Note: The contents of this blog are for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice or substitute for professional care. For medical emergencies, dial 911!
Posts with tag insulin dependent diabetes
Posted Aug 28th 2007 10:08PM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Childhood, Opinion, Allie Beatty, Support, Personalities
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!
Posted Jul 9th 2007 10:50AM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Childhood, Lifestyle, Drugs, Opinion, Support
Eli Lilly has an award they give to people who have been diabetic for 25, 50 and 75 years. They call it the Lilly for Life Award. The award recognizes people who have been enslaved to the exorbitant expenses of diabetes management, in addition to the other schedules of daily life. Endearing isn't it? The award is a significant token of Lilly's appreciation for all you have endured and sacrificed.
Lilly awards people who have used insulin for 25 years with the monetary equivalent of what your diabetes management has cost. All your copays for each bottle of insulin, each box of syringes, each blood sugar testing strip, and your ability to adapt to the ever-changing technology of diabetes care (I swear, it says that in block letters) - Lilly awards you $42,500!! I told you I lived in the land of milk and honey. ACTUALLY - it's a medal and a consent form to have your face exploited in Big Pharma marketing. You should've bought the stock! The shareholders of LLY paid approximately $1.75 per share 25 years ago, when you were diagnosed. Today that share is worth approximately $56. Anybody know the math on that return? It's probably around 3,000%.
Let's go back to that statement ever-changing technology of diabetes care. Why must it be ever-changing? Doesn't that sound a lot like never-ending? We need not spend too much time on identifying how to treat this disease when we've got that down. What we need to do is spend more time and energy on preventing the disease from happening in the first place. That is what I consider achievement. Achieve that, Lilly! And by the way - I'll take 3,000% of my $42,500 while you're at it. Thanks.
Posted Jul 3rd 2007 12:53PM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Type 2, Adult Onset, Diet, Lifestyle, Drugs, Research, Exercise, Events, Services
Meet the Face of Change is a photo exhibit owned by Novo Nordisk featuring YOU -- the face of change. Change for what, I asked? Well, it seems Novo would like to change your opinion of the barriers to insulin treatment for Type 2 diabetics. The common belief of insulin treatment for Type 2 diabetes is that it is the point of no return. Why? First instincts are usually correct.
Studies have shown that Type 2 diabetics injecting insulin create insulin antibodies (IAA). Type 1 diabetics have these antibodies upon diagnosis. Type 1 diabetes was also formerly referred to as insulin-dependent diabetes. Insulin antibodies (IAA) develop and attack the natural insulin produced, resulting in insulin dependence. Type 2 diabetics do not have the same level of IAA. Once they begin injecting insulin that looks like human insulin (the kind Novo makes) - you run the risk of developing IAA. The use of animal-insulins did not cause the development of IAA to the same extent. If you plan to start injecting insulin - ask your doctor if he will check you for IAA. As a Type 2 diabetic, you DO NOT have to become an insulin-dependent diabetic.
I asked Novo to explain what Meet the Face of Change is about. What are they trying to change? The response I received from Nov explains their wishes to strengthen the drive of their business, among other core values. Now I ask you - how do you drive a business that sells insulin? Sell more insulin. For the 16 million Type 2s not yet in this lineup- please consider if insulin-dependent diabetes is the face you want to meet. Don't add insulin to injury. It may not be the path of least resistance, but cut back on simple sugars, increase fiber consumption, and take a walk after dinner. Meet the face of change by putting your best foot forward, not your face on a campaign for vulture capitalism.
Posted Apr 30th 2007 2:37PM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Childhood, Drugs, Research, Services, Support
Novocell is the first company to use polyethylene glycol (PEG) to encapsulate clusters of insulin-producing cells. This biocompatible substance allows glucose and insulin to pass freely through the coating while preventing the body's immune system from destroying the islets.
The encapsulated islets release human insulin through natural mechanisms in response to the recipient's blood glucose. The islet cells used in this study are isolated from human cadavers. The implant procedure is performed under local anesthesia and the encapsulated islets are injected into a surgically formed micropocket in the subcutaneous tissues of the thigh or lower abdomen of the recipient. The patients received temporary low dose cyclosporine (50-100 ng/ml 12hr trough) and did not receive any other form of immunosuppression.
