Re: How many lies can fit in one paragraph?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> On May 28, 5:38?pm, Tim Shoppa <sho...@trailing-edge.com> wrote:
> > Ozgirl wrote:
> > >http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/27/9/2266
> >
> > > ""If carbohydrates increase blood glucose, why not restrict total
> > > carbohydrate intake in individuals with diabetes?
> >
> > > Blood glucose is increased in individuals with diabetes in both the fed and
> > > fasted state. This abnormal metabolic response is due to insufficient
> > > insulin secretion, insulin resistance, or a combination of both. Although
> > > dietary carbohydrate increases postprandial glucose levels, avoiding
> > > carbohydrate entirely will not return blood glucose levels to the normal
> > > range. Additionally, dietary carbohydrate is an important component of a
> > > healthy diet. For example, glucose is the primary fuel used by the brain and
> > > central nervous system, and foods that contain carbohydrate are important
> > > sources of many nutrients, including water-soluble vitamins and minerals as
> > > well as fiber (31). Given the above, low-carbohydrate diets are not
> > > recommended in the management of diabetes. Recently, the National Academy of
> > > Sciences-Food and Nutrition Board recommended that diets provide 45-65% of
> > > calories from carbohydrate, with a minimum intake of 130 g carbohydrate/day
> > > for adults (31)."
> >
> > > And Kurt expects people to take the ADA seriously? And how can one take
> > > seriously the comment about the National Academy of Sciences carb
> > > recommendation? How does that relate to diabetics?
> >
> > Everything they write makes perfect sense for me, I don't see a single
> > lie.
> >
> > Take a look at the "before" in the before/after pictures in _The
> > Discovery of Insulin_ if you want to see what a type 1 subsisting on a
> > nearly-zero-carb diet without insulin looks like. Better than dying, I
> > suppose.
> >
> > Tim.-
>
> Tim,
>
> dLife had a great documentary about the discovery of insulin and
> talked a lot about the extreme diets some T1's were put on in an
> effort to extend their life. Not a pretty sight. It still amazes,
> and humbles, me to think that if I had been born 50 years earlier I
> probably wouldn't have lived much past 25.
>
> Threads like this happen in here anytime someone dares to offer an
> opinion or present an opposing article that goes against the mobspeak
> here. No cite from anyone is definitive when it comes to what the
> right diet is. There are many different schools of thought and it's a
> shame that only one side is so heavily beaten on the cyber drums here.
>
> The title of this thread could just as easily be "How many lies can
> fit in one newsgroup?"
It all boils down to the one lie that is keeping folks from curing
their type-2 diabetes:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/891fbe3b18290e4f?
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets."
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
tr...@is-better.com
their type-2 diabetes:"
And for which claims you have lost credability in this area and persist
in being unable to provide scientific evidence in suppport of the trash
science two pound diet or claims of a "cure" for diabetes.
Truth is simple and the truth matters and the truth is not in your
opinion.
God bless.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
that causes the type-2 diabetes.
Overeating happens whenever someone eats to the point of being "full"
or no longer hungry.
"Woe to you who are well fed now..." -- LORD Jesus Christ (Luke 6:25)
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
Tim Shoppa wrote:
> On May 29, 7:46 pm, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
> > They are different diseases, with different mechanisms; type 1 doesn't
> > originate from insulin resistance, though it will develop with over
> > reliance on high doses of insulin to cover a very carby diet.
>
> Again quoting from the same source that Ozgirl calls all lies:
>
> Of note, there is little evidence that total
> carbohydrate intake is associated with the
> development of type 2 diabetes (30,70,73,74).
> Rather, a stronger association has been
> observed between total fat and saturated
> fat intake and type 2 diabetes (75,76),
> although not all findings are in agreement
> (30). Additionally, two prospective cohort
> studies have shown no risk of diabetes
> from consuming increased amounts of sugar
> (74,77), and in one study, a negative
> association was observed between sucrose
> intake and diabetes risk (72). Intakes of both
> whole grains (72,78) and dietary fiber (in
> particular, cereal fiber) are associated with
> lower risk of type 2 diabetes (30,70-72).
