[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[IP] Chinese cure-discussion
Thanks for your response. I can't say I blame anyone for erring on the side of conservatism, especially since so many people run off half quacked (:-)) only paying attention to what they want to hear. 'Cure' sounds good- but I notice that even in the response Brian Darby published to his inquiry of the online Chinese 'doc' they only claimed 27% cure in Type I diabetics, and those only with 30% of functional beta cells left. How accurate is that info? Haven't a clue.
And they go on to 'waffle' over being 'clinically cured' at that.And how do they define that? Better HA1c's?? Dunno.
I got my master's in Vermont - with UVM professor, Dr. Joyce Livak. Am currently totally 'disabled' due to brain surgery last year and am whining a lot about the cost of diabetic supplies etc. without medical insurance. (Don't qualify for Medicaid or for Medicare - yet!)
What kind of research are you working on?
---- On Jun 29 email @ redacted wrote:
> Thanks for the comments and clarification Dianne. I don't think we really
> disagree very much. Lord knows, I am the last one to rigorously follow
> orders from anyone--I tend not to really believe anything until I do it
> myself. (I'm even one of those rascals who started pumping before the
> trainer got to my house:-0 ) I'm not a physician, but I am a research
> scientist who works closely with many academic physicians. And I know
> first hand what conceited jerks many of them are. But that is common
> knowledge on this list already.
> I also agree with you that physicians are not at all trained in
> nutrition. There is nothing taught at all in the Johns Hopkins Medical
> School curriculum about nutrition. The problem stems from the science
> itself and the "traditionalist" who control medical education. Having
> attended many Nutrition sessions at the Experimental Biology meetings I can
> attest that human nutrition remains a very soft science. Many studies are
> difficult to do, and often lack proper controls. There are many variables
> involved and lots of anecdotal information. That some things work some of
> the time makes for poor scientific study. However, if there were some
> obvious benefit of a nontraditional approach, then I firmly believe it
> could not stay a secret very long. Keeping the whole body mentally and
> physically healthy is surely very important. As just one good example of
> this, one of the major problems with getting FDA approval for most of the
> new drugs for treating most mental illnesses is that placebos tend to work
> about 2/3 of the time as well as the new drug!!
> Traditional science tries to work by first understanding the process and
> then finding drugs to fix the system when it is sick. There are lots of
> exceptions showing that seredipity is often more productive (eg. penicilin,
> viagra :-), etc) . But even though there are many, they still are
> exceptions. Teas and herbal medicine have a romantic fell about them, but
> the understanding and treatment of diabetes has always followed the
> traditional route. As you and I know well, diabetes is not a disease to
> be trifled with. It's not terminal cancer where you know you are going to
> die and you have little to lose by trying anything. We are not going to
> die anytime soon, BUT we are always just a miscalculation away from death.
> So forgive me if I tend to err on the conservative side. I think most
> other diabetics should err on this side as well, and that is why the quacks
> get such a rough time on this list (and elsewhere). But Dianne, since you
> seem smart enough to try new things, I really do hope you find something
> that would allow me to throw away my pump. I and many others (including
> the AMA and all those jeks) would be eternally grateful *S*
> p.s. Mixing H and V is a good example of anecdotal occurrences. I'm happy
> that mixing works for you, but it isn't needed by over 90% of other
> pumpers. And in the only "scientific" study I know of (the one I did on
> myself last year --I'll send it to you if you want it and you didnt' see
> the post last summer), there was no obvious benefit.
> ps.s. where did you get your Master's and where are you working now?
> >Dear Dr. Mitzner-
> >I hope you'll take the time from your busy schedule to re-read my letter
> >more carefully. One, I am not paying anything for this expensive
> >treatment (my parents want to do this for me!) Two, I would not advocate
> >anyone else doing this who doesn't have access to a qualified medical
> >doctor, such as mine. Three, I am not suggesting that my beta cells are
> >active (quite the contrary)Four, I am not 'down' on all endos in the AMA-
> >I have had several wonderful ones, including my current endocrinologist.
> >It has been my experience as a 'professional' diabetic that while many
> >docs are great, some 'qualified' doctors are complete jerks however, and
> >are still practicing the medicine that they learned in medical school
> >'umpteen' years ago.(Witness the complaints in this news group about docs
> >who won't 'allow' children to use pumps and those who think pumps are
> >still experimental after - what - 20 years.
> >I agree with all on this list who find buying herbs that will 'cure'
> >diabetes over the internet to be highly questionable. In fact I'm taking
> >Brian's response from the online ad to my doctor next time I go.
> >As a nutritionist, I am well aware of the pitfalls of self medication via
> >any means and yet have found that there is much in this 'quick fix' world
> >that might be improved by slower means. (Or perhaps faster
> >communications.) While doing my Master's in nutrition, I interviewed many
> >doctors who claimed that their only background in nutrition (including
> >herbs) came from an introductory course on the biochemistry of the
> >Prior to this most physicians had NO training in nutrition as it wasn't
> >deemed relative to 'medicine'. Most diabetics who've had this disease for
> >any time, know more about nutrition than the average doctor I think.
> >Primarily this lack in education was rooted in the fact that nutrition was
> >considered a 'soft science' - one suitable for only 'women' to study
> >(shudder) as things of home, weren't really scientific and food and hence
> >nutrition were 'just' domestic science.
> >I am not advocating wasting one's time and moneyon herbal remedies that
> >may be at best ineffective and possibly deadly. I AM advocating keeping
> >an open mind
> >and not giving all power to the AMA, et al, for being the be all and end
> >all of diabetic information. My endo works in a diabetic clinic and had
> >never heard of mixing two types of insulin in a pump. I learned that
> >online and it works like a charm for me. So I am open to whatever comes
> >along as long as it meets my criteria for caution and common sense. For
> >one thing, don't go it alone, and keep your endo informed- among others.
> >Sorry for such a long post, but it seems on this list that when anyone
> >suggests that there might be another way of doing things, people see red.
> >(Smacks of quacks!)
> >I'm not giving up my pump Wayne, but if I do, believe me the folks on this
> >list will be the first to know.
Insulin Pumpers website http://www.insulin-pumpers.org/
for mail subscription assistance, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org