Diabetics : a carbohydrate-free and lectin-free diet cured me of immune genetic diabetes, theoretically incurable ; why not you ? I am an ordinary diabetic. This diet is compatible with the prescriptions of your diabetologist. It will not put you at any additional risk, and will not cause you any additional damage, apart from pain due to the lack of carbohydrates and lectins because they are addictive. At worst, this diet will fail, I will have deprived you of some of your favorite dishes for nothing, and I will have given you false hopes.
Below I present my carbohydrate-free and lectin-free diet, how I cured it, my theory on diabetes, bugs in diabetes "software".
Here are foods with little or no lectin. If you think I’ve unfairly discarded your favorite leaf or flower vegetable, it’s quite possible : search the internet for its lectin content.
I give this list as a guide : consult a diabetologist or a nutritionist to be sure.
I combined the carbohydrate-free and lectin-free diet with Dr. Alain Delabos’ chrono-nutrition. It was while reading it that I understood that despite my intolerance to milk and yogurt, I could eat cheese. Thanks to him.
Allowed plants : edible mushrooms ; leafy vegetables, flower vegetables : artichoke, asparagus, avocado, beetroot, celery, all cabbage (not cream puffs), endive, spinach, fennel, lettuce, leek, radish (you may need to remove the skin. I don’t eat radishes). Personally, I mostly eat endives, lettuce, and cabbage. Vegetables that are neither leafy greens nor leafy greens (potatoes, beans, peas, etc.) contain too many lectins.
Seasoning : coconut oil (other oils may be suitable : ask a nutritionist), onion, garlic ; spices : turmeric (but not curry, because it contains chickpea puree), star anise, etc. Beware of industrial spices, there is a lot of hidden carbohydrate or lectin. No mustard, no mayonnaise, no ketchup, no sauce.
Beverages allowed : water, tea, coffee, herbal tea. No sugar, no sweetener, no alcohol, no wine.
Fruits allowed : a few red or black berries (blackcurrant, currant, blackberry, raspberry, cranberry ; but no grapes, too sweet), avocado, a few nuts, 1 clementine, 1 mandarin, 1/2 grapefruit, depending on the season. Be careful with dates, grapes, cherries, very sweet, even for joker meals. I didn’t eat any fruit while I was on insulin.
Eggs : I sometimes have an egg for breakfast, or for lunch.
Morning, breakfast : cheeses (no yoghurts, no cream cheese, no fromage blanc ; no milk) until satiety + drinks allowed. Dr. Delabos authorizes a gluten-free baguette. Personally, I no longer eat bread.
Noon, lunch : red or white meats + vegetables + seasoning + drinks. No bread, even gluten free.
Afternoon, snack : 1 fruit + drink. No bread. I went without fruit as long as I was on insulin.
Evening, dinner : fish or seafood + drink. No bread.
Adapt according to your known allergies and intolerances, your diabetes, your blood sugar.
After the success of your diet (you no longer need insulin), Dr. Delabos authorizes 2 joker meals per week, but not on the same day.
I eat dinner less and less often, so that I fast between 15 to 16 hours a day : this is intermittent fasting.
Collateral benefit of this diet : I no longer have any dental caries, and I am in good shape.
Here is my diabetes theory. True or false, it permitted me to cure diabetes, that is to say, to no longer need any medication : insulin, metformin, etc.
Humans don’t need carbohydrates or their friends, lectins. This is proven for example by the Inuit before 1960 : they ate a few rare berries growing on the bushes in summer.
The best known lectins are glutens.
My diabetes, and in general, diabetes is an excess of sugar blood. This sugar comes from the consumption of carbohydrates and lectins in food. So a carbohydrate-free and lectin-free diet is essential :
A : not consuming carbohydrates, lectins, or any food to which you are intolerant or allergic (oils, for me) is the first diet to try. This diet can only reduce the diabetic’s blood sugar.
If this diet is not enough (I do not know the frequency of these cases), diets B and C are possible.
B : Eat a single, safe food every day, two or three times a day. A food is safe if it is carbohydrate-free and lectin-free, and you are not allergic or intolerant to it. For me, this unique food can be sardines au naturel or with herbs ; it can be chicken ; it may be cheese, despite my intolerance to milk and yogurt.
