TR Forums

I know nothing about any haarp device. Whipping patients? They deserved it. They needed it. They were dying and the good doctor was desperately trying to save them. So what if it wasn't meant to treat diabetes? It did anyway. A happy accident. So much of our history is full of happy accidents. Penicillin was a happy accident. Look how many lives that saved.

Up next: the black mold diet! Guaranteed results within a week!

Redocbew wrote:

Up next: the black mold diet! Guaranteed results within a week!

Well, death IS a result ...

Captain Ned wrote:

Redocbew wrote:

Up next: the black mold diet! Guaranteed results within a week!

Well, death IS a result ...

And death cures ALL diseases...

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

Penicillin was a happy accident. Look how many lives that saved.

...after numerous other people found an entirely different strain of it and the painstakingly developed methods to be able to cultivate and purify it.

If you simply follow Fleming's original instructions, it would take you tens of thousands of cultures and what you'd get would be terribly weak and contaminated. Fleming himself pursued it for years and didn't get anywhere useful.

In other words, it wasn't a one-time prescription by one person, useful results took nearly two decades and the medical establishment refining the process by continually checking efficacy.

Glorious wrote:

In other words, it wasn't a one-time prescription by one person, useful results took nearly two decades and the medical establishment refining the process by continually checking efficacy.

And herein lies the problem. The medical establishment never took up the idea of the rice diet because it doesn't make business sense. What are they going to tell their patients? We have a specially formulated boiled white rice and fruit preparation that you take for so and so many days and then you don't have to return to us for any more prescriptions? They have brainwashed everyone including you, Sir, into believing that the only way to manage Diabetes is with the drugs they have developed over the course of decades by sinking BILLIONS into them. Did you know that Berberine is as effective as Metformin WITHOUT the sugar crash? Why aren't the doctors offering that to the patients? Instead, they tell them, always keep a candy bar handy if your blood sugar gets too low. They are willfully putting their patients at risk of hypoglycemia. (Now I simply cannot wait to read your mind blowing rebuttal that will give me a headache for days to come because oh yes, I have limited cognitive abilities.)

Igor_Kavinski wrote:

I have limited cognitive abilities

Now there's something I believe.

I know that not all conspiracy theorists are stupid, but you're not chasing the Templars treasure here dude. You might as well be arguing that the sky is purple.

Redocbew wrote:

I know that not all conspiracy theorists are stupid, but you're not chasing the Templars treasure here dude. You might as well be arguing that the sky is purple.

National Treasure 3: The Search for the Suppressed Diabeetus Cure.

Nic Cage in his usual role, Diane Kruger somehow has T2D, and Igor_Kavinski playing Riley.

Igor_Kavinski wrote:

The medical establishment never took up the idea of the rice diet because it doesn't make business sense.

What the What!? NO its because its not even remotely good for you. Lets not rehash this /facepalm

https://www.lifeextension.com/Magazine/ ... rs/Page-01

The authors concluded that “Lipids are an important source of chemical modification of tissue proteins, even in the absence of hyperglycemia,” and that B6 vitamer treatment with pyridoxamine reduced protein and lipid glycation and “…protected against renal and vascular pathology in a nondiabetic model” (of obesity).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyridoxamine

Biostratum submitted a citizen petition to the FDA on July 29, 2005, seeking to disallow sales of pyridoxamine-containing supplements on the grounds that pyridoxamine, as the subject of an Investigational New Drug Application with the FDA, is a drug and not a dietary supplement. On January 12, 2009, the FDA ruled that products containing pyridoxamine are excluded from the definition of dietary supplements as defined by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994.[11] The FDA stated that the status of Pyridorin as an investigational new drug, as a result of an application filed by BioStratum in July 1999 and effective on September 1, 1999, meant that "the marketing of pyridoxamine in a dietary supplement is essentially equivalent to the marketing of an investigational new drug as a dietary supplement" because there was an "absence of independent, verifiable evidence that the substance was marketed as a food or a dietary supplement prior to its authorization for investigation as a new drug."

And you believe that I am the conspiracy theorist. Taking a beneficial supplement OFF the market because a pharma had spent hundreds of millions in using the said supplement to develop a drug and thereby denying its protection conferred to the kidneys of obese and diabetic patients is justified how?

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

And herein lies the problem. The medical establishment never took up the idea of the rice diet because it doesn't make business sense. What are they going to tell their patients?

The same thing they always do, which is a bunch of stuff that the patients usually ignore?

I mean, multiple people in this thread have specifically recounted how medical professionals told them they needed to change their diet or they WOULD be prescribed medication.

Thankfully, they listened, and so they weren't prescribed medication or took it only for a limited time.

This is what doctors actually say about this: "Make dietary/lifestyle changes so I don't have to see you as often and so I don't have to prescribe you medication."

What "business sense" does THAT make?

Igor_Kavinski wrote:

And you believe that I am the conspiracy theorist.

