Petition: Tell NIH Lowering Blood Sugar In Diabetics Does NOT Increase Death Risk

If you care about diabetes health, then sign this petition!

We all know how incompetent many of the government and leading health organizations are in the United States as it relates to providing information to the public about taking care of themselves to protect against disease and death. We've seen it with the failed low-fat, low-calorie diets they've been pushing on the American people for decades with no positive impact whatsoever and yet they continue to promote it as the only way to control obesity and health. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, then I do believe we can officially describe those in charge of health policy in America as INSANE!

But that adjective doesn't even begin to describe something so utterly despicable that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has done in response to the results of the ACCORD study published in the June 12, 2008 issue of New England Journal of Medicine. Have you seen this so-called "study" that concludes there is a HIGHER death risk among those diabetics who attempt to control their blood sugar levels? This is NOT a joke--that's exactly what they're saying and this just goes beyond the pale.

Check out this ridiculous statement from the abstract of the ACCORD study:

"As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events," the authors conclude. "These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes."

Okay, let's think about this logically for a moment. A diabetic who is attempting to control their disease through an "intensive therapy" (we'll assume this doesn't mean carbohydrate restriction, although it should) of controlling their blood sugars over a 3 1/2 year period of time had an INCREASED risk of death and NO REDUCTION in the risk of a heart attack? Is that what they're saying? So are we to believe through deductive reasoning that a diabetic who allows their blood sugar to stay out of whack indefinitely without any treatment is better off than those who do try to normalize glucose levels?

Am I missing something here? There is absolutely NO rationality in this conclusion by the NIH and this borderlines on criminal behavior on their part by perpetuating this notion that controlling blood sugars is somehow bringing harm to diabetes patients. This kind of fear tactics serves no good purpose and spreads misinformation to scared diabetics who become confused and dazed by what they hear from an official government health source.

That's why I am urging everyone who reads this to SIGN THIS PETITION telling the NIH to acknowledge the existing science behind why controlling blood sugar levels in diabetics is ESSENTIAL. This isn't something to be played around with--there are bigger health consequences involved with uncontrolled blood glucose levels in diabetics than with those who are controlling them. It doesn't appear that the NIH cares about these facts because they are instead seeking to put out their own twist on this ACCORD study to baffle Type 2 diabetics.

Oh, but they're saying otherwise on their Q&A web site about the ACCORD study. Check out message to Type 2 diabetics about how they shouldn't be worried at all about what they are saying.

"Patients with type 2 diabetes should not be alarmed by these findings of the ACCORD trial...This goal of less than 6 percent A1C is very hard to reach for most patients who have had diabetes for several years, often requiring multiple medications. Even the achieved level of A1C of about 6.4% is often difficult to achieve in such patients."

All I can say is WHAT?! First you tell diabetics that they "should not be alarmed," but then you follow that right up with the pessimistic view that getting A1C levels down below 6 percent is "very hard" and can only be accomplished through "multiple medications." It is too "difficult" to make this happen in patients, the NIH claims, so just throw your hands up in the air and give up. Is that what you're telling diabetic patients, NIH?!

Plus, keep in mind the definition of "intensive therapy" as noted in this study is never described, so we have NO IDEA what they're talking about. From that answer above, we can assume it includes lots of prescription drugs which may have been the culprit in the increased death risk rather than the "intensive therapy" as they stated. Instead of trying to figure out WHAT the cause was, they just ASSUMED (and you know what that means!) that lowering A1c levels were what created the jump in mortality rates.

This is like stating a firefighter has an increased mortality rate because he breathes oxygen since that's what he was doing when he died. It's not that he puts his life at risk trying to douse a raging ball of fire, oh that can't be it! It's must be that oxygen he's sucking in, so that's our story and we're sticking to it. Sound absurd? Well, it is! And so is this conclusion by the NIH. They should really be ashamed of themselves.

Their argument is not based on any kind of rational scientific reasoning or thought process at all. But who's gonna call the NIH's bluff? Doctors and medical researchers don't want to stick their neck out against this powerful government group in the fear that some much-needed research dollars are withheld from their future studies. It's a sickening place to be in at the mercy of such a group that can make or break your career.

But I and the thousands more who come to my blog each day are NOT tied to the NIH in any way. We are public citizens who care about the issue of diabetes and helping our mom, dad, sister, brother, uncle, aunt, cousin, son, daughter, and friend with this terrible condition find the hope they need to beat this disease once and for all.

And most of us realize that it is livin' la vida low-carb that has helped to bring the ill effects of diabetes under control, especially for those with Type 2 diabetes. This ACCORD study gave absolutely ZERO consideration for carbohydrate restriction which has been shown time and time again to be the most safe and effective method of improving glycemic control. Why is the NIH so silent about low-carb diets for diabetics? That's what this petition is all about and I hope you and your entire family will SIGN THIS PETITION to share what the healthy low-carb lifestyle has done for you.