>
> Tim.
flyingrat
hear...@emorycardiology.com says...
> "Woe to you who are well fed now..." -- LORD Jesus Christ (Luke 6:25)
>
Matthew 5:6 - Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Luke 6:21, 25 - Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be
satisfied. . . Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry.
Both these quotes from the Bible, and both infer that God (or Jesus)
considers hunger to be BAD.
Those who are hungry (for food or spiritual matters) will have the BAD
hunger removed, and those who are 'full' will be made hungry because
hunger is BAD.
"Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry" means HUNGER IS
BAD
Kurt Gavin
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <hear...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in message
news:1180560512.3...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> It is the overeating that leads to the visceral adipose tissue (VAT)
> that causes the type-2 diabetes.
>
> Overeating happens whenever someone eats to the point of being "full"
> or no longer hungry.
Matthew 5:6 - Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Luke 6:21, 25 - Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be
satisfied. . . Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry.
Yes, chung going on about how he's hungry all the time is just another
indication how much god and jesus hate him - punish him with hunger.
Just think what those two will do to him in the afterlife.
Twenty-four hour none stop ass rape. No, wait, it'll have to be something
chung considers punishment...
Mu
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <hear...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in message
news:1180560512.3...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
<snipped spam>
> "Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
> with well-balanced diets"
Truth: 2PD-OMER Approach is MEANINGLESS without a WELL BALANCED DIET!!!
Professor Geoffrey Loftus, Saint Swithins Hospital
<heartd...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> It is the overeating that leads to the visceral adipose tissue (VAT)
> that causes the type-2 diabetes.
>
> Overeating happens whenever someone eats to the point of being "full"
> or no longer hungry.
Then apparently the designer fucked up.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
eating that caused you harm.
You are a victim of satan's lie that "hunger is bad:"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/22532ce141e762af?
Here's how to overcome the damage:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp
This Approach comes with a million-dollar guarantee:
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever,
dear neighbor Ozgirl whom I love unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets."
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
Ozgirl wrote:
> I became obese on a high fibre, high carbohydrate, low fat diet. Within 3
> years I had my diabetes diagnosis along with a fatty liver diagnosis. I have
> always had glucose problems though. Remember I have had multiple gestational
> diabetes and a 20 plus year reactive hypoglycemia record.
>
> Naturally I was consuming more calories than my body needed or I wouldn't
> have gained that 45 kg. Point being though, contrary to what the experts are
> saying about high fibre whole grains etc preventing diabetes, one can still
> get that way on the so-called good wholesome foods. I think body weight has
> a bigger bearing than the actual diet, at least for me. I was a health
> freak.
>
> "Susan" <neve...@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:5c5eivF...@mid.individual.net...
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >
> > Tim Shoppa wrote:
> >
> > > High-Grain Diet May Increase Risk of Cardiovascular Disease
> >
> > American Journal Clinical Nutrition January 2003 77: 43-50
> >
> > When humans consume more carbohydrates than can be stored, the excess
> > carbohydrate energy is converted to fat by the liver. This process may
> > maintain blood sugar control and prevent diabetes in the short-term,
> > however it may also increase triglyceride concentrations, which may
> > increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.
> >
> > In the last decade, researchers established that fat production by the
> > liver varies depending on dietary habits and health status.
> >
> > The typical Western diet has a high fat content, which means that only
> > a limited amount of carbohydrates are available for liver fat
> > production, and liver fat production tends to be very low among
> > individuals who eat this type of diet. However, when too many
> > carbohydrates were consumed, both liver fat and sugar production were
> > increased.
> >
> > A very low-fat (10 percent of energy) and very high-carbohydrate (75
> > percent of energy) diet also leads to increased liver fat production,
> > with the increase being even more pronounced when more than half of
> > the carbohydrate was consumed as simple sugars. This points to the
> > importance of carbohydrate quality, as another study using 68 percent
> > of energy from complex carbohydrate resulted in minimal liver fat
> > production.