C : Fasting can only lower blood sugar. But fasting is not permanent because you cannot fast indefinitely, and a very weakened person like me (I weighed 55 kg for 1.74 m) cannot support it for long, perhaps not long enough not to no longer need medication. From my readings, three consecutive days of fasting activates stem cells.
I hesitate between B and C if A fails. But I won’t have to choose, because the no-carb, no-lectin diet will be successful within a week.
Nota bene : fasting does not cure everything (fractures, anorexia ...).
I conjecture that these diets work just as well for diabetes 1 as for diabetes 2. This conjecture is testable.
If a diabetologist reads me, you never know, I advocate the following. Drug doses (insulin, metformin) should not be fixed ; they must vary with glycaemia, to empower the patient, and encourage him to reduce his glycaemia and his doses, and encourage him to reactivate his pancreas. The patient must be informed of the existence of these diets. The patient should be encouraged to seek the diet that suits him.
To avoid runaway diabetes by feedback, the diet should start as soon as possible : on the one hand, the duration in days of the diet is half the daily dose of insulin : for example, for an initial dose of insulin of 24 units per day, you need a diet of at least 24/2= 12 days. On the other hand, it is conceivable that in the long run insulin injections end up definitively, irreversibly inactivating the pancreas. Experience will tell. Personally, I started the diet the day after I understood this feedback.
Other remedies for food intolerance are possible and could be successful, NAET for example.
Other food intolerances other than carbohydrates and lectins exist (oils, for me). It is not always easy to find the food at the source of the intolerance. For example, inadvertently eating a single olive perversely concealed in cheese made me sick for two weeks. If I hadn’t known about my intolerance to olives, would I have known that my intestinal troubles were due to this olive ? That’s why I mentioned diet B, single food.
I know absolutely nothing about medicine. However, I was cured of my immune genetic diabetes (type 1), theoretically irreversible and incurable. Here I present my reasoning.
Initially, I was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (insulin-resistant) at the age of 60 ; my glycated hemoglobin is 11.5 percent, I weigh less than 62 kilograms for 1.74 meters. On metformin, my glycated hemoglobin is getting worse and reaches 13.3 percent. The diabetologist prescribed me metformin, Diamicron and insulin. In one week, two nocturnal hypoglycaemia nearly killed me and caused me two retinopathies which required two operations (argon laser). This reaction of my body to Diamicron (cetirizine Mylan 10mg) shows that in fact I have type 1 diabetes. Diamicron is strictly contraindicated in type 1 diabetes.
The diabetologist explains to me : “Your reaction to the diamicron shows that you suffer from immune genetic diabetes (type 1 : the immune system destroys or has destroyed the pancreas, which secretes insulin, the hormone regulating blood sugar). So you are insulin dependent. It is irreversible and incurable. You are currently taking a daily dose of 12 units of insulin. In a year, you will need two injections a day, maybe three. When you need five, they’ll put you on an insulin pump. I tell you this so you can prepare for the inevitable. To adjust your insulin dose, you will measure your blood sugar every day. Below the low threshold (0.8 grams per liter of blood), decrease your dose by 2 units ; above the upper threshold (1.1 grams per liter), increase your dose by 2 units ; between the two thresholds, keep the dose from the day before. »
This prognosis displeases me. I think for a week.
Insulin doses are no longer fixed. For the first time, I can act. But what to do ?
The diabetologist was wrong several times. 1 : the diabetologist was wrong about the type of my diabetes. 2 : it is the reaction to the drug that determines the type of diabetes, not the results of the medical tests. 3 : this almost killed me. In my view, each of these three errors invalidates (disqualifies) diabetes medicine ; it is false and dangerous.
I decide to consider diabetology as software ; the previous three bugs are visible consequences of deeper, hidden bugs. What are these hidden bugs ?
