SEDENTARY LIFESTYLE DOES NOT WEAKEN ARTERIAL HEALTH IN CHILDREN

(© Sunday, 13 Sept., 2015: Dr. V.M. Palaniappan, Ph.D.)

I just read a research finding that came from the Institute of Biomedicine, University of Eastern Finland.

This news was based on a study project entitled, “Physical activity and nutrition in children”, “PANIC”, for short.

It says that the ARTERIES of INACTIVE OBESE children with HIGHER BODY FAT (aged 6 - 8) become STIFF.

The scientists have also found that the opposite of all the above is also true. This means, the arteries of active children in whom the fat content is less have flexible walls.

Their study sample included 160 children, and the original results were published in the Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports.

I read it in Medical Xpress, dated Sept. 11, 2015. You can get this article from the following URL:

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-09-sedentary-lifestyle-overweight-children-weaken.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=ctgr-item&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

(Let me explain all the above a little for the benefit of non-biologists:

Arteries are blood vessels that carry oxygenated ‘good’ blood.

The walls of these vessels should be thin and flexible, so that, (a) when a need to pump more blood (when a person runs, for instance), the vessels can expand and accommodate the rushing blood, and (b) the inner space of the blood tube, called lumen will be ‘big’ as was meant to be.

If the walls become THICK, it would (a) harden the walls and thereby make it stiff, and (b) the lumen space would get reduced. As a result, for want of adequate volume space, blood pressure may increase.

When men in their 40’s and 50’s (and women after menopause) get their fine arteries within the heart (called coronary vessels) loose their flexibility and become stiff (thus narrowing the lumen), the cholesterol globules may not be able to pass through at ease, and that can give them heart pain and attacks.

A person in perfect health should always have all his blood vessel walls thin and flexible.

Normally, people, along with increasing age, tend to develop the blood vessel wall stiffness, called ARTERIOSCLEROSIS or ATHEROSCLEROSIS, and that gives them the CARDIO-VASCULAR DISEASES (e.g., increased blood pressure, heart attack).

The above-said study suggests that the stiffness is caused by the fat that accumulates because of not getting burnt through physical exercises)

**************

It is here I beg to differ, for the following reasons:

For sure, when people eat too much of food (referring only to carbohydrates, proteins, and fats and oils, but NOT vitamins and minerals), and if they do not burn it off though work, naturally, the unused food (other than the vitamins and minerals) would get stored as adipose tissue within the body, and may stay there as such until it is burnt.

(The minerals, such as calcium, magnesium, copper, zinc, etc. do NOT get converted into the adipose tissue).

Working or exercising strenuously can utilise that stored fat.

For that matter, even subsequent starvation – prolonged fasting, can also deplete the fat deposits (but not the minerals).

So, there cannot be any argument about the existence of excessive fat in the sedentary children.

The question arises only when the FAT is said to STIFFEN the arteries.

When a person overeats too much of food than what his body and his physical activity can utilise, naturally the unused food energy is going to be stored as FAT, often as ADIPOSE TISSUE.

If that fat is going to be impregnated to form part of the blood vessels, that fat may not become available for use at a later time, when in need.

In other words, by right, if the person is going to do strenuous exercise or starve without food intake, THIS fat from the blood vessel walls should come for the rescue. Does it happen?

If that is going to happen, then, the stiffness in the blood vessel walls would get reversed. Whereas, such reversals do not seem to occur.

*******

Let evaluate the situation a bit further:

When a person overeats and stays sedentary, all the unutilised carbohydrates, proteins, and fats and oils get converted into fats.

The question is: when the person overeats, does the excess food contain ONLY carbohydrates, proteins, and fats and oil?

How about other constituents of the excessive food, such as the EXCESSIVE MINERALS and vitamins?

It is quiet probable that those EXCESSIVE VITAMINS still get into the cells, or become part of the body fluids, and give rise to TOXICITY-related diseases, such as HYPERVITAMINOSIS (e.g., Hypervitaminosis-A).

Similarly, the excessive IRON mineral content can give rise to Iron Toxicity.

Aluminium to aluminium toxicity, copper to copper toxicity, zinc to zinc toxicity, and so on.

How about the excessive CALCIUM mineral?

Does it cause Calcium TOXICITY?

No one talks about Calcium Toxicity, simply because everybody assumes that Calcium in any large quantity not only does not do any harm, but does only good things to body.

