I'm outraged at the coverage CNN provided on diabulemia. They accuse diabetics who suffer with the condition of doing the wrong thing. CNN neglected to address the cause of diabulemia. The drug all insulin dependent diabetics must use is a synthetic hormone that has been genetically modified. It is nothing like human insulin or any natural vertebrate insulin, for that matter.

The fact that 1 in 3 diabetics choose to take less insulin is not because they wish to eat more food. It is a reaction provoked by an inadequate and dangerous genetically modified drug. The reason a diabetic would take less insulin is to avoid experiencing the unnatural side effects the insulin is causing. CNN sensationalized diabulemia and put a damaging veneer on the victims without fully researching the facts. Genetically modified insulin does not penetrate the blood-brain barrier like natural human insulin. Genetically modified insulin distorts hormone responses to hunger. Genetically modified insulin does not protect diabetics from entering ketoacidosis when their blood sugar becomes too high. An inadequate drug causes diabulemia. Accuse the drug manufacturers of making the wrong choice. Or is that biting the hand that feeds you?

Make it right, CNN. Mass media should be the defenders of righteousness, not the accomplices to Big Pharma. Do a study comparing human insulin (natural vertebrate insulin) and genetically modified insulin. The comparison should include: penetration zones of the body, hormonal reactions stimulating and suppressing hunger, amino acids, c-peptide, lipophilic and hydrophilic nature, and pH values. The difference in natural human insulin and Lantus pH is remarkable: 7.5 to 4.0. How similar is that? CNN you've slipped on the peel and missed the facts. Now perform your due diligence to help make it right. I ask every insulin dependent diabetic to email CNN and ask them to put the facts on the line. Link to this blog so they have an idea of where to start. Thank you!

There is still no evidence to declare superiority of rapid-acting insulin analogues in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. These studies compared either insulin aspart (NovoLog) or insulin lispro (Humalog) with human insulin; no such study was available for glulisine (Apidra).

Based on average HbA1c values, patients treated with NovoLog had lower levels. However, statistical comparisons were so small that an effect on patients' health is not to be expected. It was also hypothesized that Humalog may prevent night time lows better than Apidra.

Even though patients have been treated with insulin analogues for 10 years, it is still unclear as to how these types of insulin affect long-term complications of type 1 diabetes. The long-term effects of insulin decisively increase the risk of heart disease and cancer, according to recent studies at Howard Hughs Medical Institute. Would you be surprised to learn that one of the insulin analogue manufacturers chose to withhold some of the results of their studies?

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.

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.

Mad Money is a stock show on CNBC hosted by Jim Cramer - a well-known iron fist on Wall Street. He has a following of stock enthusiasts who regard his recommendations (buy or sell) as gospel. Why is he so good at what he does? He just wants to help you make money.

And to this end -- the reason I bring Cramer's passionate drive to The Diabetes Blog is simple: last week he called Novo Nordisk as a SELL. Cramer said he's beginning to worry about a backlash on drug stocks. He advised that viewers should not be greedy and should take gains in Novo Nordisk (NVO).

Perhaps the NY Times article raised some eyebrows at Big Pharma. It appears doctors are receiving handsome gifts and stipends for handing out samples of drugs that were not all that safe for most patients. The payments give physicians an incentive to prescribe the medicines at levels that might increase patients' risks of heart attacks or strokes. In light of this blood curdling synopsis Novo got a dishonorable mention. Novo Nordisk professes to operate their company in two parts: biopharmaceuticals and Diabetes Care. The Diabetes Care segment provides insulin analogues, human insulin and insulin-related products, and oral antidiabetic drugs.

The cross examination of the C-peptide disappearing act and mysterious insulin auto-antibodies appearing where they shouldn't is just getting started. Thanks for making them sweat, Cramer!