English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

My blood sugar/lipid levels, etc. are perfectly normal, but I do have a couple of major risk factors for diabetes.

2007-01-23 07:34:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health Alternative Medicine

13 answers

There are definitely things you can do. Besides the obvious (i.e. eat health, drink lots of water, limit refined sugars, etc.) there are supplements that are useful for diabetes (just one example cinnamon). Try the book below (I have included a link for a book that is a valuable resource~ I have used it for over 10 years between the Third and Fourth editions). It has a lot of information about natural cures, as indicated by the title~ "Prescription for Nutritional Healing, Fourth Edition: A practical A-To-Z Reference to Drug-Free Remedies" by Phyllis A. Bach.

2007-01-23 08:00:50 · answer #1 · answered by Saph 4 · 0 0

1

2016-05-19 03:49:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

2

2016-09-19 06:36:11 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Are there any vitamins/supplements that can help prevent diabetes?
My blood sugar/lipid levels, etc. are perfectly normal, but I do have a couple of major risk factors for diabetes.

2015-08-24 14:51:49 · answer #4 · answered by Justen 1 · 0 0

The study that you reference was severely flawed. If indeed physicians and researchers thought in 2001 that ergocalciferol (Vitamin D2 was utilized if I remember correctly) would reduce the likelihood without adverse effects by now that study would have been replicated and if the same results were found there would be a recommendation for routine supplimentation. This study lacked statistical power. The incidence of other conditions was lower than expected based upon epidemiologic predictions which further reduces the confidence in the results. The dosage of D2 was extremely high on a per weight basis and although no adverse effects were not noted these infants were only followed for one year. In theory this dosage would lead to potentially serious side effects if used long term. The actual incidence of diabetes in this population of infants was quite low so saying that there was an 88% reduction means that in real terms the putative reduction is diabetes was a fraction of 1%. Bear in mind that most type 1 diabetics are diagnosed relatively young but the majority are not diagnosed in infancy which is another area of bias for this study. Whenever a study is published the question must be asked is there a theoretical basis for the conclusion. In this case there is not. Type 1 diabetes follows a progression of events. There must be a certain gene present. A viral infection must occur. The body must develop an auto-immune response as a result which destroys the insulin producing cells of the pancreas. D2 obviously cannot alter gentetics. D2 does not present viral infections which are not only ubiquitous in infants they are an essential factor in the development of the immunse system. D2 has never been shown to blunt an auto-immune response related to diabetes or otherwise. Let me give you an example of ergo post hoc propter hoc. This is a Latin logic quote which in essence says simply because 2 events seem to occur at the same time that they are not necessarily related and is a question that I always asked of medical students and residents and not a single one figured it out. There is a statistical correlation between blood alcohol levels and motor vehicle accidents and this relationship is cause and effect. There is in fact a stronger correlation between blood caffeine levels and motor vehicle accidents is this cause and effect? The answer is no it is a coincidence and if you are not able to figure it out email me at johnerussomd@jhu.edu. To summarize this was one study which has not been replicated. There is no theoretical basis for D2 to reduce the incidence of type 1 diabetes. The study lacked statistical power. Although a statistical benefit was noted in absolute numbers the difference would have been quite small. Statistical significance and clinical relevance are not the same. Over-all adverse health events in this study was lower than predicted thus a lower incidence of diabetes could simply mean a healthier population of infants studied. Most type 1 diabetics are not diagnosed in infancy. The duration of the study was too brief to be meaningful. The dosage of D2 may not have produced adverse events in the short run but it would be very likely to be toxic at this dosage if given essentially life-long - which if you believed the study's conclusion it would need to be and the dosage would need to be increased over-time to a level that would not be reasonable for an adolescent or an adult to take. The Lancet is actually one of the better medical journals published and it was the journal that published the landmark United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study on type 2 diabetics. That having been said the majority of medical studies published are of very poor quality. Having served on the Editorial Board of more than a dozen medical journals I am able to speak with some authority on this point. The bottom line is that this study might suggest the need for a better trial but certainly no medical authority has supported the utilization of D2 for any reason other than hypovitaminosis D. Bear in mind that many trials lead to enthusiasm that it not born out by further study. Early small trials found that tococalciferol (Vitamin E) acted as an anti-oxidant. I and many others began to cautiously recommend its use. We were all very disappointed that not a single larger more rigorous trial found it to be of benefit at all for any condition. Medical statistics are very confusing to physicians as well as lay people. Two trials asked the question what percentage of medical students, medical residents, academic physicians, and practicing physicians were able to correctly interpret a medical trial. In both studies the result was a shocking and troubling 20%. Yes I took a course in medical statistics as a medical student and I have taught it. One additional comment is that researchers have changed considerably their statistical methods to produce positive studies when the data does

2016-03-19 01:48:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Cure Diabetes Problems Naturally : http://DiabetesGoFar.com/Instant

2015-08-18 02:13:44 · answer #6 · answered by Muoi 1 · 0 0

Supplements and vitamins don't help you avoid diabetes.
Eat properly and exercise. Keep your weight controlled. These can help you avoid diabetes.
Contact the American Diabetes Association for information. Following a diabetic diet is good for eveyone.

2007-01-23 07:41:25 · answer #7 · answered by diannegoodwin@sbcglobal.net 7 · 4 2

Workout! you need to use (burn) all that excess glucose you have in your blood, if you use it, you won't have all that glucose wandering around... however, diabetics buy some pills which help burn glucose, it's some enzyme which consumes it... you don't need a prescription for it... i don't remember its name though, but you could ask.

2007-01-23 07:43:12 · answer #8 · answered by User 4 · 3 0

There are many suppliments that can help. Cinnamon, for one.

Check out nicholas perricone's books, for starters.

2007-01-23 07:50:49 · answer #9 · answered by chieromancer 6 · 3 0

Chromium helps to keep your sugar levels in balance.

2007-01-23 10:27:30 · answer #10 · answered by Erica R 4 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers