Are you cooking with oils? Interested in lowering insulin resistance? Check this out:

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Marston A on April 5, 2009 at 9:06am

Hey Craig,

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Chuck Lin on April 5, 2009 at 9:26am

Craig
I started reading this article and found some concepts really alarming.
The author pointed to the lipid membrane covering cells as the culprit for type 2 diabetes.
There is a HUGE difference between lipid membrane and the oils we eat.
1) Our body produces the lipids that we use in cells. It does not re-appropriate the ones it consumes.
2) The membrane in question is 2 molecules thick. There isn't enough room in there for any other stuff that the author is implying,

From the text: "The reason for this is tragically simple, the consumption of manufactured oils and fats rather than unadulterated fats and oils as was consumed before the diabetes epidemic (and still today in remote parts of the world where a traditional diet is adhered to and where diabetes is almost non-existent),"
3) I have never seen any scientific studies that blame manufactured oils for diabetes. However there are plenty of science that says manufactured sugar products lead to obesity, which can lead to higher cholesterol which impedes the body's ability to produce sugar transport into cells ( type 2 diabetes)
4) Diabetes is not "non-existent" in places that have traditional diets. In these parts of the world, there is a HUGE lack of diabetes detection. Just because it is not detected and reported, doesn't mean it does not exist.

Having said all that, there are reasons that may benefit a type 2 diabetic to become more vegetarian. I don't know if there are any differences between being raw than just being vegetarian. A few books I have read on the subject suggests that raw vegetables are much more difficult for the body to digest and does not allow for the maximum benefit from absorption of plant enzymes.

I think one of the biggest benefits of being a vegetarian is lowering cholesterol. It's that cholesterol link which lowers insulin resistance in type 2s. Another benefit is the lower carbs in vegetables although many vegetables are actually more accurately characterized as fruits which contains very high sugars. Since my diagnosis, I have been much more careful about what I eat and I have switched to a high vegetable low meat diet since. I reward myself every weekend in getting a good meaty meal, but during the week I have salads for lunch and dinner ( always with a serving of protein ).

-chuck

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr. Peachy (Craig) on April 5, 2009 at 10:53am

Hi Chuck,

My findings indicate that there is a stronger relationship between triglycerides and insulin resistance. Cholesterol may be a factor as well, but I don't think it's the primary factor. Either way, a healthy high nutrient, low calorie, natural foods based diet (along with daily exercise) has allowed me to resume normal life without medication along with normal cholesterol and triglyceride readings. Not to mention far more energy than when I was on Metformin. BTW, I eat a banana, some apricots, an apple, and some tomatoes every day. The notion that's been going around that fruit isn't good for a diabetic is sadly one of the things that kept me on the Metformin for all those years. Those fruits that I mentioned were instrumental in getting me off the Metformin fifteen months ago. It's the nutrients. The sugar is less important of an issue as long as your cells' insulin resistance is addressed with the necessary nutrients and the proper amount of exercise.

There is a slight flaw with your logic in statement number 4. Just because cases aren't detected and reported does not mean that they exist. I think it would serve our readers better to look at our own statistics over the past century... particularly the plight of the Pima Indians. At any rate, the main issue is that the incidence and prevalence of T2DM in this country, Canada, the UK, and, most recently and significantly, India... has risen remarkably in proportion with refined food production, consumption, and modern food preparation techniques. There is a correlation. I think Dr. Fuhrman is probably one of the most enlightened experts on this subject.

I would also take issue with statement number 3. There exists a gross lack of 'scientific' studies in this country on all kinds of treatments that lead to better health. Why? Probably due to the fact that there is very little profit for the medical, food production, and pharmaceutical industries in getting people healthy. Or, because getting healthy is too much work for those who are so convenience oriented, that science isn't about to try and change them. Rather, they are more into treating symptoms and satisfying lazy people. European and Asian countries, on the other hand, use alternatives far more widely and effectively. Why? Because it's the right thing to do and they work.

Craig

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Chuck Lin on April 5, 2009 at 11:10am

Being Chinese and from a family with extensive history of diabetes, I'm sick of watching my relatives die while treating themselves with alternative medicine. I'm not convinced that these alternatives are effective at all.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr. Peachy (Craig) on April 5, 2009 at 11:52am

Alternative medicine, if practiced wisely, is far more effective than modern western medicine at curing people. Chances are the people you are referring to were relying on alternatives without changing their diet and lifestyle. It has to be a complete package, Chuck. Too many folks rely on their doctors for solutions without addressing the root cause. That is, poor (carb and fat rich, nutrient poor) diet and sedentary lifestyle. If treating with alternatives were fatal, I wouldn't be sitting here (medication free) writing to you. Nor would the thousands of people like Mike Adams of naturalnews.com and Chet Day, who run alternative health sites that are thriving in the wake of the abject failure of modern medicine to address this epidemic we are part of. I lost my mother to diabetes, so I feel your pain. She died under the care of multiple physicians trained in modern western medicine. My older brother is dying under the care (if you can call 10 prescriptions 'care') of multiple physicians trained in modern western medicine. Meanwhile, I'm thriving with no help at all from modern medicine. I could have gone down the same path as my mother and brother, but I chose to approach this with an open mind. I'm a troubleshooter by trade. Rather than taking my doctor's word for granted and watch my life deteriorate, I began on a crusade to learn the truth about this disease. 15 months without medication or a single doctor's visit along with normal blood sugar level is all the proof I need to substantiate the worth of alternatives.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Chuck Lin on April 5, 2009 at 11:50am

My point about the lack of diagnosis in developing countries is not to assume that there are or are not incidences, simply that the author does not take into consideration of diagnosis to the incidence rate. If you don't do the diagnosis, you simply have no idea whether or not it exists. That is all I'm trying to say in statement number 4, I really don't see a flaw in that logic.