> >
> > However, it was found that obese individuals with high insulin levels
> > who consume a high-fat (40 percent of energy) diet had a liver fat
> > production rate three to four times higher than that of lean
> > individuals with normal insulin levels. But, both normal and high
> > insulin groups had lower liver fat production on the high-fat diet
> > than on a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet.
> >
> > Moreover, the low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet caused an increase in
> > triglyceride concentrations, a risk factor for coronary heart disease,
> > which was associated with the liver fat production in both normal and
> > high-insulin individuals.
> >
> > Researchers concluded that the low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet might
> > not be ideal, as it can induce liver fat production and insulin
> > resistance. This is especially true when most of the carbohydrate is
> > in the form of simple sugars.
> >
> > --
> >
> > 1: Am J Clin Nutr 2003 Jan;77(1):43-50
> >
> > Hepatic de novo lipogenesis in normoinsulinemic and hyperinsulinemic
> > subjects consuming high-fat, low-carbohydrate and low-fat,
> > high-carbohydrate isoenergetic diets.
> >
> > Schwarz JM, Linfoot P, Dare D, Aghajanian K.
> >
> > Department of Nutritional Sciences and Toxicology, University of
> > California, Berkeley (J-MS and KA), and the Department of Medicine,
> > University of California, San Francisco (J-MS, PL, and DD).
> >
> > BACKGROUND: Hypertriglyceridemia is associated with increased risk of
> > cardiovascular disease. Until recently, the importance of hepatic de
> > novo lipogenesis (DNL) in contributing to hypertriglyceridemia was
> > difficult to assess because of methodologic limitations. OBJECTIVE: We
> > evaluated the extent of the contribution by DNL to different
> > conditions associated with hypertriglyceridemia. DESIGN: After 5 d of
> > an isoenergetic high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet, fasting DNL was
> > measured in normoinsulinemic (/= 115 pmol/L) obese (n = 8) subjects.
> > Fasting DNL was measured after a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet in
> > normoinsulinemic lean (n = 5) and hyperinsulinemic obese (n = 5)
> > subjects. Mass isotopomer distribution analysis was used to measure
> > the fraction of newly synthesized fatty acids in VLDL-triacylglycerol.
> > RESULTS: With the high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet, hyperinsulinemic
> > obese subjects had a 3.7-5.3-fold higher fractional DNL (8.5 +/- 0.7%)
> > than did normoinsulinemic lean (1.6 +/- 0.5%) or obese (2.3 +/- 0.3%)
> > subjects. With the low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet, normoinsulinemic
> > lean and hyperinsulinemic obese subjects had similarly high fractional
> > DNL (13 +/- 5.1% and 12.8 +/- 1.4%, respectively). Compared with
> > baseline, consumption of the high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet did not
> > affect triacylglycerol concentrations. However, after the low-fat,
> > high-carbohydrate diet, triacylglycerols increased significantly and
> > DNL was 5-6-fold higher than in normoinsulinemic subjects consuming a
> > high-fat diet. The increase in triacylglycerol after the low-fat,
> > high-carbohydrate diet was correlated with fractional DNL (P < 0.01),
> > indicating that subjects with high DNL had the greatest increase in
> > triacylglycerols. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the concept that
> > both hyperinsulinemia and a low-fat diet increase DNL, and that DNL
> > contributes to hypertriglyceridemia.
> >
> > PMID: 12499321 [PubMed - in process]
> >
> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...1&dopt=Abstract
> > http://www.mercola.com/2003/jan/8/high_grain_diet.htm
> >
> >
> > >
> > 1: Am J Clin Nutr 2001 Jun;73(6):1019-26>
> >
> > Dietary fat intake and risk of type 2 diabetes in>women.
> >
> > Salmeron J, Hu FB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, Rimm>EB,
> > Willett WC.
> >
> > Departments of Nutrition and>Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public
> > Health, Boston.>
> >
> > BACKGROUND: The long-term relations between specific types of>dietary
> > fat and risk of type 2 diabetes remain unclear.>
> >
> > OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine the relations between>dietary
> > fat intakes and the risk of type 2 diabetes.