My diabetologist is very sure of his prognosis. Clearly this worsening of diabetes is occurring for many of his patients. I trust him about that, but I suspect a self-fulfilling prophecy and negative feedback : if it was the treatment that made the diabetes worse ? Let me explain :
Each time a phenomenon gets carried away, a scientist or an engineer suspects a feedback ("feedback"). A well-known example of acoustc feedback is Larsen effect. Negative feedback is buggy feedback. A classic example of negative feedback is the following. A and B each have their electric blanket. They swapped their control box, which was on the nightstand. A is cold and raises the temperature of B’s blanket, who is too hot and lowers the temperature of A’s blanket. Etc. It’s a vicious circle : A gets colder and colder, and B gets hotter and hotter.
I suspect my diabetes is due to carbohydrate and lectin intolerance. For a dozen years, I have not eaten dairy products or gluten to avoid diarrhea and intestinal pain. Recently, my diarrhea started again, I became intolerant or allergic to other foods : potatoes, tomatoes, oils, olives, radishes, honey and others that I did not identify. Is my diabetes a worsening of my gluten intolerance ? I read that glutens are the best known lectins, that lectins and therefore glutens are carbohydrate friendly proteins ; Diabetes is an excess of blood sugar. Hence my theory. It makes sense. If true, a carb-free, lectin-free diet may lower my blood sugar levels, possibly lowering my insulin doses as well. In a week, I wouldn’t need insulin anymore. Anyway, this diet will not make me run any additional risk and will not cause me any additional damage (well yes, there will be the "pains of lack", but they are temporary). The Inuit before 1950 did not consume carbohydrates or lectins : they are not necessary for the human body.
My theory also gives two main causes which explain the aggravation of diabetes 1 in the other patients.
First, these patients do not follow a diet and continue to eat carbs and lectins, addictive and comforting, which worsens their diabetes : their pancreas does not produce enough insulin.
Secondly, insulin injections inactivate the pancreas by an obvious negative feedback (vicious circle), which I illustrate by this imaginary dialogue between Pancreas and the rest of the body : Body. The role of the pancreas is to produce insulin, so that there is the right amount of it in the body.
Pancreas, pitiful : "Body, I wanted to do 100 units of insulin, but I could only do 90."
Pancreas was only able to produce 90 units instead of 100 because the patient did not go on a diet and consumed poison : carbohydrate and lectin. The patient compensated : he injected himself (he injected into Body) 10 more units of insulin. But Pancreas and Body ignore it ; this is impossible in nature. For Corps, everything is going well :
Body : "Pancreas, insulin level is fine with me."
Pancreas : "Since 90 units is enough, tomorrow I will do 90, instead of 100."
After ten similar incidents, the pancreas is inactivated, but not necessarily destroyed.
Note : one could object to me : “But after all, if the world believes that the common cold is incurable, it does not become so ! ". I have already answered : it is the treatment of diabetes that aggravates diabetes and makes it, apparently or really, irreversible and incurable. For the common cold (before Covid 19 at least...), it passed on its own, treated or not, because science had not yet invented a treatment that aggravates it and makes it incurable.
My theory also gives secondary causes that contribute to the aggravation of diabetes 1 in other patients. There is the feeling of helplessness of the patient which makes him really helpless. Fixed doses of medication (metformin, insulin) also contribute to the patient’s feeling of helplessness, because he cannot try to reduce them. It is "learned helplessness", and the very word "patient" participates in it : a patient waits, he does not act. For the diabetic scientist or engineer who is familiar with negative feedback, his situation (his personal involvement, his stress, his distress, his role as a patient, etc.) inhibits him and prevents him from thinking calmly. Human diabetes experts (doctors, diabetologists) are also victims of this learned helplessness.
Another secondary cause, the patient is relieved of responsibility since he does not know that the worsening of his diabetes is caused by what he eats.
In my view, this disregard for feedback is an absolutely huge, crippling error, a bug, in the "software" of diabetes ; knowing absolutely nothing about medicine, I can only detect absolutely huge errors.
In my opinion, the social consequences of this huge bug are monstrous : the "software" pushes type 1 diabetics into diabetes, instead of out of it. These patients are often children, adolescents, or young people.
In my view, this bug makes the science of diabetes a self-fulfilling science (by analogy with "self-fulfilling prophecies"). This bug also disqualifies the technoscience of diabetes, even if my case is unique.