In the first place, the above does not appeal to common sense.

The general rule is, “Anything in excess will be dangerous, or at least, undesirable”. That being the case, on what grounds can we exempt calcium alone? 

Let us recognise some basics:

It is common knowledge that children require about 900 or 1000 mg of Calcium daily for the rapid growth of their entire body (especially the bones, teeth, and nails) – which is double the quantity required by adults.

In all countries, the children are normally fed with food that are very rich in calcium. The milk and all other dairy products, eggs, seafood, etc. contain abundant calcium.

Mother’s milk contains just 20 mg of calcium/ 100m.

Cow’s fresh milk contains 120 mg.

Synthetic milk formulas created at the manufacturing industries tend to contain differing quantities, often numerous times more than that of the mother’s milk. (You will get a shock if you read the labels on the containers of these milk preparations!)

Here, in this study, the sample consisted not of infants, but of children aged between 6 and 8.

When such children are overfed with food (not just milk, as in the case of infants), they will become BIG-SIZED and HEAVY.

Their big SIZE (in terms of bulk) can be directly attributed to the adipose tissues (fat cells) that form cushion-like layers under the skin, and probably around some of the organs in the body.

(The growth in terms of HEIGHT will have to be attributed to the consumption of EXCESSIVE calcium, since that must have promoted the bone growth.)

At the same time, only a SMALL part of the WEIGHT must have come from the stored FAT, whereas, most of the weight must have come from only the Calcium EXCESS.

*********

The normal food, which can be a combination of a wide variety of vegetables and meat, tend to contain ABUNDANT CALCIUM mineral, unlike rest of the minerals (esuch as iron, copper, zinc, and the like.)

Now, where does this calcium go?

Which part(s) of the body stores this Calcium EXCESS?

As has already been pointed out, we know for sure that Calcium will NOT get converted into the FAT.

So, the EXCESSIVE, UN-UTILISABLE CALCIUM will have to get REMOVED from the body, or will have to get stored somewhere within the body.

One way by which the water-soluble free calcium excess can get removed from the body is through urination.

However, a problem would arise when a child does NOT urinate adequately.

When the child under-urinates, most of the calcium, for want of choice of storage location, gets stored in the CELLS themselves (not as part of the fat layer).

At this, if the child happens to get exposed to sunshine, or if the child is given synthetic vitamin-D, then some of the calcium excesses would promote the BONE growth, making the child much taller than those fed with normal diet.

Since the growth in terms of height is genetically controlled, a child, simply because there is unlimited quantities of calcium, cannot keep on growing to unlimited heights of 10 or 20 feet, like the climbing bean plant.

Therefore, the major portion of the calcium excesses enter into the SOFT cells of any flesh / organ, and become part of the cytoplasm of those cells there, and THAT INCREASES THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF THE BODY, besides increasing the overall SIZE (bulk) of the person.

(When a cell absorbs abundant calcium, it swells up in size. Scientists often mistake this for INFLAMMATION.

Continued absorption of the calcium excess makes THAT cell to split mechanically, resulting in mitotic cell division, which later becomes a LUMP / tumour.)

THUS, WHEN A OVER-EATING CHILD GROWS UP TO BECOME OVER-SIZED AND OVERWEIGHT, only a SMALLER parts of both the above can be due to FAT DEPOSITS, whereas MOST of the above should be due ONLY to the EXCESSIVE CALCIUM that was a major component of the over-eaten food.

Saying that the FAT makes the ARTERY WALLS STIFF does not seem to fit in to all the above explanations, whereas, saying that it is the calcium excess that stiffens the blood vessels appear to make much acceptable explanation.

Calcium can turn into calcium oxalate crystals.

Calcium is often used in industries to harden a variety of substance to be steel-like (see Palaniappan,V.M., 1998, for elaboration on this).

The blood VESSEL WALLS are made up of SOFT cells, and they are bound to receive for storage plenty of the calcium excesses – similar to any other soft cell in the body. THAT STIFFENS the walls, thus making them lose their flexibility.

When the child starves later on, or does strenuous exercises non-stop, these calcified arterial walls will not be ‘expected’ to release the deposits, for the calcium will NOT contribute any bit of energy for work – it will not equal the carbohydrates or any other energy provider! 

********

No one can argue about the DATA obtained in the above study.

It should be true that over-eating and sedentary lifestyle would certainly make any child overweight with STIFF ARTERIES.