You know what your problem is? You've got no self-awareness.

Also rail about big pharma you all like, but why wouldn't a nationalized single-payer system (like the NHS, which incidentally now owns Fleming's famous laboratory) pursue cheaper options if they were viable?

The NHS would love to cut costs and make their stakeholders healthier. Why would the entire British "medical establishment" conspire to suppress something that would save them an extraordinary amount of money?

Glorious wrote:

Also rail about big pharma you all like, but why wouldn't a nationalized single-payer system (like the NHS, which incidentally now owns Fleming's famous laboratory) pursue cheaper options if they were viable?

The NHS would love to cut costs and make their stakeholders healthier. Why would the entire British "medical establishment" conspire to suppress something that would save them an extraordinary amount of money?

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/news/2017/de ... 30767.html

The NHS is already on the right track.

Glorious wrote:

[
This is what doctors actually say about this: "Make dietary/lifestyle changes so I don't have to see you as often and so I don't have to prescribe you medication."

What "business sense" does THAT make?

Simple: human nature. Even if the doctors are sincere, the pharmas know that a large percentage of at-risk patients will FAIL to make the necessary dietary changes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ohn-yudkin

If a respected researcher can be ridiculed by the medical community for speaking the truth, then I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the reaction I am getting from you guys.

Kempner rice diet: eat 2400 calories
Newcastle diet: eat 600 calories. (People at Auschwitz ate more--this is for essentially starving people into much healthier levels of weight).

Kempner rice diet: Rice, but mostly sugar (literally a quarter of the bag you'd just grab off the grocery shelf DAILY to reach 2000 calories ) to maintain
Newcastle diet: soups, shakes, and green veggies.

How are these the same? The newcastle diet is basically just a crash-diet to get obese people less obese, which is good because obesity is a major risk factor for diabetes (not to mention a lot of other things)

This has *NOTHING TO DO* with your fad diet, it's just when your BMI is like 35 you really should listen to what doctors say OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER "Eat better/less, exercise more"

In fact, they say it SO MUCH that it's become background noise. People tune it out to the extent that they don't even think doctors actually say it.

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

Simple: human nature. Even if the doctors are sincere, the pharmas know that a large percentage of at-risk patients will FAIL to make the necessary dietary changes.

LMAO

Problem: We just can't get people to actually follow diets.

Solution: Here is a diet.

Also, the diet is literally a bowl of steamed white rice with the equivalent volume of granulated sugar poured on top of it.

Enjoy!


No wonder Kempner had to whip people, that's disgusting. That's literally like a hundred spoonfuls of sugar, can you eat even three in a row?

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ohn-yudkin

If a respected researcher can be ridiculed by the medical community for speaking the truth, then I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the reaction I am getting from you guys.

LOL you're completely incoherent.

Robert Lustig says sugar is the dietary devil.

Walter Kempner says eat a pound of it a day with 1-2 cups of rice, and basically nothing else.

I don't, err, I don't think these two things are reconcilable?

And, you know, that sugary Satan was never seen as any sort of hero: that article blathers about the USA food pyramid as part of this whole "sugar conspiracy".

Yeah, OK *NO*

NO NO NO NO NO

What kind of an insane lie is this? An entire generation knows it isn't true. That damn thing was on the wall at my school, in my classrom even. I stared at stupid thing all the time, it's burned in my memory.

The very tip, labeled "USE SPARINGLY" said "Fats, Oils & Sweets"

SWEETS. USE SPARINGLY. Verbal & Pictorial!

Don't believe me?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... yramid.gif

So, at this point I'm not really talking to Igor_Pavinksi. I'm just following along with the thread for anyone who(for some weird reason) is still reading this thread because they're interested in the subject matter.

Fructose gets a lot of bad press, and is often singled out as the culprit in fizzy soft drinks and processed sugary foods, but the actual data isn't quite so clear cut as that. It appears that eating whole fresh fruits(one of the very few historical sources of fructose) doesn't have the same effect as the modern fizzy drinks and fruit juices.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18676134

Like most other foods, consuming excessive quantities of sugar isn't a great idea regardless of its form, but it's not as simple as saying "fructose is bad, mmmmkay?".

redocbew wrote:

Fructose gets a lot of bad press, and is often singled out as the culprit in fizzy soft drinks and processed sugary foods. Like most other foods, consuming excessive quantities of sugar isn't a great idea regardless of its form, but the actual data isn't quite so clear cut as that. It does appear though that eating whole fresh fruits(one of the very few historical sources of fructose) doesn't have the same effect as the modern fizzy drinks and fruit juices.

Right, and while that vilified food pyramid does have pictures of fruit on it, it doesn't have pictures of doritos, mega-gulp mountain dews, or any number of the other things we pour HFCS into.

It doesn't have pictures of modern processed foods on it at all, and only a few things on it really could have HFCS added.

