MORE TOWARDS SOLVING A GENETIC MYSTERY IN TYPE-1 DIABETES

	MORE TOWARDS SOLVING A GENETIC MYSTERY IN TYPE-1 DIABETES (© 13 April 2016: Dr.V.M.Palaniappan, Ph.D.)  Large number of medical researchers must have read with great interest the following article that appeared in Medical Xpress (April,11, 2016), and earlier on in Genes and Immunology.  Even before we can discuss my ADDITIONAL, but EARLIER input into this area of research, it would make things easier for non-medical people to understand this very important problem to read the introductory part of what has been published in Medical Xpress: (http://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-04-genetic-mystery-diabetes.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=ctgr-item&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter): Solving a genetic mystery in type 1 diabetes According to Stephan Kissler, Ph.D., Investigator in the Section on Immunobiology at Joslin Diabetes Center and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School (Originally published in: Genes and Immunology): In type 1 diabetes, the immune system attacks the body's own insulin-producing cells. Scientists  don't understand what triggers the attack or how to stop it Now the Kissler lab has shown one way in which one such gene, called RGS1, may help to foster the autoimmune attack. In the attack, immune cells called T cells infiltrate the pancreas and damage the insulin-producing beta cells. Inhibiting RGS1 didn't prevent autoimmune diabetes from happening … in humans … We're continuing to test a number of other genes to see if one strikes us as being a very potent modifier of type 1 diabetes … … this piece of information about RGS1 might become valuable down the line when we know more about other genes… ******** Let me simplify the entire matter, by avoiding the use of too many medical terms, for the benefit of our Blog Readers:  For that matter, even the medical researchers should read this, for the information contained in this throws light on the possibility of a complete cure of the problem.  For a while, let us keep away the intrinsic details concerning the   genes and genetics. Let us talk of what we can understand at ease:  We are very much aware that there are few types in Diabetes:  1.    Type-1 diabetes mellitus, also called Juvenile Diabetes (in the past) or Insulin-Dependent Diabetes mellitus. 2.    Type-2 diabetes mellitus, also called Non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. 3.    Diabetes insipidus, characterised by frequent urination. 4.    Pregnancy diabetes, also called Gestational diabetes, and 5.    Drug-induced diabetes.  Certain cells called Beta cells that are present in Pancreas secrete Insulin hormone.  Insulin digests sugar (carbohydrates).  If Insulin production is LESS, all the eaten sugar will not get digested. This results in type-2 diabetes.  To keep the sugar (carbohydrates) digestion in order, insulin supplements are given to the patient, in the form of drugs.  If insulin is given as a supplement from external sources, then there is no need for the Beta cells in the Pancreas even to try to secrete insulin.  (When such a thing occurs in the Thyroid gland, that is, if the thyroxin secretion is NOT enough, then the Thyroid STIMULATING Hormone (TSH) is secreted. THAT induces the gland to secrete MORE thyroxin.)  When it comes to diabetes, there is NO such thing as ‘Insulin STIMULATING hormone’.   However, the sugar WE EAT as part of the food works as Insulin Stimulating Hormone.  In other words, If we eat normal amount of sugar, normal amount of insulin secretes.  If we REDUCE sugar consumption, Insulin secretion also gets reduced.  If we INCREASE sugar uptake, insulin secretion INCREASES proportionately.  This is how the pancreas functions.  *********** Problem would arise if and when abnormal happenings occur.  Like everything else, our body has an optimum / best RANGE when it concerns SUGAR REQUIREMENT.  There is a minimum and maximum for such sugar requirements.  If and when we consume MUCH LESS sugar than the MINIMUM, we become totally energyless, and we can faint, and can even die.  At the other extreme, if and when we consume TOO MUCH sugar than the MAXIMUM our body can tolerate, that too can make us die.  If we consume MUCH LESS sugar, our brain does the following to make us consume MORE sugar, in order to save us from ultimate death.  It makes us feel energyless and exhausted. Our brain gives us a strong desire to eat sugar – a craving occurs. When we eat, the craving stops.  If we OVER-CONSUME TOO MUCH of sugar, our body does the following, in order to save us from ultimate death:  To start with we get the feeling of ENJOYMENT while eating sugar. It is pleasurable.  Once the NEED for sugar is over, we FEEL SATISFIED. So, we want to stop eating more of the sugar.  If we continued eating sugar, then our brain gives us a feeling of HATE. We hate to eat more sugar – we get disgusted, in spite of that food being delicious.  At this stage, let us say some one forces us at gun-point to eat still more sugar.  If and when we eat more, our brain makes us VOMIT, just to save us from the ultimate danger of death.  Our brain, instead of making us vomit, could have simply increased the insulin production to solve the problem at least as a temporary measure.  In reality, the brain does that too, but only as a temporary measure.  However, if we keep on continuing the eating of more and more sugar, and if ALL such sugars are digested with abundant insulin secretion, then the FAR TOO MUCH OF THE DIGESTED SUGAR will kill the cells and us, ultimately - the tissues would rot - similar to the GANGRENE that occurs in the long-term diabetic patients with uncontrolled blood sugar levels all the time, necessitating the amputation of the toes or lower part of the leg.  