It should also be true that if the child continues to overeat AND under-urinate all the time, the arterial wall stiffness can get worse, and remain so in the adulthood of the child, thus giving rise to cardio-vascular diseases.

My above interpretation would mean that, even if the over-eating (calcium-rich diet) child is going to do enormous amount of exercise, as long as the child under-urinates, the arterial walls would certainly get stiffened (losing its elasticity) exactly as that of the sedentary child.

In other words, the amount of physical activity may not influence the stiffening of the arteries, but it is only the retention of calcium within the body that would matter.

(I have brought to recognition in several of my publications the following observation:          

Strenuous activities promote profuse sweating.

Profuse sweating would drastically REDUCE the quantity of URINE voided.

As a result, the calcium excesses that are supposed to get leached out of the body as part of the voided urine (to its saturation point), would only get stagnated inside the body, and that tends to make a child (even adults) morbid obesity.)

The scientists in the University of Eastern Finland have observed that the arteries of THIN children do not get stiffened.

Needless to explain that when a child eats LESS food, the child is NOT going to be OBESE, and also is NOT going to accumulate EXCESSIVE CALCIUM.

Further, as per my study during the past 40 years, I have found that all those, whether they are children or adults, who drink plenty of water (e.g., adults drinking about 2 L or more), and urinate nearly all of it (through about 7 or 8 urinations / day, or more) do NOT accumulate calcium, and as a result, they (a) do not become obese, and (b) do not get arterio / athero-sclerosis, or related cardio-vascular diseases. 

**********

OK, Friends,

Thanks for reading this article.

I will be happy to receive comments from you.

With best wishes and thanks,

Dr.Palani, Ph.D.

Bottom of Form

OVEREATING VERY HIGH-CALORIE DIET AS SUCH MAY NOT LEAD TO DIABETES

(© 10 September 2015: Dr.V.M.Palaniappan,Ph.D.)

Are you aware of the news that was reported in Medical Xpress yesterday (Sept.,9, 2015). If not, you can read it now from the following URL: 

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-09-high-calorie-diets-overeating-diabetes.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=ctgr-item&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

The news is about a small study conducted in Temple University, Philadelphia, by a team led by Dr.Guenther Boden, published in Science Translational Medicine.

It seems that they made six men eat daily a diet that had 6,000 calories, when only 2,200 calories were considered adequate for them.

After eating that way for about a week, those men had put on about 3.6 kg. each.

This had led the researchers to believe that such a rapid food consumption can lead to PRE-DIABETIC STATE, because, just two days after initiation of the programme, all the men are said to have developed INSULIN RESISTANCE.

The explanation offered for the insulin resistance is that when the body produces the insulin, its efficacy (efficiency) gets lost.

Dr. Boden says the fatty acids (from fats and oils consumed) and the stress exerted over the cells can also form possible culprits in causing this problem.

Dr. Boden also believes that the oxidative stress caused due to excessive food consumption tends to produce some toxic byproducts, and they can cause this problem.

*********

I have every reason to believe that the interpretation given for the above observation is very much questionable.

It is so because, in the first place, as per my study on the subject of diabetes, the CARBOHYDRATES / GLUCOSE do NOT give rise to Type-2 Diabetes.

Excessive sugar consumption, beyond the tolerance limit of the beta cells capacity, leads only to TYPE-1 INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS (but NOT the type-2!).

When a person consumes far too much of the sugars, and if ALL those sugar excesses are digested by proportionately increased insulin, ONLY THEN, those excesses will interfere with the normal functioning of the entire body.

In order to protect the body from destruction due to such an enormous sugar absorption, the brain ‘kills’ the beta cells, and makes them totally inactive. We have been calling this rescue process as “Auto-Immune Disease”.

By right, if not for this ‘self-destruction’, the person would die almost immediately – perhaps within a few days.

Other than the above, excessive sugar consumption, as monitored by tracking the total quantities of food in terms of calories, may NOT have anything to do with the initiation of a pre-diabetic situation, or an onset of diabetes.

Thus, trying to establish a relationship between excessive food consumption in terms of calories and the onset of type-2 diabetes should be considered as a gross misunderstanding.

The above explanations are given for want of a proper understanding of the phenomenon that happens in the beta cells of the Pancreas, that are responsible for the production of insulin.