Notable signatures appearing on this petition so far include Dr. Richard Feinman, Regina Wilshire, Dr. Richard Bernstein, Jackie Eberstein, Dr. Keith Berkowitz, Uffe Ravnskov, Fred Hahn, and many others! Christine and I have done our part to SIGN THIS PETITION and we invite you to do the same for the sake of providing accurate information for diabetics dealing with this terrible disease. Let's not make the problem worse by discouraging the goal of normalizing blood sugars.

I love what Dr. Bernstein, the most famous Type 1 diabetic in the world who has been using a low-carb dietary approach to control his disease since 1946, had to say in the comments beneath his signature on this petition.

"I've had type 1 diabetes for 64 years and have an HgbA1c of 4.6% thanks to a low carb diet. I have a coronary artery calcium score of '1' at age 74. My patients with similar A1c's enjoy similar cardiac health."

You tell 'em, Dr. Bernstein! The low-carb diet is indeed an effective "intensive therapy" that is helping CONTROL blood sugar levels without the use of the risky drug therapies. How about the NIH taking a closer look at the REAL studies that have come out in favor of using something like the Atkins diet to benefit diabetics? There PLENTY of evidence out there and I'm all too happy to share it anytime.

Make your voice heard and SIGN THIS PETITION!

'Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show' Episode 19: The Hidden Health Agenda Of The NIH

LISTEN NOW to Episode 19 of "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore" by clicking on the PLAY IN POPUP link below (You DON'T need an iPod to listen!):

 "The Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore" Episode 19 [12:38m]: Play in Popup | Download

Those so-called health "experts" are back at it again trying to tell us what we need to do to lose weight and get healthy in 2007. Unfortunately, despite convening a panel and coming up with strategies for addressing the obesity epidemic in the United States, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is STILL clueless about how to actually resolve this ever-growing problem because the low-carb solution continues to be ignored. UGH UGH UGH!

Check out my show today and let me know what you thought about it. As always, you can also call our listener comment line anytime day or night at (206) 203-4192.

You can check out the podcast many different ways:

1. Listening at the official web site
2. Going to iTunes
3. Calling (818) 688-2763 to listen via Podlinez
4. Subscribing to the RSS feed

Are you tired of the so-called health "experts" continuing to get it wrong year after year with no accountability for it? If you could give those nuts at the NIH a piece of your mind, then what would you say to them? Leave your comments here and don't hold back. We must unite our voices together to stand up to this garbage they are spreading that will do NOTHING to solve the problem.

Come back on Thursday when I will outline several specific reasons why the low-fat, low-calorie diet is a failed dietary approach and why livin' la vida low-carb has got it beat hands down! You'll be inspired!

THANKS as always for listening. If you've never commented on the show but have enjoyed it, then PLEASE share a quick comment with us this week. It would mean more to me than I could adequately express. Take care!

Study: Live To Be 85 With Weight Loss, Lower Triglycerides, And Getting Married

Dr. Bradley Willcox believes he has found the secrets to living longer

We all want to live a long and healthy life, don't we? That why books like this one seem to attract people's attention. Well, this Washington Post story outlines a new study today that tells you exactly what you need to do to live to be 85 or longer. Are you interested?

Lead researcher Dr. Bradley Willcox from the independent, non-profit Honululu, Hawaii-based Pacific Health Research Institute and his team observed 5,820 Japanese-American men from the island of Oahu with an average age of 54 when the study began and they were tracked for as many as four decades (1965-2005). Their health was regularly monitored at a series of examinations by the researchers.

Dr. Willcox and his team used the following nine major health risk factors during their study to measure their impact on the longevity of the men who were being studied:

1. Being overweight with a BMI of 25 or higher
2. Having high blood sugar, a precursor to diabetes
3. Having high triglyceride levels, a precursor to heart disease
4. Having high blood pressure
5. Having low grip strength by exerting 86 pounds of pressure or less
6. Being a smoker
7. Drinking three or more alcoholic drinks daily
8. Being a high school dropout
9. Never getting married

In all, 58 percent (or 3,369) of the study participants deceased before they reached the age of 85. While the remaining 42 percent (or 2,451) of the study participants simply made it to that age, a total of 11 percent (or 655) of the original study participants were able to attain "exceptional survival" status by reaching the ripe old age of 85 years old without having any mental or physical problems to speak of, including the absence of cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung disease, Parkinson's disease and diabetes, conditions typical of the elderly.

What the researchers found was those study participants who did not exhibit any of those nine major risk factors for disease in their 50s were 70 percent more likely of making it to 85 and a 55 percent chance of reaching that golden age free of mental or physical ailments.

On the other hand, the study participants who had six or more of those conditions when they were in their 50s only had a 22 percent chance of even living long enough to reach 85 and a mere single digit chance of making it to that coveted "exceptional survival" phase.

