Swimming with Great Whites? If you’ve got “Diabetes” look away now.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
June 20, 2013 | 4 Comments


  1. Recommended reading and watching, after, Jaws, the movie.

    Tuesdays with Moray
    Mitch Albom

    The Blow
    All about drug dealing, the comparisons, with which;, I will not even go there…..

    A book everyone should read.
    It is all about detachment, which is the only route.
    A lovely chronicle of an old man, who faces death and how he deals with it.

    Tuesdays, Fridays, Sundays, whatever day of the week it is – detachment from drug abuse, detachment from medical abuse, detachment from felony – how detached does one have to become?

    We need a new title for a new film, as the Killing Fields has already been taken.

    A Hammer Film produced introducing characters who are not celebrities, but those playing the parts themselves.

    Who wants to audition?? Me, first….

    Do I want diabetes, not particularly, do I want any other side effect, from my drug, not particularly.

    Could they all just tell me what side-effect, I might get, from my drug?
    Do I constantly have to read the small print and put myself on Rxisk.org

    Do I have to suffer yet another practise nurse telling me I should take a statin, in case, I might suffer from something to do with my arteries.

    Have I just been through the ordeal of the world, with ssri withdrawal and uh, oh, something mind-bendingly horrific. Have I? Or did I dream it.

    Will they just stop it. I do not want any more drugs. I do not.

    I do not want to ever enter a surgery ever again.

    Another good one was 84 Charing Cross Road with Anthony Hopkins and Anne Bancroft.
    This was a civilised banter between two literature loving people.
    This was not an underground movement of discussion by internet.
    This was reality, passing books back and forth across the Atlantic and feeling the book and reading the papery fabric on which they were printed.

    Isn’t this internet banter absurd, crazy and delusional.
    Why isn’t is published in every day terms, in the press, at least.
    I feel like an underground mole. I don’t like it, but I guess, for now, this is all that is available.
    I don’t do facebook, I don’t do twitter; I do upfront honesty and transparency and the internet is putting too many, too many even without it, to find a way out of all this…..

    Are we having a whale of a time, not particularly…..

  2. Submitted by Brent Hoadley

    I read your article “Swimming with Great Whites” with interest. Type 2 diabetes (in my opinion) is indeed a ‘created’ disease. What is NOT a created disease is Type 1—and what has happened in this field is (again, in my opinion) criminal—but no one will look back far enough to discover the roadmap laid down by Eli Lilly in bringing to market synthetic insulins.

    The litigious/criminal behavior that spawned rDNA insulin provides a story in itself. The manner in which the first synthetic insulin garnered FDA approval is yet another story that is jaw-dropping. The FDA approved rDNA synthetic insulin (Humulin) with the caveat this was a niche-market drug for those who were allergic to natural (animal-derived) insulins. The FDA required post-marketing studies, no studies have been provided. Humulin and Ultralente Humulin (slow-release formulation) have both been determined to be quite problematic for many Type 1 diabetics. (In fact, slow-release human Ultralente was quickly removed from the marketplace.) Ignoring bad results (hypoglycemia unawareness, allergic reactions, dead-in-bed syndrome, sudden death, coma, emergency room visits, etc.), has become commonplace. Looking at HRT studies (which you brought to light of day), would support that synthetic insulins have become as dangerous to Type 1 diabetics as did synthetic hormones used by women.

    I spoke personally with a Harvard professor of biochemistry who was closely associated with Harvard’s original work to create a synthetic hormone (aka synthetic insulin). He stated flatly that there was no guarantee that today’s products are exactly identical to the biochemical structure they were trying to copy and batch-to-batch production runs are difficult to control.

    Today’s doctors are ruled by mentors (many with vested interests) who insist that testing often is a requirement of treatment. (Yet, 20-year-old technology still rules the meter-market, allowing for +/- 20% error rates). Tight control (which is impossible to maintain over any sustained period) places the onus for compliance on the patient. Most young diabetics have no autonomous symptoms that warn them of impending dangers—instead they rely only on inadequate monitors that give them a moment-in-time snapshot of their bG.

    In my day (I’ve been diabetic for 56 years), the shakes, sweats, nausea, muddled-thinking were all warning symptoms that I’d better be on high alert—and do something to save my own life. Today’s patients—because of the treatment (synthetic insulin that does NOT produce warning signals and bG meters that only give an often-inaccurate indication of current bG)—are in constant peril and yet do not know what they do not know.

    Lilly, in bringing their products to market, CONTROLLED the competition. They withdrew one after another of time-proven, necessary natural insulins, substituting the latest-greatest, highly profitable patented, synthetic “insulin.” Our political system cannot force a company to provide a needed life-sustaining insulin because Lilly convinced the FDA there was an “equal” product on the market.

    Currently, we are embroiled in non-transparency for more-recent drugs. What will it take to get a researcher/investigator to look far enough back to see the original roadmap?

  3. I’m a bit confused about Type I and Type II diabetes … my first reaction was, if Type II is “not a disease” then we must be amputating a lot of legs over here for no good reason! But maybe it’s a trans-Atlantic terminology clash? Or is “insulin-dependent Type II diabetes” (gulp) an iatrogenic disease (caused by the medical treatment)?

    What we are told these days in the US: Type I starts young and is caused by actual dying off of the cells in the pancreas that secrete insulin. Obesity is not a factor, diet and exercise only help a little, and you need insulin. Period. Type II can start at any age and is caused by development of “insulin resistance” in the cells of the body as a whole. Obesity does play a role, and it can sometimes be flat-out reversed by diet and exercise. Type II can and does “progress” from using oral meds to needing insulin and can cost you your sight, your kidneys, etc. etc. But even when it is “insulin dependent” it is still called Type II. Is that true, false or a bit of both?

    (Back in the old days they spoke of NIDDM (Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus) or “Adult Onset Diabetes.” But now so many people wind up on insulin, and so many kids get the same condition as their parents, those terms became useless. Enter Type II.)

  4. I’ve been a insulin defendant diabetic for about 34 years now. I used to take Ultra Lente and regular insulin till they stopped making it. I then switched over to Lantus. Before taking Lantus and Novolog I had no diabetic complications. Within 15 months of switching over to synthetic insulins I developed severe diabetic retinopathy and gastroparesis. I don’t have to add I was drinking a lot of DIEt Coke at the time too. However I believe that M-Cresol and phenols in the insulins could be playing a role in my complications.

Leave a Reply