Although I don't doubt that there are growing number of cases of diabetes, we know the strong genetic link of diabetes. I think the Pima Indians prove my point. In the article you linked, its says "They discovered an extremely high rate of diabetes among the Pima Indians". This is among a population who are not consumers of manufactured oils. Obesity can lead to diabetes, but it is still primarily a hereditary disorder, obesity contributes to the manifestation of the disease from being prone to diabetes to actually become a diabetic.

On a side note about lies and statistics, one of the biggest errors in statistics is when the data is not normalized by the sampling size. If the number of people with diabetes increases over a given year you cannot measure the rate of increase without normalizing it against the number of population increase and the number of people tested ( and of course the results of positive versus the results of negative).

As for statement #3, I do see a lot of people with your opinion that pharmaceutical companies are not looking for a cure but treating symptoms.

When I was growing up during the cold war, there was a lot of propaganda in the media and in schools about the imminent threat of a nuclear war. The Russians were the enemy and our TV heros were constantly battling them. I remember a song by Sting called "Russians" and it really made me think.

"We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is that the russians love their children too"

Do the pharmaceutical companies love their children too? I would hope so.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr. Peachy (Craig) on April 5, 2009 at 12:58pm

The story of the Pima Indians exemplifies how the introduction of western culture to a tribe of Indians who were doing just fine living off the land, tending their gardens etc., where the incidence of diabetes was negligible up until they were subjected to the refined foods and sedentary lifestyle, which was rapidly becoming typical of that era, started becoming diabetic at an alarming rate... up to 50%. If you look at your own ancestry, many rural Asians have set records for longevity and rarely needed a doctor. Why? High nutrition food, plenty of daily physical activity. This isn't that hard to grasp.

As far as your logic equating pharmaceutical companies to the Soviet Union threat... I think a course in human nature might be in order here. Not everyone is altruistic. Certainly not the Soviet power elite, and certainly not the corporate heads of big pharma or their major stockholders. Sorry, while you're welcome to believe what you want, I grew up during the cold war too. I certainly share your hopes, but the fact of the matter is, if big pharma cared that much about their children, they wouldn't be rushing to bring so many of their products to market mainly to pay corporate head's bonuses and stockholder dividends. And they certainly wouldn't be advertising garbage like Lipitor. I don't see them rushing to pull Actos off the shelves, either.

Hope is good. I hope that through the exchange of knowledge, we can help more people make more informed choices about their diet and lifestyle. Relying on government, the media, major medicine/the AMA, big food companies, and big pharmaceutical companies, isn't going to help, though. Too much money involved. Kids or no kids.

Craig

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Yvonne on April 5, 2009 at 9:28am

Craig- I appreciate this info. I have a couple of quick thoughts but still need to think over what I've read here. This article didn't discuss animal fats. Is there any info on cooking with butter or lard? The articlalso e doesn't address any genetic component - why some people are less affected by consuming heated oils. But, it does go a long way towards explaining why fish oil capsules (Omega 3 fatty acids) mitigate cardio damage.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr. Peachy (Craig) on April 5, 2009 at 11:04am

Hi Yvonne,

Most of the health sites I belong to seem to argue against the consumption or use of animal fats in any way. I tend to believe them. The genetic component is still a mystery to me. I can only offer unfounded theories. All having to do with cell wall health. Those of us who are susceptible, clearly have some sort of weakness that allows the cell's permeability to be affected by fats. Regardless of the source of the fats. The ScienCentral.com article I read some time ago pretty well proves that fats are the main cause of insulin resistance... at least to me. At any rate, eating healthy can go a long way toward alleviating diabetes as well as a host of other issues.

Craig

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Gerri on April 5, 2009 at 11:40am

Thanks, Craig. Wonderful info, as always!

My mother used to give us raw eggs as kids in shakes.

A bit ago, I posted a discussion on copper supplementation. Afraid it was rather long & technical, no one responded & it quickly got buried. I'd be interested in your thoughts about it. What made me think of this was the article you referenced that talked about the importance of zinc. Zinc is important, of course, & zinc & copper need to be the proper ratio.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr. Peachy (Craig) on April 5, 2009 at 12:11pm

Hi Gerri,

More and more articles I'm reading refer to trace minerals as being a vital part of our daily health and are sadly missing from manufactured foods. Who would have thought that selenium, chromium, vanadium, and neodymium are vitally important to us? I have not read up on copper. As a fibromyalgia sufferer, I'm all too aware of the consequences of insufficient magnesium, though. Turns out, the Great Salt Lake is one of the richest sources of trace minerals on the planet. Look up "Concentrace" sometime.

Craig

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Anthony Holko on April 5, 2009 at 12:25pm

Copper we have plenty of from the piping. But I think zinc is in very short supply because our geology was scoured by the glaciers. Have no idea how you would balance the two.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last