(2010-02-13 15:31:15)

2型糖尿病人胰島素分泌並沒有減少,胰島素抵抗理論存在著巨大的漏洞。2型糖尿病人血糖升高的真正原因是:從胃腸吸收來的糖不能及時地送到全身,四肢、皮膚等部位得不到足夠的糖,參與消耗血糖的細胞減少,最後導致了血糖的升高,被診斷為糖尿病。

因此,真正治療2型糖尿病,是通過恢復機體運輸糖的能力,使從胃腸吸收來的糖及時運送到全身每一個細胞附近,只要四肢、皮膚的細胞也能正常消耗血糖,血糖值自然恢復正常。2型糖尿病人的胰島素分泌並沒有減少,根本不需要服用刺激胰島的降糖藥或者注射胰島素。這才是2型糖尿病的「治本之道」。

但是,一直以來,無論是醫生還是病人都認為:既然2型糖尿病是血糖升高,那麼只要把血糖降下來,2型糖尿病就得到了治療。正是因為這樣的觀念,降血糖現在幾乎成了治療糖尿病的唯一目標。不管採用什麼辦法,只要血糖降得快,就是好療法。這就好比以前流行很廣的治駝背的故事一樣:不管用什麼辦法,把駝背弄直了就行,於是,用兩個門板把駝背病人一夾,再站在門板上用力踩,駝背肯定能踩直,但是人被踩死了。

現在治療糖尿病最主要的、也是醫院裡最推薦大家使用的方法就是注射胰島素了。2型糖尿病人身體內缺胰島素嗎?缺不缺胰島素,大一點的醫院都能檢測,你去檢測就行了。現在西醫已經有明確結論:2型糖尿病人根本就不缺胰島素,有的人體內的胰島素比正常人還高呢!不缺胰島素你為什麼要補充胰島素?英國著名的醫學雜誌《柳葉刀》已經發表文章,注射胰島素的2型糖尿病人比使用二甲雙胍等降糖藥的病人死亡風險要高49%!1

降血糖最簡單、最直接的辦法是什麼?餓肚子。你的血糖再高,餓上兩天,肯定能降下來。降不下來就接著餓,10天只喝水不吃任何東西,血糖肯定降到6以下。但是,這跟用兩塊門板治駝背有什麼區別呢?

大家肯定覺得沒有人傻到這個程度,用這種方法來治療糖尿病。不幸得很,這樣的方法現在非常流行:

找一個地方,把糖尿病人封閉起來,只給菜糊糊、生蔬菜吃,還要堅持運動,堅持個10天,血糖降下來了,告訴你,病好了。一回來,血糖馬上就升上來了,白花了幾萬元。

還有那些嚴格控制飲食、每天只吃一點點,餓得頭暈眼花也不增加;專吃含糖特別少、難以消化吸收的的蕎麥麵、南瓜粉等雜糧;故意把米飯做得半生不熟,這樣飯難以消化就可以少吸收。這些不都是現在很流行的輔助治療糖尿病的方法嗎? 現在看起來是不是覺得很愚蠢?

之所以出現這些愚蠢的療法,就是因為沒有認識清楚2型糖尿病的本質,以為2型糖尿病就是血糖升高,血糖降下來了,2型糖尿病就好了。實際上,血糖升高只是2型糖尿病的一個表象。現在所有的人都用降血糖這個標準來衡量糖尿病療法是否有效,所以,才出現了這些看上去很愚蠢的療法。

臨床上使用的降糖藥、胰島素,也都是以能否降血糖為唯一目標,只是解決了高血糖這個2型糖尿病的表象,治標不治本,所以永遠也不可能治癒2型糖尿病。這就是西醫認為2型糖尿病是終身疾病的原因。西醫只是控制血糖,根本就沒有去治療糖尿病,當然治不好了。如果從本調理,2型糖尿病是可以治癒的。


  1. While I cannot point you to a specific article in The Lancet that definitively states that "injecting insulin in type 2 diabetics has a 49% higher risk of death than using metformin and other hypoglycemic drugs," the idea that insulin might be associated with a higher mortality risk compared to metformin in type 2 diabetes has been discussed in medical literature. For example, a 2016 study published in PLoS One titled "Association between Insulin Monotherapy versus Insulin plus Metformin and the Risk of All-Cause Mortality and Other Serious Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study" reported that people with type 2 diabetes using insulin were at an increased risk of a combined endpoint defined as first major adverse cardiac event, first cancer, or mortality, with the risk being significantly higher for users of insulin monotherapy compared with users of insulin plus concomitant metformin. You can find this study here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153594 Additionally, a 2015 article in AFP (American Family Physician) mentions that "Patients should be treated initially with metformin because it is the only medication shown in randomized controlled trials to reduce mortality and complications." This suggests a potential difference in mortality outcomes between metformin and other treatments, including insulin. You can find this article here: https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2015/0701/p27.html It's important to note that the relationship between different diabetes treatments and mortality risk is complex and continues to be studied. These findings do not necessarily mean insulin is inherently more dangerous, as it is often used in more advanced stages of the disease when other treatments are no longer sufficient. To find the specific article you are referring to in The Lancet, you might try searching their online archives using keywords like "insulin," "metformin," "type 2 diabetes," and "mortality."

標籤: 鄒時禎

添加新評論