pages, single spaced of side effects. One of them was a burst aorta. Another was torn ligaments. I turned the bottle over to the police for disposal and healed myself: chlorine dioxide and DMSO.
That’s such a poor attitude your Dr had. Their job is to assist us in providing info on healthy lifestyle changes and occasionally provide suggestions on meds that can accomplish more if lifestyle changes don’t work. It’s really up to us. I hope you found a new Dr. 👀
We are watching a system treat smoke while feeding the fire.
Type 2 diabetes is not a mystery. It’s a state of chronic overload — too much glucose, too much insulin, for too long. The body pushes back. It resists.
And what does the system do?
Adds more insulin.
That’s like pouring gasoline on a grease fire and then congratulating yourself because the flames briefly changed color.
People lose toes, feet, eyesight, independence — all while following the official script. Then one day they remove the fuel (carbs), lower the insulin load, and the condition reverses. Not in theory. In real bodies.
That should end the debate.
Instead, the model doubles down:
More drugs. More injections. More weight gain. More “chronic and progressive.”
No — that’s not the disease progressing.
That’s the treatment loop.
You can’t solve insulin resistance with more insulin any more than you cure alcoholism with another drink.
The body isn’t broken.
It’s responding exactly as biology does: adapt, resist, protect.
Remove the overload and the system stabilizes.
This isn’t complicated. It’s just inconvenient to the existing machine.
This situation is exactly my own. My type 2 diabetes stemmed from taking unnecessary antidepressants for 20 years, prescribed while, like everyone else, I was subjected to structural violence at the hands of the state, as theorized by Johan Galtung in 'Structural Violence' (1969).
And yet, the medical profession feeds me the same deceitful line: to avoid questioning its protocol, it has reclassified type 2 diabetes as a “chronic and progressive” disease, incorporating higher A1C levels (7–7.5 in some elderly patients) as the new norm. This normalizes a pathological condition instead of reversing it.
Thank you for this powerful essay that exposes this vicious cycle. It’s time to move beyond the “just adding fuel to the fire” paradigm.
"Structural violence" is a lefty, woke concept. Institutionalized racism, sexism, and classism, among others. Interdependent, including family violence, gender violence, hate crimes, racial violence, police violence, state violence, terrorism, and war. It is very closely linked to social injustice insofar as it affects people differently in various social structures.
No different than changing cholesterol levels so that more people can be prescribed stations. Stay away from doctors unless to do so would kill you like an open fracture. They may give you some medication for some number they don't like upon duscharge but nobody said you have to take it. Other than trauma, most of the things we see medical doctors for are things that Chinese medicine calls 'phlegm' which is a buildup of dampness, something Western medicine does not understand.
Almost always the treatment involves moving lymph and draining dampness. Since Western medicine has no concept of dampness, the standard of care never addresses this and the person gets worse. Changing diets is a good start as moving lymph may not be physically possible as the best way is to get even moderate, low intensity exercise like walking. However, clearing the phlegm will usually enable that to happen and a slow but steady way of doing it is to change what you eat. For obesity (a phlegm condition) changing to a low carb diet with fasting introduces metabolic changes that eliminates the phlegm so moving is possible. This moves lymph to clean out your system and if you start doing resistance training (using body weight so a gym membership is not necessary) your metabolic rate goes up.
Because they don't understand dampness, none of their treatments work. We tend to overuse medical doctors. They are very skilled at conditions that are life threatening or are the result of trauma. I think articles like this are good at pointing this out and when the article gives a case study like the man who lost a foot, the solution involves some dietary change. Going Paleo is a big change as we have to overcome our addiction to fast acting carbs like bread or breakfast pastries. Until Paleo becomes the standard of care (it may be for some forward thinking doctors treating cancer) for things like type 2 diabetes, people have to take that initiative themselves.
However, some doctors are noticing that staying in Paleo is not such a good thing. Some of these doctors do add starchy vegetables or whole grains or legumes to the diet; the trick is when you add back carbs, to avoid going back to your old habits and to keep carbs below a certain amount (percentage of calories).