As per my study, I have established earlier through several of my publications, that it is CALCIUM that behaves like sugar, and it is THAT mineral, when it goes into the body beyond the body’s tolerance limit, that gives rise to both the Pre-diabetic state as well as the Type-2 Diabetes.

************

One can understand as how the Calcium mineral functions as sugar, instigating the beta cells to withdraw insulin secretion, from the following observations:

Point-1: When a person consumes more sugar (carbohydrates), more insulin secretes.

If less sugar is consumed, less insulin gets secreted.

Thus, the process gets auto-regulated, depending upon the sugar consumption.

Point-2: The sugarcane plant produces sugar by utilising calcium that can be absorbed from the soil.

(Sugarcane plants raised in acid soils that is devoid of calcium produces extremely little sugar, and tastes bland.

Whereas, cane raised in soils that are either naturally rich in calcium, or is enriched by 'liming the soil' (which is a normal practice in Agronomy), contains abundant sugar, and thereby tastes very sweet.)

Likewise, mangos (or any other fruit) taste sweet if the soil has adequate calcium, and end being sour if the soil is devoid of calcium.

This tends to show that sugar as such is produced with the use of calcium.

Therefore, it is possible for the animal / human body to react to calcium (excesses) as if the latter is sugar itself.

Point-3: Our daily requirement of calcium: for adults, it is around 450 or 500 mg, whereas for children, it is double – about 900 or 1,000 mg daily – that is to cope up with the demand for the rapid growth of the bones, teeth, nails, and the like.

Point-4: Almost without exception, ALL food items (solids and liquids) contain calcium. Some contain plenty, some mediocre, and some very little.

We often say ‘several drops can make a flood”. Likewise, eating TOO MUCH of even less-calcium-containing food can add up to too much of calcium within the body.

Needless to say, consuming too much of calcium-rich diet, such as fish and other seafood, eggs, cheese, butter, milk, etc. tend to accumulate to frighteningly LARGE QUANTITIES OF CALCIUM within the body.

Point-5: Drinking-water contains some amount of calcium in it. That calcium too can add up to the total calcium that has accumulated within the body.

The rain water does NOT contain any calcium, and its pH stays around 5.6 or so. (It is acidic because the H20 combines with CO2 present in the air, and becomes H2CO3 (weak carbonic acid).

(In polluted environment, the H2O can pick up hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and the like, and become (H2SO4, sulphuric acid) ACID RAIN, with a strong acid pH, as low as even pH3.5 in industrialised countries)

When the rain water flows over the soil, it picks up the soil-calcium. As a result, the water in a pond tends to contain calcium, and its pH may be around pH7.0 or 7.5, or so.

(The pH of human blood has come to remain at pH7.35 - 7.45 because of drinking only the pond water at pH7.4 or so, for several millions of years - evolution appears to have established it.)

In Malaysia, because of the limestone parent rock, the topsoil contains abundant calcium, and as a result the pond water tends to become highly alkaline, and its pH may remain even at pH 8.0 or so.

So, drinking naturally calcium-rich pond water, or calcium-enriched piped water can increase the body’s calcium content – to a level that can be more than the body’s needs

The above being the case, if a person is going to drink the ALKALINE water that comes out of a MACHINE (all the time), his body can end up accumulating far too much of calcium that can reach a level that is far beyond the body’s tolerance limit.

(When a person's body gets acidified (i.e., hyperacidosis, often recognised as 'heaty body') because of inadequate sleep, over-work, consumption of strong acid food and drinks, dry masturbation, and the like, drinking machine-created ALKALINE water would do wonderful healing, almost immediately. However, one may not need to drink such alkaline water for more than three days, the most.)

Let us remember this: even if something is good for the body, if that becomes excessive, it can become toxic. Calcium is no exception to this rule.

Point-6: American diet, besides containing abundant calories, appears to be very, very rich in calcium.

The amount of cheese, butter, eggs, pastries and pizzas, and numerous other eatables, plus enriched biscuits, chocolates, and the like the American diet has, certainly add up to HUGE QUANTITIES of calcium.

Worse still, many of the Americans tend to take calcium supplements on a daily basis, with the (false) assumption that unlimited quantities of calcium is good for the body.

They believe that, if the mineral happens to be too much, the body will reject the unutilised and unwanted excess out of the body through urinations.

Point-7: Any unwanted excess, or poisons, or unwanted end products of metabolism, if they happened to be water-soluble, will get removed from the body through URINATIONS.