So, there is a definite need for the brain to totally put a full stop to the eating of too much of sugar.  The brain, since time immemorial, from the time of becoming Homo sapiens from being Apes, or even before that, has associated SWEET TASTE to SUGARS.  In other words, if SUGAR does NOT TASTE sweet, then our brain will NOT induce the secretion of Insulin.  The taste buds in the tongue, the brain, the pancreas, etc. are well inter-connected, inter-dependent, and remain well-coordinated, helped by SALT (Sodium) in its capacity as an essential ELECTROLYTE.  Since a century, Man (not any other animal) has become so intelligent that he has developed capabilities to HIDE the sweet taste from being felt by the taste buds in the tongue*.  (* Similar to adding a likeable perfume to the poisonous mosquito or cockroach killer poison, the original smell of which is extremely bad and repulsive. We would avoid inhaling bad smell, whereas we would  inhale much deeply if perfumed. That results in poisoning our brain and body.)    If for instance, sugar is filled inside CAPSULES, and if the capsules are just gulped, instead of chewing, then our brain will have no knowledge of the entry of THAT sugar into the body.   As a result, brain may not induce insulin secretion, and THIS encapsulated sugar will NOT get digested.   So, the undigested sugar will have to keep floating in the body fluids, doing all possible damages for the well-being of the body*.  (* Swallowing food without chewing will be similar to consuming capsules.  This is one of the major reasons why we must chew our food before swallowing.    In fact, I have recorded that nearly ALL the type-2 diabetic people do NOT chew their food, but gulp them rapidly: see Palaniappan, V.M., 1998. Obesity: Causes, Cure, and Prevention. ISBN 967-9988-0508. 471pp.)  In theory:   If we happen to consume all sugars only in the form of capsules, or if we SWALLOW our food rapidly all the time, as described above, our brain will have no knowledge of the ‘smuggled’ sugar, and thereby loses its management potentials. In other words, our brain gets deceived*.  (* This would happen to Astronauts, if they depend upon encapsulated diet for their survival.)  As a result, FAR TOO MUCH OF SUGAR ends up within the body, and disproportionate insulin quantities leave them to float in the blood in an undigested manner.  This can bring about the death of the cells and the person, as described above.  AT THIS, AN EMERGENCY TO SAVE THE BODY FROM DEATH HAS RISEN!  What can be done?  The best possible measure appears to be a TOTAL STOPPAGE OF THE INSULIN PRODUCTION!  Thus, TWO emergency situations can warrant instantaneous stoppage of insulin production:  1.    When a person consumes awful lot of sugars (recognisable by the taste buds in the tongue), almost non-stop, beyond the body’s tolerance limit, thus inducing the secretion of TOO MUCH of insulin -, beyond the true need.  2.    When sugar is pumped into the body in a hidden state, essentially due to gulping the food without chewing*.  (* 'Pumping' glucose into the body, avoiding the buccal and gastro-intestinal channel, for longer durations would equal this.) Irrespective of the mode of sugar entry, if there happens to be too much of sugar within the body, the best way appears to be a TOTAL STOPPAGE of insulin secretion.  If and when THAT happens, the person gets TYPE- 1 DIABETES.   WE SIMPLY CALL THIS LIFE-SAVING HELP RENDERED BY THE BRAIN AN "AUTO-IMMUNE DISEASE".     IF SUCH AN 'AUTO-IMMUNE DISEASE' DOES NOT HAPPEN, WE WOULD DIE!   THAT BEING THE CASE, INSTEAD OF CALLING IT AN AUTO-IMMUNE DISEASE, WE SHOULD CALL IT "ALTERNATIVE LIFE SAVING MEASURE", RATHER THAN CALLING IT A DISEASE. ******   In Type-I diabetes, if the Beta cells in the Pancreas are NOT dead yet (if it is an early stage), then a REVERSAL should be possible.  In Type II, where the Beta cells are alive but it is only question of LESSER insulin secretion, then a REVERSAL appears to be almost DEFINITELY POSSIBLE.  *********** What I have explained above is all that happens at MACRO-level.  However, if you want to go academic, and if we are to trace the detailed changes at ‘micro-‘ or even at ‘ultra-micro level’ (similar to seeing detailed cellular structures through an electron microscope), then of course, we have to recognise the sequences related to the genes and their interplay.  It would be even more interesting to see the sequence at ‘Nano’ levels.  Irrespective of the approach, the result will be the same.  At macro-level, it would be simple to understand and practise, but will be unimpressive, and may appear as ‘unscientific’.   The other academic approach will be extremely impressive, and much complicated to understand, but will form a necessity for academic excellence. The Ph.D candidates will have to be trained this way to think and interpret information much intricately.  Unfortunately, we do not seem to have much time to wait any further, particularly because the sufferings and the rate of death due to diabetes alone (besides the health-care expenditures), appear to be crossing over the bearable limits of nearly all the nations around the world.  ******** We need to address this issue somewhat ungently.   It should not matter who does the job. Egoism, professional protectionism, so-called medical ethics, etc. should be kept aloof.  It should not matter which discipline of medicine helps to achieve success. All we need is a successful stoppage of the problem, if possible, all at once.  In the first place, WHY IS IT THAT ALL THE RESEARCH FINDINGS DONE HITHERTO WORLD-WIDE DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE THE POTENTIALS TO ERADICATE THE DISEASE?  It should be because, the APPROACH TO SOLVING THE PROBLEM may not be correct.  