In my opinion, these huge bugs in the "software" went undetected, simply because the "software" leads to results confirming the beliefs and predictions of the actors ; this confirmation accredits the "software", ie it reinforces the confidence that the actors have in it. Another negative feedback loop that makes "software", although completely buggy, confirmed by experience, that theory, although completely wrong, is confirmed by facts.
I have just summarized the reasoning that led me to try this diet. For simplicity, I have discarded elements that are not used or not essential for my theory, and which only confuse the situation ; of course, these discarded elements are compatible with (do not contradict) my theory.
I need to start the diet as soon as possible to avoid the negative feedback trap : maybe in the long run insulin injections irreversibly inactivate the pancreas ?
So I start the diet without carbohydrates or lectins the next day, a week after the diabetologist’s prognosis.
In a week, I no longer need insulin : every day, I lower my blood sugar below the threshold allowing me to reduce my daily dose of insulin by 2 units, initially 12 ; I pedal 20 to 30 minutes a day. I endure some "pains of lack" (memory of old wounds : fractures, sprains, which have been awakened by the diet ; itching), which I had not anticipated : I deduce that carbohydrates and lectins are addictive. Diarrhea ceases after 4 days of diet ; the pains due to withdrawal and those due to diabetes (cramps, violent electroshocks, aches, thirst, headaches) dissipate after a few weeks.
An electroshock is an electrification ; fatal electrification is electrocution ; electroshock has nothing to do with a discharge of static electricity.
I am sure and certain that, without this diet, the diabetologist’s prognosis would have come true.
This diet cured me : my cure accredits my theory, without proving it. But my recovery proves the "software" wrong : Type 1 diabetes is not incurable. Reminder : to invalidate a theory, a counterexample is enough.
A year and a half later, I am using the same method to no longer need metformin, this time without experiencing any pain. I could have done it earlier. I no longer take any diabetes medication. I continue this diet, which is sustainable.
I behave here like a computer scientist who tries to detect software bugs, from traces of the software, without having access to the sources (because I know absolutely nothing about medicine). It is easier to detect bugs in software than flaws in technoscience, or the errors of human experts who run this "software" and with whom you have sympathized.
In computing, a bug is a crippling error that invalidates, discredits, disqualifies, destroys all the software : the software and its results are not reliable ; using them is dangerous. As soon as a bug is detected, the very first thing to do is to fix it. In the best case, the presence of a bug is detected, because the bug makes the software unusable : either the software terminates prematurely before giving a result, or the software terminates but it gives clearly false results in the majority of case. In the worst case, the bug does not render the software unusable ; the bug is not detected, because the software returns results which seem correct, because they confirm and therefore reinforce erroneous beliefs based on false theories (used by the software) ; worse,
Let’s sum up : if the results of buggy but usable software confirm your beliefs and predictions, or are in your best interest, why would you look for bugs ? We will illustrate this with the "software" of diabetes.
– The "software" does not take feedback into account, so the treatment of diabetes makes it worse ! This bug is monstrous. Either my diabetes 1 is unique (I don’t believe it for a moment), or my diabetes 1 is typical and then this bug creates diabetics. Scientifically, whether my case is unique or not, this bug disqualifies, destroys the technoscience of diabetes : it is unreliable, it is dangerous, it is harmful.
– The "software" offers a remedy worse than the disease. In one week, the treatment caused me two nocturnal hypoglycaemia which almost killed me and two retinopathies. The "software" makes the medicine innocent, and puts the responsibility on the prescribing doctor.
– The diagnostic bug : based on the results of the medical analyses, the "software" made a mistake about the type of my diabetes. The type of diabetes depends on the patient’s reaction to the drug. It reminds me of the (apocryphal ?) way in which, according to the Monty Pythons, the Inquisition proved whether or not a woman was a witch in the Middle Ages : the woman cleared by the ordeal would die ; the witch survived the ordeal and was executed.
– The allopathic bug : the remedy is necessarily medicinal. This is the allopathic conditioned reflex. However, if a patient eats an insidious poison (very slow, addictive), the remedy is to stop the poison. The "software" does not offer a diet, apart from the obvious cases (obesity, alcoholism, smoking).
