The Kitty Hawk Approach to Curing Type-1 Diabetes

“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.”
–Helen Keller

“We’re so happy to hear that [such-and-such] laboratory is researching a cure  for type-1 diabetes,” emailed a reader of this blog. Her nine-year old had developed type-1 diabetes a few months earlier. “She’s so happy to know they are close to finding a cure.”

That labs, universities and research teams are investing time, money and resources seeking a cure for type-1 diabetes is great. Or, at least, I hope so. Considering how long they’ve been at it (over a hundred years) and what practical results they have produced (zippo)… it’s not all that hopeful. I mean, if, for example, they had developed some drug or treatment that at least provided some beta cell regeneration (even for a day) then I’d be convinced a cure may be coming.

Instead, what we see is more and more forms of mechanical replacements – continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps and “artificial pancreases.” Technological substitutes for a biochemical problem. These aren’t cures or anything of the sort. They are patches at best.

We’ve witness the same confusion in the kidney department. Dialysis is nothing more than a large and awkward external replacement for the kidney. The clinic Nicole works with is nonetheless called a Kidney Care Clinic. But they do nothing to “care” for the kidneys (no less cure them). If anything, the blood pressure drugs prescribed in the early stages of kidney failure probably hurt the kidney tissue. Otherwise, the kidneys are ignored. Kidney Substitution Clinic would be a better title. In the same way, diabetic care ignores the pancreas and substitutes its function with gadgets and injections. Yet we are expected to believe that such widespread practices will suddenly be replaced by actual healing?

Even if a miracle drug does come out that regenerates beta cells or otherwise stops the autoimmune attack, how long will it last? A month? A day? A few hours?  Will its effect peak and wean, creating the same unreliable blood sugar control injected insulin offers? And what will be the side effects of a drug designed to suppress an autoimmune reaction? Will one be trading type-1 diabetes for leukemia or pneumonia?

What’s more, there appears little motive for a big cooperation to cure any disease. No matter how much they charge for the treatment, once it’s cured, it’s cured. Permanent cures put a permanent end to profits. Maybe, that’s why medical science hasn’t cured anything.

Hasn’t cured anything? What about polio? What about it? “While we have all been taught that vaccination ended the world’s many deadly epidemics,” explains an article by the Weston A. Price Foundation, “an honest and careful review of original historical medical sources, publications and statistics from the past two hundred years reveals that infectious diseases declined 90 percent before mass vaccination was ever introduced.”

Scarlet fever was never vaccinated for… yet do you know anyone suffering from scarlet fever? Evidence suggests that improved hygiene and better delivery of fresh food to cities had more to do with ending polio than a vaccine.

But even if we give vaccines credit for eradicating polio and small pox,  medical  science has very little to show for over a century of work. Cancer, heart disease, muscular dystrophy, Alzheimer’s, stroke, multiple-sclerosis, autism, Parkinson’s disease, etc., have not been cured. Instead, these diseases have reached epidemic levels. What reason would any sane person have to suspect that they will suddenly come up with a cure for type-1 diabetes? A disease that is forecast to generate $32.24 billion in annual sales of insulin by 2019 according to Transparency Market Research.

So why wait around, hoping somebody else will solve your problem? At the end of the 1800s the U.S. military was working hard to put a flying machine in the air. Instead, it ended up crashing it into the Potomac River. A few years later, two bicycle repair men, the Wright brothers, after four years of experimentation, were flying circles over the beach outside of the small town of Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.

Reading up on the Wright Brothers, I quickly realized how much they sacrificed, how hard they worked and how many mistakes they made in order to do what many thought was impossible. They spent their leisure time building model planes and testing them in their homemade wind tunnel. They made many trips to the beaches of Kitty Hawk, hauling prototype after prototype, only to watch it crash into the ground. They ate over a fire, endured bitter winter winds and slept in a shack.

This, I think, is the attitude and approach we need to employ to cure type-1 diabetes. It’ll come down to individuals with the disease testing various methods. This is what my wife – who has had type-1 diabetes for 40-years – has been doing for the last three years. But with so many healing methods available, and so many variations on each, it may take a while before we hit the right combination.

We rather suspect, however, that we are getting close. Nicole recently tested a combination of approaches we’ve found very promising. She tested them for 40 days. For about 30 of those 40 days her insulin needs decreased by 75%. She went from injecting 16 units per day to only needing 4 units (to maintain a blood sugar of 4.7mmol/L). Unfortunately, a c-peptide blood test showed this reduction was not because she was producing her own insulin.

Nonetheless, Nicole’s 40-day experiment yielded many other improvements: Rough and dried skin on her arms and legs became nearly as soft as a newborn baby. The dry large splits (which would easily become infected) on her feet disappeared. And, best of all, her kidneys appear to have improved by 500%. Prior to the experiment she could only produce 5-10ml of urine per day. By day 30 she was producing 50-100ml.

With an airplane, there are thousands of small details that need to be worked out in order to soar into the sky. Likewise, I think a thousand small adjustments must be made throughout the entire body before type-1 diabetes can be cured.

I don’t think it’s a matter of finding some magic treatment. It’s more so a matter of assisting the body’s own ability to detoxify and rebuild.

“Ham sandwich today, ham sandwich yesterday, ham sandwiches every day of the year,” moaned a construction worker during lunch break.

“Why don’t you ask your wife to make you another type of sandwich?” asked one of his co-workers.

“What do you mean?” he replied “I make my own lunch.”