> >
> > DESIGN: We>prospectively followed 84204 women aged 34-59 y with no
> > diabetes,>cardiovascular disease, or cancer in 1980. Detailed dietary
> > information>was assessed at baseline and updated in 1984, 1986, and
> > 1990 by using>validated questionnaires. Relative risks of type 2
> > diabetes were obtained>from pooled logistic models adjusted for
> > nondietary and dietary>covariates.
> >
> > RESULTS: During 14 y of follow-up, 2507 incident cases>of type 2
> > diabetes were documented. Total fat intake, compared with>equivalent
> > energy intake from carbohydrates, was not associated with risk>of type
> > 2 diabetes; for a 5% increase in total energy from fat, the>relative
> > risk (RR) was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.02). Intakes of saturated>or
> > monounsaturated fatty acids were also not significantly>associated
> > with the risk of diabetes. However, for a 5% increase in>energy from
> > polyunsaturated fat, the RR was 0.63 (0.53, 0.76; P <>0.0001) and for
> > a 2% increase in energy from trans fatty acids the RR was>1.39 (1.15,
> > 1.67; P = 0.0006). We estimated that replacing 2% of energy>from trans
> > fatty acids isoenergetically with polyunsaturated fat would>lead to a
> > 40% lower risk (RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.75).>
> >
> > CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that total fat and saturated>and
> > monounsaturated fatty acid intakes are not associated with risk>of
> > type 2 diabetes in women, but that trans fatty acids increase>and
> > polyunsaturated fatty acids reduce risk. Substituting>nonhydrogenated
> > polyunsaturated fatty acids for trans fatty acids would>likely reduce
> > the risk of type 2 diabetes substantially.>
> >
> > PMID: 11382654 [PubMed - in>process]
> >
> > > Again quoting from the same source that Ozgirl calls all lies:
> > >
> > > Of note, there is little evidence that total
> > > carbohydrate intake is associated with the
> > > development of type 2 diabetes (30,70,73,74).
> > > Rather, a stronger association has been
> > > observed between total fat and saturated
> > > fat intake and type 2 diabetes (75,76),
> > > although not all findings are in agreement
> > > (30). Additionally, two prospective cohort
> > > studies have shown no risk of diabetes
> > > from consuming increased amounts of sugar
> > > (74,77), and in one study, a negative
> > > association was observed between sucrose
> > > intake and diabetes risk (72). Intakes of both
> > > whole grains (72,78) and dietary fiber (in
> > > particular, cereal fiber) are associated with
> > > lower risk of type 2 diabetes (30,70-72).
> >
> > And here's what scientists say about that:
> >
Mu
<Another one of Chung's request for $30 by PayPal, duly removed by Mu>
> "Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
> with well-balanced diets"
Translation: 2PD-OMER Approach DOES NOT WORK without a WELL BALANCED DIET!!!
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> "Alan S" <loralgtwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mfqs5358u5ivoo8cj...@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 31 May 2007 00:38:59 +0100, "Mu" <M...@bigMutha.com>
> > wrote:
> > <snip>
> >
> > Please cut x-posts from sci.med.cardiology. This is one guy
> > we hoped never to see again.
>
> I am not sure it is the original Mu. That Mu was pro Chung.
>
> Don't believe everything you think.
This reminds me of the ASD controversy concerning Madison.
She and you remain in my prayers.
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
tr...@is-better.com
Well that it should. You had a series of interchanges with someone who
did not exist, some even think it was a multiple person effort even
different genders.
So we see this renewed desire to resume communication with a non-person
who was leading you on regarding their medical status. This had to be a
great source of gigggles for them. The more you did your two pound diet
thing the more they gave you reason to go on and on and on.
So much for the claims of superior "discernment" that "chi" is said to
afford.
God bless.
Professor Geoffrey Loftus, Saint Swithins Hospital
<heartd...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> Clearly it was the amount that you were eating and not what you were
> eating that caused you harm.
>
> You are a victim of satan's lie that "hunger is bad:"
No, but a nice, thick steak charred like Dresden on the outside and
so
bloody rare inside that it moos when you cut it is exquisitely good.
flyingrat
tr...@is-better.com says...