– The "software" falsely concluded that my diabetes was not caused by my diet. He didn’t offer me any diet that lowered my blood sugar. He told me falsely that there was none.
– The "software" prescribes fixed doses of medication at the start of treatment, which discourages and disempowers the patient, who feels powerless, and becomes helpless. When the doses have to be adapted to the glycaemia, the patient is no longer in a condition to seize the opportunity.
– If the diet without carbohydrates and without lectins works as well for diabetes 1 as for diabetes 2, then the distinction between diabetes 1 and diabetes 2 is not relevant. It’s a complication (a wart, a patch, a hack, a computer scientist would say) of the "software". It keeps bugs ; it makes it possible to manage the bad reactions of the patients to the drugs, to shift the responsibility on the prescribing doctor and to clear the drug ; it allows drugs to continue to be sold ; it makes it possible to segment the diabetic patient population. Complications have several advantages : they seem scientific ; they dissuade, they amaze like the contradictory injunctions of the soap opera Covid and its sequel ; they sow confusion. Charles Pasqua : "When you’re bothered by a case,
All these bugs systematically harm some : patients, and systematically benefit others, the pharmaceutical industry, and diabetes technoscience (diabetologist, laboratory, etc.). Why weren’t they detected ? Because the "software" satisfies all players (to use the game theory term), confirming them in their predictions and false beliefs, or advancing their interests (if the bugs had harmed profits pharmaceutical companies, the bugs would have been researched, detected, and fixed...or complicated and improved) :
— the "software" provides synthetic insulin to diabetics, without which they would die ;
— the "software" provides the pharmaceutical industry with captive diabetics, who are dependent for life on synthetic insulin.
— the "software" provides diabetics to diabetologists.
The patient is bugged too. Without it, the "software" could not work. The first bug of the patient is to believe that the pharmaceutical industry has the same interests and the same goals as him. All the patient has to do is ask a simple question such as : will a pharmaceutical industry spokesperson triumphantly announce that “Our researchers have finally found an extremely simple and free cure for diabetes ! It’s not medicated. You will no longer need our medicines.” ? Obviously not.
On the one hand, the (sane) patient wants to be cured and no longer need medication. On the other hand, the pharmaceutical industry, its shareholders, its investors, has the interest of selling as many drugs as possible to as many people as possible. In fact, it has an objective interest in creating from scratch illnesses, real or imaginary, and sick people, real or imaginary, who are lifelong drug addicts.
The patient did not ask questions ; he doesn’t have time, or he’s been dissuaded, like all of us ; moreover, his distress, his despair, his learned helplessness in the face of the disease make the patient dependent on the technoscience which comes to his aid.
The patient’s second bug is a consequence of the first. The patient naively trusts "software", Science, etc. I emphasize that human experts who tell patients false things are not intentionally lying to them ; human experts (diabetologists, doctors) are in good faith. The patient is deceived by people who are wrong.
Personally, it was only because the "software" was not favorable to me that I looked for its bugs.
In conclusion, each of the bugs disqualifies (makes unreliable or even dangerous, harmful) the "software" of diabetes. I hope that once explained, these bugs are obvious. These bugs turn diabetes treatment into a trap : diabetes treatment makes diabetes worse. This makes diabetes technoscience a self-fulfilling science. The "software" of diabetes is completely false but its operation confirms the beliefs and forecasts of the actors (very sinister forecasts for the patients) or goes in the direction of their interests.
This proper functioning of the "software" confirms and reinforces the "software", that is to say the trust placed in it by the actors. The "software" works thanks to its bugs. The experiment confirms the theory, although the theory is completely wrong.
Let’s sum up : if the results of software or "software" confirm your beliefs and predictions, or point in your direction, why would you look for bugs ? Actors disadvantaged by "diabetes" software are diabetic patients ; but they have been left helpless whether they have the skills or not.
Are there other sciences which are in the same case ?
The epistemologist Karl Popper strangely wrote that a scientific theory must be "falsifiable" ; was he thinking about the technoscience of diabetes ?
Did Philip K. Dick Think About Synthetic Insulin In His Novel "Death Substance" ?