Some starches, like potatoes, may be made less unhealthful by cooling them after cooking, then reheating if desired. This reduces their glycemic score by quite a lot.
My husband reversed his type 2 within weeks of learning he had it exactly as described here: he ended the carb load. No doctor needed. Unfortunately, he had had a heart attack which is how the diabetes was diagnosed. He ended up having two bypasses and was sent home with 23 prescriptions. We threw away all of them but two (one for pain and one for nitro, which were also eventually tossed). He now takes some vitamins and supplements, gets in several hours a week of exercise, and his cardiologist "fired" him. Of course.
As a man who has lived through this Institutionallized Money Mill, known as Alopathic Medicne.
I have only contempt, luckly I have a propencity of thinking for myself. Infact, I called my Doctor(hostage) out to his face, and he like a true being of Light, discouraged by the whole situation that brought us both to this place of disgust, with a SYSTEM(corporate system), admitted he could do nothing, as the system would not allow him any other recourse, and his Medical Licence would be taken from him, if he did...
I was flab-bergastic[sic], I see this as institutionalized Malpractice, fraud by Cirminal Mafia, the MoneyMill, we are only politely allowed to call Big Pharma; but, many here will agree, their only observed progress, is the efficency at which they steal from We The People, and not just money, but Life, as their agenda has only one logically possible result; fewer people. That is no sound, viable, business model therefore, Logic dicates, their goal is to make as much money as possible, on the people they want to kill, for as long as they can...
The Truth it seems, no-one wants to hear, because of its' religious over tones, is:
The alopathic medical mafia(not all the doctors), work for The Beast, and their business plan is nothing less than the depopulation of this Earth, in an effort to facilitate The Dominion of The Beast.
That my friends is where, I will leave, if you don't aggree that is fine; the truth is hard on purpose...
They can't quite wrap their heads around the fact that the Rockefellers intended the system to be this way and had the financial resources to get it done. Too psycho for the average person to resonate with. Denial and doubling down is easier. Until it isn't
Upvoted you, on both places! And like another commenter wrote, us Type 1 Diabetics are hungry for information, and a lot of us are strongly motivated and disciplined to persevere with whatever lifestyle changes are needed. Thank you!
Dr. Richard K. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution. Max 6gm carbs breakfast, max 6gm lunch, max 12gm dinner. Provides much invaluable advice on how to manage insulin within that dietary paradigm. He himself is T1 (diagnosed as a 12yo). Fascinating life journey from engineer to MD.
As a nephrologist, I followed a similar path as my colleague, Jason Fung. Back around 2000, I started prescribing low carb diets to my diabetic patients and was able to effect complete reversals in quite a few. Interestingly, and virtually unreported in the medical literature, is that diabetic kidney disease stabilized or improved in those who reversed diabetes. I currently help diabetics by deprescribing after correcting the diet. First to go is invariably insulin.
Insulin made sense in Type 1 diabetes, where insulin deficiency is the problem. Pharma hijacked the Type 1 model and applied it to Type 2 diabetes, a completely different disease with a completely different pathophysiology. The successfully bamboozled the medical profession by focusing on glycemic control, thought this was never demonstrated to improve hard outcomes. In the landmark ACCORD study, those treated to lower glycemic targets had higher mortality and the trial was stopped early.
Type 2 diabetes is a manifestation of the Metabolic Syndrome, readily identified clinically as a combination of central obesity, hypertension, vascular disease, and type 2 diabetes. The lipid panel usually shows high triglycerides and low HDL, and fasting insulin levels are elevated. Most doctors still treat all these as separate entities and focus on LDL cholesterol, rather than the TG/HDL ratio, and they never measure fasting insulin.
ACCORD did not show that lowering glucose is harmful in general.
It showed that very aggressive glucose lowering in high-risk, long-standing Type 2 diabetes using older therapeutic strategies increased mortality slightly.
That’s a much narrower and more clinically specific finding than you have presented.
UKPDS found benefit in newly diagnosed patients.