"It is important to be physically robust in midlife," the researchers wrote about the study. "This is consistent with theories of aging that suggest that better-built organisms last longer and that physiological reserve is an important determinant of survival."

Behavioral modification in terms of our health seems to make a difference in how long we live, Dr. Willcox explained.

"There appears to be a lot we can do about modifying our risk and increasing the odds for aging more healthfully," he said. "It's good news because it really gives you something to zero in on if we want to be healthy at older age."

The results of his study, which was paid for with grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Hawaii Community Foundation. were published in the November 15, 2006 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association.

With advancements in medicine and health technology these days, people are living longer than they ever have before. But that doesn't mean we should stop striving to do those things that we can to extend our lives and remain healthy for as long as possible. My wife Christine had a grandfather a few years ago who was very active all the way until his untimely death at the age of 81 due to internal bleeding in his prostate. Other than that, the man was as vibrant as any young whooper snapper half his age still working long past "retirement" age!

So our direct charge from this study is to do those things that we can to prevent the risk factors from robbing us of our life before it's our time to go. The good thing for people like me in my mid-30s is I've still got 20 years to figure it all out (although I think I've got a pretty good grasp on it now after losing close to 200 pounds the past few years thanks to my low-carb lifestyle). Others may not have that luxury, though, as they are already at or quickly approaching mid-life.

The researchers gave their own advice about what people should do.

"We have identified several potentially important risk factors for healthy survival in a large group of middle-aged men. These risk factors can be easily measured in clinical settings and are, for the most part, modifiable. This study suggests that common approaches that target multiple risk factors simultaneously, such as avoidance of smoking or hypertension, and approaches that enhance insulin sensitivity, such as maintaining a lean body weight, may improve the probability of better health at older ages. This may be especially important for men, few of whom survive to oldest-old age."

Okay, it's one thing to just say change, but HOW?! Let me attempt to answer that for each of the nine major health risk factors that Dr. Willcox and his team used in this study:

1. Being overweight with a BMI of 25 or higher

You should know my answer to this. Other than the fact that I think BMI is bunk, if you need to lose weight then you need to make up your mind you want to lose weight, find a plan that works for you, implement that plan exactly as prescribed and then keep doing it for the rest of your life. For me, livin' la vida low-carb is the only thing that has ever worked for me. This is an essential part of getting your health under control, so make this your priority above everything else.

2. Having high blood sugar, a precursor to diabetes

High blood glucose levels have been shown to have very serious consequences on your health, not the least of which is diabetes. Breaking your addiction to sugar and other refined carbohydrates will stabilize your blood sugar and keep you happy and healthy for many years to come. Your body doesn't need sugar anyway, so you can live without it.

3. Having high triglyceride levels, a precursor to heart disease

Another perk of the low-carb lifestyle is miniscule triglycerides. Before my low-carb lifestyle, my number was in the 300s. Now it's around 40-50. You can't argue with results like this!

4. Having high blood pressure

Losing weight helps with this as well as reducing stress and cutting down on sodium for people like me who are salt-sensitive.

5. Having low grip strength by exerting 86 pounds of pressure or less

Working out is a great way to keep your strength up as you seek to remain fit into your golden years. I commit to going to the gym almost every single day and I don't regret that decision one bit. I only hope to have the same vigor when I reach 50, 60, 70, and yes 85!

6. Being a smoker

My advice--DON'T DO IT! I've never seen the point of puffing something into your mouth that can lead to cancer. Stupid!

7. Drinking three or more alcoholic drinks daily

My advice again--DON'T DO THIS EITHER! While the "buzz" you get from alcohol may be fun, you are only dehydrating your body and killing brain cells with each swig. Stay smart, don't drink!

8. Being a high school dropout

Well, it goes without saying that having a good education is important for a lot of reasons because it can help you make better choices. While that is not universally true for everyone, those who finish high school, college and graduate school put themselves in a position to live comfortably enough to lead a healthy life.

9. Never getting married

This was quite an interesting, seemingly non-health-related risk factor, but I can see how it would come into play. Now that I'm in my 12th year of marriage to my beautiful bride Christine, I value the health benefit of having a mate. She's not only my lover and confidant, but she's my best friend. The struggles, the pain, the joy, and the celebrations are all shared by both of us as we have commited ourselves to God and to each other. That's something single people will never benefit from and it looks like it can have an effect on their longevity, too. What better reason to go FALL IN LOVE, eh? :D

So there you go! Get those 9 things in order and you are well on your way to living to be a healthy 85-year old! I plan on getting there as a 50-year survivor of the Atkins diet. Hee hee! We're gonna show them low-fatties yet. Long live those of us who are livin' la vida low-carb. We'll be talking about the good old days well into the future, won't we? :)

NIH Should Look At Low-Carb Obesity Strategy

The major players in the health debate are meeting again this month to discuss the topic of all health topics on the minds of those in academia, government, industry and health care. The subject matter they are concerned with most is obesity.