This is where I throw my hands up: Do we live on the same planet? Is this is like the Mandela Effect, and in their pre-convergence universe history was different? Do people not even look at the things they point at?

---

Like, sure, maybe "squares" are the agents of Lucifer, I don't really know, but look, that's actually a circle, OK?

Redocbew wrote:

Like most other foods, consuming excessive quantities of sugar isn't a great idea regardless of its form, but it's not as simple as saying "fructose is bad, mmmmkay?".

And this *IS* "establishment medical advice!"

Fruits+veggies = yay!

Chips+candy = nay!

This is what doctors (WHAT EVERYONE) means when they say "eat healthier and probably less" (cause most Americans could stand to lose a few, or even a lot).

This is so ubiquitous that, as I've said, it's as if people have just stop noticing it. It's said so much that no one listens anymore and therefore people start to think it isn't said at all.

So we got all sorts of nonsense like "If only people would eat a pound of sugar a day with some rice on top, the ONE TRUE DIET suppressed by a cabal of EVERY MEDICAL PRACTITIONER IN THE COUNTRY"

To go off on a total tangent, I just recently was introduced to the hollow-mask illusion. What's interesting about it is that people who are schizophrenic often don't see it the way the rest of us do. Presumably that's because the link between their external and internal "senses" doesn't work the same way.

That's the best I got for why conspiracy theorists get stuck on their conspiracies.

Glorious wrote:

[
Also, the diet is literally a bowl of steamed white rice with the equivalent volume of granulated sugar poured on top of it.

I'm really really sorry for the confusion. I'm not advocating to eat sugar as Kempner did. I can only vouch for the diet that my friend followed and that included boiled white rice, two apples a day, a peeled guava (guava skin raises blood sugar. peeled guava lowers blood sugar) or a citrus fruit at every meal and sometimes, boiled chickpeas to go with the rice. The quantity of the boiled rice was fixed at 250g. He followed this for 15 days while taking a multi-vitamin supplement and a pinch of salt per day. After 15 days, he started eating chicken/beef stew and nuts along with barley bread and almost little to no oil. This he continued until 3 months were up and then he got his A1C tested which came out to be 5.0. This diet plan is the one I would recommend. I think my friend's calories never exceeded 2000 based on the limited foods he ate (don't know for sure. He wasn't exactly keeping track). Since I don't have any other trusting friends who happen to just be diagnosed with diabetes, I can't test the sugar inclusive 2400 calories Kempner diet for efficacy. It may or may not work but I do know that asking someone battling high blood glucose to eat sugar would just feel very very wrong and unethical.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that my friend also ate whatever fruits he wanted to, except banana, dates and avocado. These three are forbidden (banana and dates due to rapid rise in blood sugar and avocado due to the fat content).

Redocbew wrote:

hollow-mask illusion

Thank you for that. The mask appears convex to me. /RELIEF

"You're not stupid. You're just insane."

"Thank you."

Yeah, guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

I'm really really sorry for the confusion. I'm not advocating to eat sugar as Kempner did.

This is just bizarre.

You advocate the Kempner rice diet, with a link about it.

That link, and the simple google search of "Kempner Rice Diet" both detail a diet that's basically ~2 cups of white rice + ~1 pound of granulated sugar a day.

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

I can only vouch for the diet that my friend followed and that included boiled white rice, two apples a day, a guava or a citrus fruit at every meal and sometimes, boiled chickpeas to go with the rice.

So you're vouching for "Do something entirely different from what I not only named, but cited"?

Really. How would I do that? You never said anything about this until right now, what on earth did you expect to people to do? How would they "follow" this diet?

Read your mind?

---

For all your insane rhetoric of "DOCTORS ARE BUTCHERS" if they behaved like you do it's malpractice. They could lose their license. I could sue them.

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

This diet plan is the one I would recommend.

So this whole thing is fraud, then?

Because that's the "Igor_Pavinski" diet, not the Kempner diet.

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

Since I don't have any other trusting friends who happen to just be diagnosed with diabetes

THANK THE FSM.

(btw, I don't believe any of this. I don't think any such "friend" exists, sorry. Just letting you know, OK?)

Igor_Pavinski wrote:

It may or may not work but I do know that asking someone battling high blood glucose to eat sugar would just feel very very wrong and unethical.

OMFG PEOPLE HAVE BEEN YOU TELLING YOU THAT FOR PAGES ACROSS TWO THREADS.

Are you serious? You just realized this now?

DOUBLE-BLIND, FOR BOB'S SAKE!!

No, I'm not SSK.

One of these days I'm just going to succumb to the surreal....

https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic ... 4&start=30

This thread that I started first mentions what my friend ate. At no point did I ask anyone to eat sugar. I thought you had read this thread and were objecting to the diet that he followed. The moment you mentioned "eating sugar", I was like, "Oh God. So that explains everything". And please don't insult me by saying that no such friend exists. I have no reason to lie. I'm not a teenager.