Then, "They successfully bamboozled the medical profession by focusing on glycemic control, thought this was never demonstrated to improve hard outcomes" is nonsense. The UKPDS (newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes) demonstrated that better glycemic control reduced:
Retinopathy progression
Need for laser photocoagulation
Nephropathy markers
Microvascular complications overall
Then long-term follow-up of UKPDS showed a “legacy effect” - early glycemic control later reduced MI and all-cause mortality years after the trial ended.
ACCORD was supposed to show a benefit from aggressive treatment of hyperglycemia but showed the opposite—weight gain and increased mortality. This wasn’t surprising to me since hyperglycemia is just a symptom of an underlying metabolic syndrome, which was likely worsened by aggressive treatment, especially with insulin.
UKPDS struggled to show any significant benefits and was extended at least twice for this purpose, and there were many other methodological problems. The very small difference in incidence of proteinuria was not clinically relevant and there was no effect on development of kidney failure. Similar story with retinopathy, assessed as visits to ophthalmology, with no improvement in blindness.
The narrow focus on glycemic control in Type 2 diabetes is misguided and causes significant harm. Most cases can be prevented, stabilized, or reversed with proper dietary changes.
What large-scale trial evidence supports your contention that "Most cases can be prevented, stabilized, or reversed with proper dietary changes?" (Leaving aside for now the simple truth that few people are able to actually maintain "proper dietary changes.")
You're parroting misleading, inadequately framed talking points about the evils of oral agents or insulin, and "just eat properly" - for this audience, plenty of whom are "viruses aren't real" and "plandemic" loons. No nuance, creating suspicion and feeding it.
UKPDSC “conventional” therapy, intensive control (with SU OR insulin) achieved about a 0.9% lower median HbA1c. The main findings:
~25% relative risk reduction in “microvascular events"
In the metformin subgroup there were reductions in diabetes-related endpoints and mortality versus conventional therapy - small, but real. The difference in microalbuminuria/proteinuria was statistically significant but small in absolute terms. No clear reduction in ESRD during the randomized phase, but ESRD is relatively uncommon over a 10-year horizon in newly diagnosed patients, so the trial was underpowered for that important renal endpoint.
In the 10-year f/u the intensive group showed emerging reductions in MI and all-cause mortality despite HbA1c convergence , the so-called “legacy effect."
----
I see now - you're a professional anti-establishment guy, AAPS leader 😂 🤣 - Stuy to CUNY to couldn't get into a US medical school . And you're a bigly supplement seller railing against corrupt "Big Pharma," and "financial conflicts of interest" of members of consensus panels - while you're grooming and preying on morons and mentally ill people. Your mother would be so proud of you ...
Agree. Fanatical anything is not good. Balance - balance. Everyone has different chemistry. But like you stated, if your body doesn't have what it needs, it will snatch it from other parts of the body. Not all parts snatched from are good.
I keep my husbands diabetes pretty 'in check' by making it as simple as can be. 1 protein to 1 carb. He eats alot of open face hamburgers, haha. 1 piece of bun to 1 meat patty with veggies, no cheese. We just have to care enough to find what helps our own situation.
I took all white carbs and refined sugars out of my diet after my A1C kept creeping up. My Dr said I needed metformin! I also started daily fast walking when my blood pressure rose high after much stress from a family loss. Dr wanted to put me on blood pressure meds. I was in a medical downhill spin. Now I’m healthy, much lower healthy numbers and no meds. I didn’t need meds, just lifestyle changes. That should have been my drs first suggestion. Why do drs always recommend meds first? I now have a new dr. and I think about how my healthy life is “my responsibility”. Meds aren’t my answer, choices are. It’s not easy to always eat healthy, but I’d rather feel good and stay on the right track. Many times it’s in our power to make good decision! We just have to do it ourselves!
Years ago I saw an ENT about reflux. He put me on a PPI and planned to see me in six months (and then apparently forever). The PPI left me bloated and feeling poorly, so I read up and made a couple lifestyle changes. I saw him once more, and when I asked he told me that "most patients don't want to consider lifestyle changes." OK Doc. Sure. Whatever you say.