Chunky is k00king out at a fine throttle today.
Not only PROOF of unemployment (posting frantically during office hours)
but pushing the Madison Line again. He has been caught, reeled in and
filleted but just can't get past his own arrogance to accept that
Madison was not a real person.
Madison was a sock, Chunk the Unemployed tried doctorin' her and now he
can't accept she was a sock. So he is still pretending she is real!
Priceless. Just shows what an arrogant and unemployable fraud he is. St
Bob of Pastorio is probably looking down on high and howling with
laughter at Greyfriars Chuunky coming apart at the seams
FR
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> convicted neighbor Mâck©® <shootspamm...@deathtospam.net> wrote:
> > Tim Shoppa <sho...@trailing-edge.com> wrote:
> > >On May 30, 12:12 pm, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
> > >> Julie Bove wrote:
>
> > >> > Doesn't hold true for me. My diet upon diagnosis was very low in fat of any
> > >> > kind, high in fiber and full of whole grains.
> >
> > >> Mine, too. Ornish diet.
> >
> > >Getting away from all the medical papers and into personal issues: do
> > >either of you believe that your diet was the sole cause of your
> > >insulin resistance/diabetes? A primary cause? A trigger?
> >
> > >If so, do you feel personal guilt for your diet or blame commercial/
> > >societal factors as being responsible for that diet?
> >
> > >You can flame me for asking the above questions, they're not easy
> > >questions, they're also questions I've always avoided personally. I do
> > >not ask them lightly.
> >
> > >Tim.
> >
> > why do so many people, legit posters and idiot trolls alike, assume
> > that guilt is an automatic or rational response to having type 2
> > diabetes?
There is understandably feelings of guilt now that we understand
type-2 diabetes to be an acquired condition arising from overeating.
> > There are several answers. 1. social engineering. 2. predatory
> > scammers like chung who feed off of negative human response (as a
> > result of social engendering) to obesity or anything else that makes
> > one different from the "perceived" norm.
Mack's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains convicted
by the Holy Spirit:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
> > 3. misinformation about the
> > actual progression of type 2 diabetes/insulin resistance.
It is clear that insulin resistance (metabolic syndrome) precedes
type-2 diabetes in many cases by several years.
> > We can't change societies failings here, and the solution to scammers
> > like chung is to take them out behind the wood shed and beat them to
> > within an inch of death every time the try and push their worthless
> > scams. America really should consider importing the Caning punishment
> > they use in some of the Asian countries.
The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a scam:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp
> > But we can do something about diabetes ignorance. Insulin resistance
> > is not caused by obesity.
It is causes by the inflammatory cytokines coming from visceral
adipose tissue (VAT).
> > Insulin resistance begins long before
> > weight gain occurs.
It happens after the VAT happens.
> > This is not to say that being over weight does
> > not complicate and worsen insulin resistance. It just isn't the
> > actual cause of it.
VAT is the actual cause of metabolic syndrome (MetS) or insulin
resistance.
There are a number of ASD participants who serve as illustrative
examples.
> > Insulin resistance however is a cause of weight gain.
It is the overeating that causes weight gain.
Insulin resistance is simply a marker for the predilection to overeat.
This tendency arises from believing the lie that "hunger is bad:"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/22532ce141e762af?
> > When the body
> > has excess glucose in the system, whether from over eating or insulin
> > resistance in the absence of over eating.
Without overeating, there will not be a net excess of glucose.
> > Insulin will cause the
> > excess glucose to be converted to fat for fuel storage. This is a
> > natural bodily function. It is one of the functions of insulin (an
> > actual growth hormone) that is not often talked about, especially in
> > diabetes literature or by many diabetes care givers, endos included.
> > Type 1s new to pumping insulin will often learn this problem the hard
> > way.
Overeating is both necessary and sufficient for weight gain where
there is homeostasis.
> > Once the individual gains a certain amount of weight, differing from
> > individual to individual, the added weight does exacerbate the insulin
> > resistance. Increasing it. Also increasing the rate at which the
> > resistance causes weight gain. When this occurs it becomes very
> > difficult for the individual to lose weight, even when dieting and
> > exercising.