If the CORRECT PROCEDURE is written in a gold plate and is buried in the South Pole, all the researchers appear to have been digging the soil in the North Pole. This way, they can never find even after a century - the result can be chaotic and disastrous.   In spite of being a non-medical research scientist, I have found the correct procedure for a total prevention and complete cure of the problem – Type-2 Diabetes, in particular.  Of course, my procedure is bound to be VERY HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL - essentially because of its deviation from prevailing norm. I can very easily do identical kind research work similar to all other researchers, and come up with identical kind of answers, and say that  one should do exercises, avoid sugar consumption, and reduce obesity. This would then CONFORM to what has already been found by a million scientists around the world. Yet, it would never yield any beneficial result, except that I will not be criticised!  Is that my purpose?   I am not expecting a promotion in my workplace, and therefore, I do not need to be scared of criticisms.  I am objective-oriented.   I feel the purpose of my existence is to save mankind at this juncture. God has given me the knowledge. A workable approach will certainly be unique, unusual, abnormal, and will NOT conform to the non-working approaches that are being repeatedly said by others.  ************ Gunther S. Stent from University of California in Berkeley calls my kind of report as “PREMATURE DISCOVERY”. He, along with his colleague Barber, emphasizes in their paper that discoveries that were not consistent with the accepted knowledge at the time or not verifiable technologically would experience the delayed phenomenon. “delayed recognition papers are those that are initially unappreciated or unused but are later recognized as significant”  Dr. Eugene Garfield, Founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), who was a pioneer in the field of citation analysis, and whose data bases have now become the online research tool of the “Web of Knowledge” (Infoplease, 2007), writes:  “Recognition is one of the most valued rewards of science. It often is confirmed exclusively on the individual or team responsible for a particular breakthrough. “These fortunate few certainly deserve the media attention and awards that come with the success of discovery.” “It is almost impossible to identify useful, important, yet unrecognized papers by any but highly subjective evaluation, but we can recognize a special class of undervalued papers – those that were recognized long after they were published. Such papers represent DELAYED RECOGNITION and sometimes are associated with PREMATURE DISCOVERY.”  “… PREMATURE DISCOVERY IS A SUBJECT OF DELAYED RECOGNITION. “A definition, according to Stent, is that the discovery “was not appreciated in its day. “This can occur when the contemporaneous knowledge, technology, and social issues prevent the discovery from being extended experimentally or applied to other related scientific efforts.”  Garfield adds on: According to William Goffman in Cleveland’s Case Western Reserve University and Kenneth S. Warren of the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, “…A strong presumption prevails that any evidence that contradicts the accepted view is invalid and must be disregarded…” It seems, Barber had well defined in 1961 itself about the topic of resistance by scientists to new discoveries (especially those that challenge commonly held percepts). Likewise, if one does not follow the well-ploughed path of presentation of his/her discoveries, the chances of those findings getting totally ignored appear to be great. The fact that a particular research is done in a deviated manner from the so-called ‘norm’, should, by right, be considered to show the extra capabilities and exceptional talent of the researcher. Again, Eugene Garfield’s (1989) another thought-provoking article entitled “The Process of Scientific Discovery” has brought to recognition my kind of approach.   If all of MY discoveries published in 1998 (and subsequent years) in the form of a books with proper ISBN reference and the like) is considered to constitute 100%, recent scientists from different parts of the world have been publishing these days bits and pieces of my findings (amounting to 5 or 6 percent of my works) as if theirs is the first-time report (may not form plagiarisms), simply because they have not seen my publications – for want of adequate citations and publicity, especially because I do not belong to the mainstream medical fraternity. Thus, my findings tend, erroneously, to form one of the multiple discoveries. I have been trying for the past 41 years, through multivariate means, to get my findings recognized. None of them brought me any success.  Could you, if you have any authority,  kindly evaluate my works, and do the needful to bring them to recognition soon, so that the suffering millions worldwide can be saved from nearly all of the diseases, thus making their life on earth more pleasant, contributive and meaningful.  ********** THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION, or any Health Ministry in any of the countries, must come forward to recognise my findings.    FOR THAT MATTER, EVEN OUR MALAYSIAN HEALTH MINISTER  Dato Sri Dr. S. Subramaniam, and/or his Deputy Dato Seri Dr.Hilmi Yahaya, who support any alternative medicine if it can help the people rid of their health problems, could invite me to implement my findings in one of our well-established and most modern hospitals in Kuala Lumpur / Selangor (Such as the Selayang Hospital),  I will do the needful, demonstrate excellent and highly disciplined scientific procedure and show positive results within a short time span of even TWO MONTHS, incurring insignificant expenditure. ******** Well friends, I look forward to some magical changes to occur this year. With best wishes, Dr. Palani, Ph.D.