SMH. iIn January a doctor prescribed an antibiotic that came with 4 pages, single spaced of side effects. One of them was a burst aorta. Another was torn ligaments. I turned the bottle over to the police for disposal and healed myself: chlorine dioxide and DMSO.
"Burst aorta" - not quite. So you didn't take a fluoroquinolone. You sure showed them!
You're a parody, history lady.
That’s such a poor attitude your Dr had. Their job is to assist us in providing info on healthy lifestyle changes and occasionally provide suggestions on meds that can accomplish more if lifestyle changes don’t work. It’s really up to us. I hope you found a new Dr. 👀
Better yet. I made a couple of simple changes and no longer see him, or any ENT.
Yippie. It’s up to us! Great! 😊
It sure is :)
You are not “most patients” just as I am! Good for you!
We are watching a system treat smoke while feeding the fire.
Type 2 diabetes is not a mystery. It’s a state of chronic overload — too much glucose, too much insulin, for too long. The body pushes back. It resists.
And what does the system do?
Adds more insulin.
That’s like pouring gasoline on a grease fire and then congratulating yourself because the flames briefly changed color.
People lose toes, feet, eyesight, independence — all while following the official script. Then one day they remove the fuel (carbs), lower the insulin load, and the condition reverses. Not in theory. In real bodies.
That should end the debate.
Instead, the model doubles down:
More drugs. More injections. More weight gain. More “chronic and progressive.”
No — that’s not the disease progressing.
That’s the treatment loop.
You can’t solve insulin resistance with more insulin any more than you cure alcoholism with another drink.
The body isn’t broken.
It’s responding exactly as biology does: adapt, resist, protect.
Remove the overload and the system stabilizes.
This isn’t complicated. It’s just inconvenient to the existing machine.
— Lone Wolf
The system is working exactly as the Rockefellers intended. Evil. To the core.
I feel you are correct there Pamela. Lone Wolf
This situation is exactly my own. My type 2 diabetes stemmed from taking unnecessary antidepressants for 20 years, prescribed while, like everyone else, I was subjected to structural violence at the hands of the state, as theorized by Johan Galtung in 'Structural Violence' (1969).
And yet, the medical profession feeds me the same deceitful line: to avoid questioning its protocol, it has reclassified type 2 diabetes as a “chronic and progressive” disease, incorporating higher A1C levels (7–7.5 in some elderly patients) as the new norm. This normalizes a pathological condition instead of reversing it.
Thank you for this powerful essay that exposes this vicious cycle. It’s time to move beyond the “just adding fuel to the fire” paradigm.
"Structural violence" is a lefty, woke concept. Institutionalized racism, sexism, and classism, among others. Interdependent, including family violence, gender violence, hate crimes, racial violence, police violence, state violence, terrorism, and war. It is very closely linked to social injustice insofar as it affects people differently in various social structures.
WOKE
No different than changing cholesterol levels so that more people can be prescribed stations. Stay away from doctors unless to do so would kill you like an open fracture. They may give you some medication for some number they don't like upon duscharge but nobody said you have to take it. Other than trauma, most of the things we see medical doctors for are things that Chinese medicine calls 'phlegm' which is a buildup of dampness, something Western medicine does not understand.
Almost always the treatment involves moving lymph and draining dampness. Since Western medicine has no concept of dampness, the standard of care never addresses this and the person gets worse. Changing diets is a good start as moving lymph may not be physically possible as the best way is to get even moderate, low intensity exercise like walking. However, clearing the phlegm will usually enable that to happen and a slow but steady way of doing it is to change what you eat. For obesity (a phlegm condition) changing to a low carb diet with fasting introduces metabolic changes that eliminates the phlegm so moving is possible. This moves lymph to clean out your system and if you start doing resistance training (using body weight so a gym membership is not necessary) your metabolic rate goes up.