According to Cell Biology by the Numbers, beta cells have a turnover rate of 50 days. So why do the bodies of people with type-1 diabetes keep on building pancreases deficient in beta cells? It may just be a matter of removing heavy metals, toxins or inorganic waste which are congesting the tiny blood vessels in the islets of Langerhans.  Maybe it’s the entire pancreas that needs to be cleared of an infection. Maybe it’s the immune system that needs to be repaired. Maybe mercury has contaminated the DNA of the person. Maybe it’s about overcoming psychology traumas that are resulting in chronic constriction of the beta cells’ blood vessels. Maybe it’s all these and more. It may be a combination lock — and until you get all seven numbers correct, it’s not going to open – healing won’t take place.

So it comes down to individuals researching, speculating, theorizing and testing ideas. Testing is key. The Wright Brothers were willing to spend four years building gliders that ended up crashing. That taught them what not to do. Others stayed in the air better and pointed them in the right direction.

Likewise, the Wright Brothers weren’t starting from scratch. “I wish to avail myself of all that is already known,” wrote Wilbur Wright, “and then, if possible, add my mite to help on the future worker who will attain final success.” Indeed, it was only after Otto Lilienthal died testing a glider in Germany that Wilbur and Orville became serious about building a flying machine, according to the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum. The brothers referenced Lilienthal’s equations, writing and experiments – along with the work of George Cayley and Leonardo da Vinci.

Today, independent researchers have access to an incredible amounts of information at a speed and economy non-existent one hundred years ago. Using Google Translate’s English-to-Hindi dictionary and Skype I’ve consulted with a practitioners in India who has reversed kidney failure in select cases. Online medical journals give me access to studies I would normally have to pay high-priced subscriptions for. Via blogs, Youtube and self-published books I’ve accessed information for little or no money from independent researchers and leading scientists in a wide variety of countries, including Mexico, Russia and England.

And you don’t necessarily need a four year medical degree to fix your pancreas. Most of what is taught in medical school may have little value for such an endeavor. Medical students’ time seems to be spent memorizing the names of bones in the hand and drugs in the pharmacy. Otherwise, much of the useful information they learn in university, we can likewise learn from books and recorded lectures. $12 in late fees at the local library might provide much of the same  information as a $120,000 tuition. And $120 worth of self-published books from Amazon can provide information that isn’t even hinted at the best medical schools in the world.

Many people might also not attempt to find a cure for type-1 diabetes because of lack of money. With billions being raised each year for research into cancer and other diseases, we’ve been conditioned to think that it takes lots of cash to find a cure. Considering, though, how little progress all those billions of dollars of donations have made, one might assume the opposite: Throwing lots of money around may not be the way to heal a human body.

According to the U.S. National Park Services, Orville Wright claimed it only cost them $1,000 in raw materials to invent the first airplane (about $20,000 in today’s money).  At the same time, the U.S. War Department paid Smithsonian Institution Secretary Samuel Langley $50,000 in 1899 (nearly $1.07 million today) to build his failed airplane.

Notwithstanding, even if a cure for type-1 diabetes does involve a considerable sum, there are various ways to raise funds for such experiments. There are several fund-raising websites where you could post a description of the experiment you wish to conduct and the costs involved. People regularly raise $50,000 on such sites. Personally, I’d rather donate to such a grass-root cause, bereft of administrative costs, than to the Juvenile Diabetes Association.

Interestingly, the methods Nicole has been experimenting with over the last few months have actually saved us money, instead of requiring more. These protocols have been reported to allow for complete regeneration of the beta cells in patients in Mexico, Russia and India. These approaches may have already healed Nicole if it were not for how deep down the diabetes rabbit hole she has gone. In particularly, kidney disease may be a big obstacle to reversing type-1 diabetes. We think that the kidneys play a major and little-known role in repairing the body. As Nicole’s kidneys have failed, this has hindered the speed at which she can recover.

It’s similar to the Wright brothers. While not having the resources of the U.S. military, they certainly did have advantages. I’d assume the equipment and skills they had from running a bicycle shop, enabled them to go from repairing bikes to building planes. I’m hoping that younger and healthier people with type-1 diabetes will try the approaches that Nicole is experimenting with and see quicker results.

I realize that this “Kitty Hawk approach” to curing type-1 diabetes – testing, failing and testing – may not be as appealing as some Dr. McCoy of the future jabbing a hypospray into one’s arm full of some miracle medication. Yet, as Rafe Esquith says in Teach Like Your Hair’s on Fire: “…true excellence takes sacrifice, mistakes, and enormous amounts of effort. After all, there are no shortcuts.” 

Editor’s Note: We will soon be hosting a teleseminar, where Nicole and I will explain the multi-prong approach we are testing, along with more details about the results. You can listen live and ask questions. Hopefully, many people will go away and begin testing these ideas themselves. If nothing else, these methods show great promise for reversing and preventing the many “complications” associated with type-1 diabetes – nerve damage, kidney failure, amputation, dementia, heart failure etc. We’ll announce when the teleseminar will be held in the near future (subscribe to be notified).

About the Author: John C. A. Manley researches and writes about alternative treatments for type-1 diabetes and its many complications. His wife, Nicole, of 15 years has had type-1 diabetes for four decades. Together they have lowered her HgbA1c below 5.5%, regained thyroid function, increased kidney function and reversed gastroparesis. Read more about their journey out of the T1D matrix or subscribe to their Diabetic Dharma blog..