Imagine taking insulin was as easy as applying skin cream. Guess what - it's not so far fetched an idea, thanks to Phosphagenics and it may be coming soon!

Phosphagenics' has patented a transdermal carrier technology (TPM) that rapidly transports insulin across the skin without disrupting or damaging its surface. The company has recently announced successful results from clinical trials in Australia. This confirmes the TPM technology is safe and effective at delivering insulin into the bloodstream, without adverse events. The trial showed that the insulin safely penetrated through the human skin and delivered insulin into the bloodstream over a sustained period of time. Could this be the next generation of basal insulin? Adios Lantus. Arrivederci Levemir! Almost -- TPM/Insulin, applied topically, delivered insulin through the skin and into the bloodstream for up to 8 hours. So like sunblock -- you'll probably have to reapply.

Weep not, fellow Americans. Although Phosphagenics is based in Australia, they are in the process of applying for Phase 2 clinical trials in the U.S. Big ups to the Muffin Man for keeping me abreast of his leading-edge news from the diabetes-friendly forefront!

For those diabetics injecting insulin and getting frustrating results - this blog's you. I include in this group of frustrating results: hypo unawareness, diabulemia, lethargy, weight gain, erratic blood sugars, and missed periods (for the ladies) - these are all side effects people have experienced once beginning genetically modified human insulin. It so happens it is the only kind available in the United States.

Bev did a terrific blog on the Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust and the difference a choice has offered me: more controlled blood sugars, lower blood pressure, less hunger and even a little weight loss - high five! But herein lies the problem - the choice is not easy to come by. Most doctors believe Big Pharma pushed genetically modified human synthetic insulins because it was better. However this, like the insulin analogues - was nothing but stellar marketing with lackluster scientific proof.

If any of those symptoms listed in my first paragraph kept you reading to this point - please ask your doctor to give natural animal insulins a second chance. Do yourself and other diabetics a favor and request information to bring to your doctor by emailing enquiries@iddtinternational.org. The IDDT will send information on natural animal insulins. You may not be interested, but another diabetic may love the fact it will soon be a choice for them. Freedom of choice - isn't the Liberty Bell appropriate here?

The CafePharma message boards are for pharmaceutical sales professionals and those interested in the pharmaceutical industry. A former Lilly sales rep started a thread about Eli Lilly and the lies they've told over the years. Pro Lilly responses flooded in, as did the anti-Lilly responses. Yesterday, however, two comments seemed to hit the message board with a vengeance.

Comments #23 and #24 epitomize the anatomy of a good old fashioned debate. Comment #23 is an Eli Lilly sales rep who claims to have helped with the successful launch of rDNA insulin, and the conversion of patients on pig and cow insulin to Humulin. He remarked from the perspective of a salesman that it was a successful venture resulting in unilateral domination. In response to his yesteryear achievement - commenter #24 raised some wonderful counter-points for modern day consideration. The following paragraph summarizes the results 25 years after the market saturation of Humulin and genetically modified human insulin.

The adverse events include: (1) Complications of diabetes are increasing. (2) Dead-in-bed syndrome is up over 300%. (3) Traffic accidents caused by people using rDNA insulins are increasing (especially in Type 2). (4) rDNA insulins are producing immunogenic responses in the same manner and numbers in the diabetic population as did pig and cow insulins. (5) No long-term studies have ever been conducted to define the dangers of the synthetic insulin hormones relative to cancer and other diseases.

Of course my favorite point is the fact that recent studies have shown that the culprit in many Type 1 diabetics may actually be the human insulin antibody produced by the diabetic. This may be self-serving beyond Type 1 diabetics needing insulin - it's giving Type 2s the very same problem.

Story time!! Today is Bastille Day. The French National holiday commemorates the storming of the Bastille, which was a mark of the French Revolution - a revolt against absolute power.

Although I am not French - I am convinced there needs to be a revolution against absolute power of the insulin cartel. You all know them very well - Lilly, Novo and Sanofi Aventis. You've been a loyal customer, in spite of the shortcomings of their products. One example of a shortcoming is the absence of C-peptide. It is found in proinsulin and protects cells from the complications resulting from long-term diabetes. The other is the possibility that another source of insulin might be better for your treatment than synthetic human insulin. The fact the US only offers genetically modified human insulin is not fair when it comes to balance of power. Does this sound like a revolution that a feisty diabetic like me is starting?

I am not here to tickle a revolution. I'm determined to achieve it. Every diabetic deserves the right to choose their insulin. This choice should not be made for you by those who profit from the sale. I'm a type 1. I am a diabetic because my body made antibodies for human insulin. Why must I use insulin that continues creating these antibodies? I'd like to use something a little different that makes antibodies for horse or cow or PIG insulin. Can I get some pork up in here, please? It's difficult to obtain. It's as difficult as Ricky Bobby trying to say something in French. This Bastille Day Blog is a proclamation. As a prisoner of the insulin cartel - I declare that there will be a choice one day soon. Given the choice - you might opt for an insulin revolution, too. Laissez-faire!