Because they don't understand dampness, none of their treatments work. We tend to overuse medical doctors. They are very skilled at conditions that are life threatening or are the result of trauma. I think articles like this are good at pointing this out and when the article gives a case study like the man who lost a foot, the solution involves some dietary change. Going Paleo is a big change as we have to overcome our addiction to fast acting carbs like bread or breakfast pastries. Until Paleo becomes the standard of care (it may be for some forward thinking doctors treating cancer) for things like type 2 diabetes, people have to take that initiative themselves.
However, some doctors are noticing that staying in Paleo is not such a good thing. Some of these doctors do add starchy vegetables or whole grains or legumes to the diet; the trick is when you add back carbs, to avoid going back to your old habits and to keep carbs below a certain amount (percentage of calories).
Some starches, like potatoes, may be made less unhealthful by cooling them after cooking, then reheating if desired. This reduces their glycemic score by quite a lot.
"Resistant carbohydrates."
This is the only sensible comment here.
I would love to see you address type 1
My husband reversed his type 2 within weeks of learning he had it exactly as described here: he ended the carb load. No doctor needed. Unfortunately, he had had a heart attack which is how the diabetes was diagnosed. He ended up having two bypasses and was sent home with 23 prescriptions. We threw away all of them but two (one for pain and one for nitro, which were also eventually tossed). He now takes some vitamins and supplements, gets in several hours a week of exercise, and his cardiologist "fired" him. Of course.
As a man who has lived through this Institutionallized Money Mill, known as Alopathic Medicne.
I have only contempt, luckly I have a propencity of thinking for myself. Infact, I called my Doctor(hostage) out to his face, and he like a true being of Light, discouraged by the whole situation that brought us both to this place of disgust, with a SYSTEM(corporate system), admitted he could do nothing, as the system would not allow him any other recourse, and his Medical Licence would be taken from him, if he did...
I was flab-bergastic[sic], I see this as institutionalized Malpractice, fraud by Cirminal Mafia, the MoneyMill, we are only politely allowed to call Big Pharma; but, many here will agree, their only observed progress, is the efficency at which they steal from We The People, and not just money, but Life, as their agenda has only one logically possible result; fewer people. That is no sound, viable, business model therefore, Logic dicates, their goal is to make as much money as possible, on the people they want to kill, for as long as they can...
The Truth it seems, no-one wants to hear, because of its' religious over tones, is:
The alopathic medical mafia(not all the doctors), work for The Beast, and their business plan is nothing less than the depopulation of this Earth, in an effort to facilitate The Dominion of The Beast.
That my friends is where, I will leave, if you don't aggree that is fine; the truth is hard on purpose...
I Love You all.
Giant Healing Suppirtive Hugs<3<3<3
What I don't understand is the public's faith in the system. Five years ago the system was quite clearly poisoning them. Now they go back for more?
They can't quite wrap their heads around the fact that the Rockefellers intended the system to be this way and had the financial resources to get it done. Too psycho for the average person to resonate with. Denial and doubling down is easier. Until it isn't
Upvoted you, on both places! And like another commenter wrote, us Type 1 Diabetics are hungry for information, and a lot of us are strongly motivated and disciplined to persevere with whatever lifestyle changes are needed. Thank you!
Dr. Richard K. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution. Max 6gm carbs breakfast, max 6gm lunch, max 12gm dinner. Provides much invaluable advice on how to manage insulin within that dietary paradigm. He himself is T1 (diagnosed as a 12yo). Fascinating life journey from engineer to MD.
I'll look him up. Thanks.
As a nephrologist, I followed a similar path as my colleague, Jason Fung. Back around 2000, I started prescribing low carb diets to my diabetic patients and was able to effect complete reversals in quite a few. Interestingly, and virtually unreported in the medical literature, is that diabetic kidney disease stabilized or improved in those who reversed diabetes. I currently help diabetics by deprescribing after correcting the diet. First to go is invariably insulin.
Insulin made sense in Type 1 diabetes, where insulin deficiency is the problem. Pharma hijacked the Type 1 model and applied it to Type 2 diabetes, a completely different disease with a completely different pathophysiology. The successfully bamboozled the medical profession by focusing on glycemic control, thought this was never demonstrated to improve hard outcomes. In the landmark ACCORD study, those treated to lower glycemic targets had higher mortality and the trial was stopped early.