The difficulty arises from believing satan's lie that "hunger is bad."
This is because eating less down to the right amount and exercising
increases hunger.
Moreover, accelerated VAT loss while being hungry increases the
feeling of hunger even more.
The key to being able to stay the course is befriending (embracing)
hunger because of the knowledge that "hunger is good" because
medically and physiologically it is good and because spiritually it is
from GOD, Creator of heaven and earth.
> > In the past and even today, type 2s were not diagnosed until they had
> > several of the so called "classic symptoms". The 1st one being
> > obesity. Ask any type 2 who has been screened for diabetes in the
> > past who's doctors told them their 200+ BG reading was nothing to
> > worry about because they didn't have any other diabetes "symptoms" at
> > the time. Thankfully the diagnostic criteria for type 2 diabetes has
> > improved. Weight is no longer a determining factor in today's
> > diagnostic standards, even though some idiots with a medical license
> > still use it.
Not sure from what planet this comes from.
> > As a result there are more and more type 2s being diagnosed at much
> > younger ages before obesity and other major complications have already
> > set in. Making it far easier for these "lucky" ones to get their
> > diabetes under good control far sooner than would have been possible
> > with the standards from 10 or even 5 years ago. Many of these people
> > can in shorter periods of time control their diabetes through diet and
> > exercise alone, after only a short time on oral med's or even insulin
> > in some cases, and many don't need med's at all at the time of
> > diagnosis.
> >
> > And yes all of this information points out the very obvious facts that
> > exercise and proper weight maintenance and proper diet(for the
> > individual) are all essential parts of diabetes management "regardless
> > of the type of diabetes" one has.
> >
> > These newly diagnosed diabetics who get under control very quickly and
> > avoid complications and maintain healthy weight levels have not been
> > around long enough to collect long term data on. The misinformed data
> > that most current professional diabetes predictions are based on, come
> > from the older set of diabetics who were diagnosed under much older
> > and faultier diagnostic criteria. When these newer diabetics start
> > providing long term data to model diabetes care on we will see that
> > complications are lowered and predictions of inevitable doom are no
> > longer the standard.
> >
> > There is also an unfortunate draw back at this time, mostly due to
> > insurance company greed and in some countries like the UK and
> > Australia who pay for health care through taxes. They have the false
> > idea that limiting access to testing supplies will save money over the
> > long term and short term and they are misusing the data collected on
> > type 2s to justify this. Some of the false claims used are "testing
> > for type 2s does not provide any useful data the type 2 can actually
> > use to improve glycemic control." "The a1c test is more than adequate
> > to base control and treatment recommendations on." The truth is both
> > statements and others like them are patently false. Relying solely on
> > the A1c test means a type 2 can only make changes based on guesses
> > once every 3 to 4 months. Rather than making informed decisions on a
> > daily basis based on daily BG testing. Frequent testing allows the
> > individual to gauge the effect of individual meals on BG, sick days,
> > and in the case of women they can determine the effect of various
> > bodily functions that do not occur in men that do have a direct impact
> > on BG control. Some women, especially the ones with irregular
> > periods, can learn to judge their onset and end times by their BG
> > fluctuations.
> >
> > Both men and women can learn to predict the onset of
> > colds/flu/infections etc. The effect of physical and or emotional
> > stress. And can directly link the change in some symptoms like pain
> > due to neuropathy in fluctuations in BG control.
> >
> > Based on an individual's personal background, guilt may be a natural
> > response to a type 2 diagnosis, but it is not an accurate one nor is
> > it always useful or beneficial. Misdirected emotions like guilt can
> > complicate depression and make diabetes control harder.
> >
> > Accepting that an illness is not something to be blamed for and that
> > the illness can be successfully treated and managed is often the best
> > approach.
> >
> > Any type 1 who makes an ignorant statement like, "at my diabetes
> > wasn't my own fault" doesn't have a clue what he/she is talking about.
> > It's just so normal and easy to look for something or someone to
> > blame. And this blame game is played by both those looking at and
> > those living with the disease.