I was excited to see my friend, Lissa Coffey, appearing on The Today Show this morning. Lissa is a PhD, a relationship expert and sociologist. Lissa shares her ancient wisdom and modern style through her site, Coffey Talk, and her newsletters. A recent newsletter addressed homeopathic medicine and I share with you how this applies to the treatment of diabetes.

Homeopathic medicine is a natural pharmaceutical science developed in the early 1800s. It uses small doses of natural substances (animal, vegetable, and mineral) to stimulate the body's own defenses. Homeopathy is a word derived from the Greek words for similar and disease. It is medicine based on the law of similars that says a substance will help to heal symptoms similar to those that it is known to cause. This is the same principle behind immunization.

When I received Lissa's newsletter on homeopathic medicine immediately I thought of how this applies to diabetes - a disease of insulin antibodies attacking the naturally produced insulin in the body. Why would you treat a disease with the exact hormone that caused it? Novo, Lilly, Aventis - you are all making a grave mistake in forcing American's to use GM human insulin, both Type 1 and Type 2. The extinction of porcine and bovine insulin has consequently proven to be detrimental to diabetics over the last 25 years. Studies show tighter control - yet complications on the rise. How do you explain this? I'm not excited for what the future holds, unless we see a return of these similar but not exact insulin forms.

Slow and steady wins this race -- and that is why Flamel Technologies took the more natural approach with basal insulin in developing Basulin. The results in a comparison study with Lantus showed patients, while on Basulin, experienced 50% less hypoglycemic events.

Basulin is a controlled release of human insulin, not an insulin analogue like Lantus. The goal with Basulin is to deliver human insulin in order to reduce the risk of potential immune response which can be created by artificial insulins. Lantus has been the preeminent leader since its introduction in 2000. However, Lantus is an insulin analog, meaning that its molecular structure has been changed slightly, to sustain this long-lasting effect. The long-term effects and safety of insulin analogues have not been established.

In a human study, patients formerly treated with Lantus were then changed to Basulin. On the day prior to replacement of Lantus with Basulin, 11 hypoglycemic events were experienced in the 30 patients receiving Lantus. Once these patients were switched to Basulin for the 14 day trials, an average of only 5.1 hypoglycemic events per day occurred. This result is very encouraging, because hypoglycemia is a severe and commonly observed event in T1DM patients. Here is the billion dollar question (In 2006 over 60% of $8.9 billion was spent on long-acting insulin) -- is this more natural Basulin more fat-loving (like real human insulin) in comparison to the insulin analogue Lantus?

Lately the news has seen a lot of devastating diabetic events due to hypoglycemic unawareness. Hypoglycemic unawareness is commonly defined as an inability to recognize the symptoms (sweating, tremor, hunger, anxiety, and palpitations) of decreased blood sugar or a failure of the warning signs to occur before development of neuroglycopenia, which means a shortage of glucose in the brain. Curiously, this term was not coined for diabetes until 10 years after the introduction of genetically modified human synthetic insulin and insulin analogues.

I hate to say it but diabetes is a crapshoot. You never know what you are going to get, but you can sure try your best to keep your eye on the ball. Removing the inherent dangers of hypoglycemic unawareness would make me a happier diabetic, and improve the lives of all those I care about (diabetics like myself). The answer might lie in the only type of treatment available nowadays, insulin analogues. Diabetics who do not take any form of drug to control blood sugar do NOT have hypoglycemic unawareness.

It's called human but it is nothing like natural human insulin. It may be faster acting or longer lasting but I'm sure He didn't intend for insulin to break sound barriers or last three moons. If Big Pharmaceutical companies were asked to compare insulin analogues with natural human insulin you'd hear crickets. I promise you NO Big Pharma will fund a study that would become the antithesis of their marketing campaigns, human insulin is better. It's not better, it's just different -- totally different! Natural insulin is fat-loving. Insulin analogues are water-loving. The global command center of the body (the brain) is one big blob of fatty material. This means as your blood sugar is dropping, your brain is last fed, if it eats at all. Here in the United States we are victims of circumstance in hypoglycemic unawareness. Sorry brain, no soup for you.

For more the more than 300,000 users that once relied on animal-derived insulin, the final chapter of animal insulin is finally ending for the US market. In December 2007, Novo Nordisk has officially decided to discontinue making animal-insulin. Their explanation doesn't go into great detail why they chose to discontinue it. But the supporting evidence they use to warrant the decision is a little weak.