At the American Diabetes Association 66th Annual Scientific Session in June -- Novocell announced the progress of the study. No adverse events had occurred -- no news is good news. In addition, the company also has the fortune of existing in California - where they can prosper on further stem cell research. Novocell has developed a process that efficiently converts human embryonic stem cells into insulin-producing cells. Novocell believes this study will demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the encapsulation technology that can be used with the unlimited source of insulin-producing cells developed from stem cells to treat patients with diabetes.
Posted Apr 5th 2007 9:15AM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Type 2, Childhood, Adult Onset, Lifestyle, Opinion, Support
The Rule when it comes to managing diabetes is maintaining a blood sugar between 80 and 120 mg/dL by all means necessary. This does not take into consideration that some people might function better with a higher blood sugar. For all intents and purposes this is for safety reasons. Clocking in at no higher than 120 mg/dL is evidenced to delay the onset of long-term diabetic complications.
However, in my blog about Jeff the Trucker, in order for Jeff to be considered safe to drive -- the Federal Standards said that he must maintain blood sugars between 140 and 200. Whereas conventional medicine says the safest range for blood sugars is between 80 and 120. If Federal Standards say that you can function better with a higher sugar - why is it that we are encouraged to keep them lower? I understand this from a clinical perspective this is to delay the onset of complications. But in reality - the complications result from the fluctuations in blood sugar level and not so much the level at which it is sustained.
So herein lies my question for all diabetics out there - do you feel better or worse when your blood sugar is 80 compared to a blood sugar of 130? Compare being high and being low - what are the strengths and weaknesses of each?
I'll start - I prefer my blood sugar to be higher (<120 mg/dL) rather than lower (<80 mg/dL). When I am higher I know I am never on the verge of being disoriented, uncoordinated, or likely to lose my ability to think clearly. Having a higher blood sugar allows me to continue on without worrying if I'm too close to having a reaction. My weakness of being high is the inconvenience of needing water - ice, cold water. Now how do you all feel about your highs and your lows? It's okay. I know it's frustrating as H-E-double hockey sticks to test, treat, and repeat - only to find that your numbers aren't always perfect. Tell me about it. No, really -- please, do!!
Posted Mar 23rd 2007 12:43PM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Type 2, Childhood, Adult Onset, Drugs, Research, Products
Just like a referee to normalize play throughout the game - DiaKine Therapeutics is developing ways to normalize the body's immune system.
The new drugs modulate cytokines, part of the body's immune system, which mistakenly attack normal organs and tissue and cause diseases such as: diabetes, multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease. Research by Dr. Nadler and his collaborators published in 2006 showed that controlling certain cytokines can arrest the progression of, or reverse, type 1 diabetes in an animal model.
The company's first product, IsletLifeLSF Media 1 is designed to improve the viability and insulin producing capabilities of harvested islet cells prior to transplant. This would potentially improve the success rate of the procedure. Additional therapeutics under development by DiaKine include: adjunct therapy to islet cell transplants, halting the progression of type 1 diabetes in newly diagnosed adults, treatment and prevention of Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of Adults (LADA), treatment and prevention of insulin requiring type 2 diabetic, treatment and prevention of diabetes complications.
It all sounds like good stuff in the works. Keep an eye on the progress and press releases of DiaKine, as well as their research partner - the Diabetes Research Institute. A lot is happening these days. What else have you seen or heard about in the autoimmune arena?
Posted Dec 31st 2006 6:00PM by Allie Beatty
Filed under: Type 1, Childhood, Drugs, Research
New research reveals that faulty nerves in the pancreas may be one of the causes of type I diabetes, a condition where the immune system mistakenly attacks islets. Substance P was found to be responsible for healthy function and protection of islets.
Toronto researchers injected substance P into diabetic mice to reverse new onset diabetes. Sernova Corp is leading research into reversing insulin dependent diabetes by implanting a small device containing insulin producing islets to reverse diabetes, and Sertoli cells to naturally protect the islets from the body's immune system.
There is no point in scaring you like a virgin on prom night by telling you where the Sertoli cells derive. Where they're taking us along the path to cure type 1 diabetes is of greatest importance.