>
> this is the biggest load of crap i've ever read here and that's saying
> a lot.
It does seem as though Mack has lost touch with reality.
> you are an enabler who is making excuses for people who are
> fat and lazy.
The latter is a consequence of their compulsion to overeat.
This compulsion arises from believing the lie that "hunger is bad."
> Diabetes for most t2s is caused by no exercise and a
> history of bad eating.
Type-2 diabetes is, without doubt, caused by years of insulin
resistance arising from the pathological effects of the inflammatory
cytokines coming from visceral adipose tissue (VAT).
> Fat people love to say they are that way
> through no fault of their own but that's not true.
Even normal weight individuals can have too much VAT.
> just look at the
> people with diabetes who get told they have it and then are scared
> straight into losing weight and exercising. they could have done that
> before. the excuse of insulin resistence is just that. maybe a few
> have it but you make it sound like nobody can lose weight because they
> are victims. b.s. of course all the hypochondiracs and fat people in
> here will pat you on the back for such a stupid statement. just about
> all fat people can lose weight if they get off they put down the fork
> and get off their butt and exercise.
The latter will make them hungrier if they don't overdo it and injure
themselves.
This combined with "exercise resistance" will actually result in
weight (VAT) gain as seen in randomized controlled trials.
> You want to say it's not their
> fault. yeah sure.
Actually, I would blame satan:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/22532ce141e762af?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> convicted neighbor Mack wrote:
> >"Ozgirl" <are_we_there_...@maccas.com> wrote:
> > > convicted neighbor "Mâck©®" <shootspamm...@deathtospam.net> wrote in message
> >
> > >> True, and the causes for this appear to be several. A great deal to
> > >> investigate. Which I have not personally done, or made the attempt.
> > >> So I rely on those who have those problems to fill me/us in.
> >
> > >Although, to give Tim some credit. At least he is attempting to learn about
> > >the complicated disorder called type 2. I think his questions come from
> > >ignorance of the disorder more than anything.
> >
> > The line about trolls and legit posters wasn't implying that Tim was
> > in the troll list.
> >
> > sorry if it came across that way Tim.
>
> That's OK - I knew I was walking across a potential minefield when I
> posed my questions. I was trying to enlarge the scope from not only
> the often-unanswerable "what causes diabetes?" to how we feel about
> such questions. I do think I learned a few things that will take me a
> while to digest!
Would start with learning that the cause of type-2 diabetes is known:
Overeating --> VAT --> Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) --> Type-2 Diabetes
The reason for the overeating:
"Hunger is bad." -- ragin' satan.
The truth:
"Hunger is good." -- Holy Spirit
Amen.
Suggested additional reading:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/d02eaa5dec008048?
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
> And I ask lots of really stupid questions. I'm still trying to wrap my
> mind around what everyone here means when they say "spike" as being a
> problem, as to me it indicates a mostly-working pancreas, something I
> haven't had for a quarter century! When I ask what a spike is and
> everyone points me to their obvious "spike", I still don't have an
> innate understanding because my bg goes up and down in vastly more
> complicated ways. I wish things were so simple as just spikes!
>
> Tim.
flyingrat
hear...@emorycardiology.com says...
> "Hunger is good." -- Holy Spirit
>
Hunger is bad - THE BIBLE
Matthew 5:6 - Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Luke 6:21, 25 - Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be
satisfied. . . Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry.
Both these quotes from the Bible, and both infer that God (or Jesus)
considers hunger to be BAD.
Those who are hungry (for food or spiritual matters) will have the BAD
hunger removed, and those who are 'full' will be made hungry because
hunger is BAD.
"Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry" means HUNGER IS
BAD
Chung twists these quotes to sell his diet and gain fraudulent donations
for his one-man charity. No wonder he dare not set foot inside a church.
The Two Pound Diet is based on a lie, and Chung distorts scripture to
sell it. Expect him to either run away screerching and howling, or do a
furious little foot-stamping jig on Bob Pastorio's grave. Either way
Chung's core lies are exposed and the VICTORY is for the TRUTH of his
vile ways.
FR