Millions upon millions of dollars have been spent by well-meaning researchers who have been trying to grasp this seemingly incurable problem for many years. They have examined what the problem is and have made recommendations to help solve it, yet the problem not only persists but has even gotten worse. Could it be those "science-based solutions to obesity" have been misguided? GASP!

Some people will thumb their nose up at this assertion and proudly say that these are medical "experts" and that I should respect what they have to say about the subject of obesity since I am but a mere untrained citizen. Okay, I respect them and I am admittedly untrained in the field of health, but that doesn't mean they are infallible in their opinions nor does it mean my opinions on the subject should be automatically rejected either. There appears to be a real disconnect between the theories of how to bring about lasting weight loss and the application of those theories into the lives of real people so they can bring about the change that will allow them to live long and prosper.

The abstract for the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 82, No. 1, 211S-214S, July 2005 gives us a brief look into what is being looked at this year about how to take on the beast of obesity. Let's see what they've come up with.

The official executive summary of the Strategic Plan For National Institutes of Health Obesity Research led by Allen M. Spiegel and Barbara M. Alving reveals what the game plan is for attempting to solve the obesity problem this time.

Why is this so important for you to pay attention to? Because this is the group responsible for steering the direction of obesity research by making recommendations in the medical community regarding effective strategies for helping people with weight problems. My biggest concern is and has always been since I've been writing about this subject in this forum that the low-carb answer is being entirely ignored as if it does not exist. Withholding information that could help some people find the cure to their obesity problem is unconscionable.

Don't misunderstand me, though. Is low-carb the end-call diet for anyone who is obese? Of course not! But it helped me when I was a 410-pound man to shed 180 pounds and I know it can help others if the blinders would begin to fall off of the eyes of these researchers. All the information they are distributing points back to the same old failed strategies they have always promoted for weight loss.

I will break down each of the four "major scientific themes" of their strategy for tackling obesity:

1. preventing and treating obesity through lifestyle modification

Actually, this is the best recommendation they make. I agree wholeheartedly that the first step in taking on and defeat the problem of obesity problem is to encourage people to make necessary lifestyle changes. The fact is that low-carb is the lifestyle change many have been looking for their entire lives. The reason other low-fat/low-calorie/portion-controlled diets have failed people in the past is because they do not provide a reasonable permanant plan for eating healthy for the rest of your life. But livin' la vida low-carb not only helps you lose weight, but gives you a delicious and healthy way to keep the weight off forever. That is why the low-carb option for tacking obesity needs not only to be simply suggested, but actively promoted by medical researchers and experts.

2. preventing and treating obesity through pharmacologic, surgical, or other medical approaches

I am not a big fan of the obesity surgeries such as gastric bypass and other strange ways to help people deal with their obesity problem. I know many people, my mother included, who have had this surgery and ran into many complications as a result. Undoubtedly the people who choose this way to lose weight are desperate and feel like there is no other way to lose weight. That is such a shame, too. It makes you wonder how many people would have to do this surgery if the low-carb way of eating were marketed as heavily as the low-fat/low-calorie/portion-control diets have been. I bet the numbers would plummet dramatically because this is the best weight loss method available for people today.

3. breaking the link between obesity and its associated health conditions

How are you supposed to do that? The inevitable "link" between obesity and conditions such as Type II diabetes, heart disease, back pain, chronic pain, stroke and more is impenetrable. Obesity itself must be dealt with before these other conditions will improve and/or go way forever. We do not need to simply mask the symptoms while the real problem is not addressed. Deal effectively with obesity and these other conditions will immediately improve with most people.

4. cross-cutting topics, including health disparities, technology, fostering of interdisciplinary research teams, investigator training, translational research, and education/outreach efforts

This final suggestion is all about the information that is distributed to the public. My motivation for speaking out so passionately about this subject is nothing more than helping to educate the general public about a way to lose weight that helped me. Since the media and medical establishment have failed to arm people with all the information they need to make an informed choice about which plan of action will work best to help them overcome their obesity problem, I believe web sites like this and many others which extol the virtues of livin' la vida low-carb are carrying on an "undergroud" debate that can and will have an impact on obesity if it can get past all the lies and distortions from the media on a daily basis.

The self-proclaimed goal of the Strategic Plan for NIH Obesity Research is to "strive to facilitate and accelerate progress in obesity research to improve public health."

If that's their genuine desire, then they need to take low-carb seriously as part of the equation for dealing with obesity and helping people improve their health. Obesity is not inevitable if we would just wake up to the low-carb solution that is staring us in the face. We need leaders on this issue, not just mamby-pamby robots telling us the same thing year after year.