Novo says, animal insulin is derived from the pancreas of slaughtered animals. This statement is as true as the statement "human insulin is derived from the pancreas of slaughtered humans". Novo continues, since that time there has been significant improvement of insulin quality and formulation. Absolutely true! In fact, a Novo pork product was shown to be greater than 99% pure, while an Eli Lilly human insulin only exceeded the 97 percentile. As a consequence, demand for these old animal insulins has declined by as much 20% in the last year to a point where approximately 2% of all insulin users are currently using these products. Largely due to the fact doctor's were advising their patients they must prepare to switch to GM insulin because animal-derived insulin would be nearly impossible to obtain. True. The research that introduced GM insulin (back in the 80s) was preemptive, at best. The claims supporting it was better than the existing insulin choices was clearly debatable .A telling similarity to the discovery about Avandia.

The long-term results of GM insulin and its analogs would prove to be a nightmare if the right questions were asked, and the data properly collected. Is it fair for any of the companies to ask us to change from an insulin product we have grown to love? No, but much like the off-Broadway play suggests: We love you (as a customer). Your diabetes is perfect (for our bottom line). Now change your insulin (we don't feel like making that kind anymore). Too bad type 1 diabetics forced to change to GM insulin didn't have the outspoken advocates like those taking Avandia.

When blood sugar is falling, the stopper built into the body is the release of glucagon from the alpha cells of the pancreas which stimulates the release of glucose from the liver (but only if your adrenaline is flowing). However, when hypoglycemia is due to injected insulin - the stopper isn't entirely in place. Scientists explain how epinephrine (adrenaline) plays a major role in regulating glucose in times of low blood sugar and how this response could be adversely affected by the use of beta-blockers.

During insulin-induced hypoglycemia in dogs, the roles of adrenaline and glucagon were evaluated. The dogs fasted overnight to remove excess glucose from the blood. The dogs also had their adrenal glands removed. The adrenal glands are the source of adrenaline. Adrenaline is released into the bloodstream in response to physical or mental stress,to initiate the stimulation of glucose, among many other functions. Adrenaline and insulin were released at two different rates: a basal rate or a variable rate to simulate an adrenaline response. When the blood sugar fell to 42 mg/dL, the dogs in the basal rate group failed to release glucagon, but the simulated adrenaline response group increased normally. The liver response to releasing glucose fell in the basal group but increased in the simulated adrenaline response group. The researchers conclude that adrenaline must be responsible for this critical response to insulin-induced hypoglycemia.

Beta blockers are a common class of prescription drugs that counteract the stimulatory effects of adrenaline. Diabetics who inject insulin and take beta-blockers should be extra cautious of hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemic unawareness is already established for diabetics injecting GM insulin (genetically modified human insulin). Given the side effects of beta blockers, there is greater reason to be more aware of hypoglycemis unawareness -- yes, oxymoron. Those individuals who are on the brink of diabetes should avoid beta-blockers at all costs, according to a study in The Lancet (January 2007) beta-blockers used for hypertension increase a patient's risk of developing diabetes.

Like a student driver -- the function of proinsulin (c-peptide) is as critically important as driver's education. The research was done, but because the information highway was just picking up speed (at the time back in '88) dissemination of such research was difficult, at best. Never fear - I found a good study to start things rolling.

Proinsulin (c-peptide) is made along with insulin in a 1 to 1 ratio from the beta cells. After a dose of proinsulin was administered - it took 5 to 10 minutes longer to lower a patient's blood sugar in comparison to insulin, alone. The rise of blood sugar following the lowest point was much slower, as well. In lay terms this means that insulin, coupled with proinsulin (c-peptide), results in a more controlled reaction. Kind of like the teenager with his permit to drive and Dad riding shotgun. The permit gives the kid the right to drive the car, but Dad is telling the kid when to accelerate and when to slow down. Insulin and proinsulin are quite similar in nature except we're talking about a life threatening hormone without the parental guidance.

The antilipolytic effect of proinsulin (tapping fat cells for energy and ANTI means this is stopped) was significantly stronger in comparison to insulin alone. Human proinsulin has a stronger effect on prevention of fat burning for energy in the absence of insulin (ketoacidosis). This seems logical because if you metabolize the glucose in your blood for energy - you will have little (if any) residual glucose to store as fat. Type 2 diabetics have a plethora of c-peptide in their body upon diagnosis but their blood sugar is also high. Looks like insulin and proinsulin reduces the risk of ketoacidosis and regulates fat metabolism.

Why did they decide to manufacture human synthetic insulin without it again? A personal experience pumping piggy proinsulin for 2 days now and I've seen definite control in my blood sugar fluctuations - less than 20 mg/dL in any testing window. It feels like the newly introduced highly purified porcine proinsulin came with a built-in continuous glucose monitor (i.e., C-peptide). More to come...