Type 2 diabetes is a manifestation of the Metabolic Syndrome, readily identified clinically as a combination of central obesity, hypertension, vascular disease, and type 2 diabetes. The lipid panel usually shows high triglycerides and low HDL, and fasting insulin levels are elevated. Most doctors still treat all these as separate entities and focus on LDL cholesterol, rather than the TG/HDL ratio, and they never measure fasting insulin.
ACCORD did not show that lowering glucose is harmful in general.
It showed that very aggressive glucose lowering in high-risk, long-standing Type 2 diabetes using older therapeutic strategies increased mortality slightly.
That’s a much narrower and more clinically specific finding than you have presented.
UKPDS found benefit in newly diagnosed patients.
Then, "They successfully bamboozled the medical profession by focusing on glycemic control, thought this was never demonstrated to improve hard outcomes" is nonsense. The UKPDS (newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes) demonstrated that better glycemic control reduced:
Retinopathy progression
Need for laser photocoagulation
Nephropathy markers
Microvascular complications overall
Then long-term follow-up of UKPDS showed a “legacy effect” - early glycemic control later reduced MI and all-cause mortality years after the trial ended.
ACCORD was supposed to show a benefit from aggressive treatment of hyperglycemia but showed the opposite—weight gain and increased mortality. This wasn’t surprising to me since hyperglycemia is just a symptom of an underlying metabolic syndrome, which was likely worsened by aggressive treatment, especially with insulin.
UKPDS struggled to show any significant benefits and was extended at least twice for this purpose, and there were many other methodological problems. The very small difference in incidence of proteinuria was not clinically relevant and there was no effect on development of kidney failure. Similar story with retinopathy, assessed as visits to ophthalmology, with no improvement in blindness.
The narrow focus on glycemic control in Type 2 diabetes is misguided and causes significant harm. Most cases can be prevented, stabilized, or reversed with proper dietary changes.
What large-scale trial evidence supports your contention that "Most cases can be prevented, stabilized, or reversed with proper dietary changes?" (Leaving aside for now the simple truth that few people are able to actually maintain "proper dietary changes.")
You're parroting misleading, inadequately framed talking points about the evils of oral agents or insulin, and "just eat properly" - for this audience, plenty of whom are "viruses aren't real" and "plandemic" loons. No nuance, creating suspicion and feeding it.
UKPDSC “conventional” therapy, intensive control (with SU OR insulin) achieved about a 0.9% lower median HbA1c. The main findings:
~25% relative risk reduction in “microvascular events"
In the metformin subgroup there were reductions in diabetes-related endpoints and mortality versus conventional therapy - small, but real. The difference in microalbuminuria/proteinuria was statistically significant but small in absolute terms. No clear reduction in ESRD during the randomized phase, but ESRD is relatively uncommon over a 10-year horizon in newly diagnosed patients, so the trial was underpowered for that important renal endpoint.
In the 10-year f/u the intensive group showed emerging reductions in MI and all-cause mortality despite HbA1c convergence , the so-called “legacy effect."
----
I see now - you're a professional anti-establishment guy, AAPS leader 😂 🤣 - Stuy to CUNY to couldn't get into a US medical school . And you're a bigly supplement seller railing against corrupt "Big Pharma," and "financial conflicts of interest" of members of consensus panels - while you're grooming and preying on morons and mentally ill people. Your mother would be so proud of you ...
Supermarkets selling 30-can cases of soda certainly isn't diffusing the diabetes epidemic:)
americandiabetes
society.org
seeks to change the standard of care!
Agree. Fanatical anything is not good. Balance - balance. Everyone has different chemistry. But like you stated, if your body doesn't have what it needs, it will snatch it from other parts of the body. Not all parts snatched from are good.
I keep my husbands diabetes pretty 'in check' by making it as simple as can be. 1 protein to 1 carb. He eats alot of open face hamburgers, haha. 1 piece of bun to 1 meat patty with veggies, no cheese. We just have to care enough to find what helps our own situation.