At the same time, if such substances happen to be water-insoluble, then, they get out of the body either through (a) faeces, or (b) through the SKIN in the form of ECZEMA or PSORIASIS.

For these unwanted substances to get leached out of the body, the person should drink about 2 L of plain, normal water daily (not juices or soups), and should urinate about 7 times or so (Palaniappan, 1998 – 2014).

If a person drinks much LESS water (e.g., 500 ml/day), and therefore VOIDS VERY LITTLE URINE through about 3 or 4 urinations, then, MOST OF THE CALCIUM EXCESSES (along with other unwanted substances) tend to stay within the body.

Such ‘remnances’ tend to remain within the body, accumulating to ENORMOUS quantities.

Point-8: A question arises now: where will all these calcium excesses stay within the body? What is the store-house to retain such excesses?

The blood stream will NOT allow even a little extra calcium to stay in the blood fluid. The brain takes care of regulating it by making the THYROID GLAND secrete an enzyme called CALCITONIN.

This calcitonin, the moment any little calcium EXCESS comes into the blood, it pushes such extras into the LYMPH fluid – since that is the body’s drainage system.

The lymph carries it to various parts of the body, in search of soft cells that can act as store-houses.

Point-9: When PROSTATE GLAND (in men) requires calcium for making up the seminal fluid, it utilises some of the calcium from the lymph fluid.

During that process, if TOO MUCH of calcium enters into the cells that make up the prostate gland (simply because too much is in the lymph fluid), then, ALL those CELLS swell up, resulting in the INFLAMMATION OF the cells, and thereby the prostate gland. This makes it into an ENLARGED PROSTATE GLAND. If the process continues, prostate cancer occurs.

Point-10: In women, under normal circumstances, the soft cells of the milk-producing ducts in the breasts absorb calcium from all available sources, and manufactures milk.

The excessive calcium carried by the lymph fluid gets absorbed by these cells.

If the woman does not feed a baby for any reason, the calcium that enters into each cell stays there as calcium oxalate crystals in the cytoplasm.

When more and more such crystals accumulate within the cells, EACH CELL ‘BLOATS’ UP (resulting in inflammation), ENLARGES IN SIZE, AND INCREASES IN WEIGHT.

If the person happens to continue under-urinating, the retention of the calcium excesses too would continue. This enhances a continued inflammation of the breast cells, thus giving rise to a BREAST LUMP.

If and when the process continues, it turns out be CANCEROUS.

Point-11: In an under-urinating person, the calcium excesses get distributed to ALL soft cells in ALL the organs, in ALL parts of the body, thus INCREASING THE OVERALL SIZE & WEIGHT OF THE PERSON, making the person OBESE. Of course, as said earlier, subsequently, MORBID OBESITY develops, giving rise to cancers, stone diseases, blockages, and the like.

Point-12: Under normal circumstances, the UNUSED EXCESSIVE CALORIES tend to get converted into FATS (adipose tissue), and that (a) would stay insulating the various organs, offering cushion-like protection from shocks, and (b) protection from freezing of the cells to death due to VERY LOW temperatures that is beyond the body’s tolerance limit (as in Polar Regions, Winters, highlands, and the like).

Undoubtedly, such fat cells can increase the body weight of a person to some extent. However, they do not interfere with the insulin production by the beta cells in the pancreas, simply because they do not have anything to do with the digestion of sugars.

Point-13: In obesity, there seems to exist two distinctly different types:

Type-1: Those who eat TOO much of food, AND drink 2 L or more water, AND urinate 7 times or more daily, tend to have flabby, untidy, ‘hanging’ kind of flesh all over their body – ‘hanging’ chin, (saggy breasts in women), huge belly, very big thighs, huge buttocks, and the like. These people do get common cold, fever and such virus infections frequently (i.e., once or twice a year).

They never seem to develop diabetes, heart blockages, stone diseases, hypothyroidism, cancers, etc.

Type-2 Those who accumulate excessive calcium essentially because of under-urination (along with few other factors that favour calcium accumulation), tend to become (a) very tall and huge-built with very tough muscles, and (b) very heavy.

These are the people who get type-2 diabetes, cancers, stone diseases, blockages, hypothyroidism, etc.

Point-14: The second type of obesity described above shows clearly that it is only the EXCESSIVE CALCIUM THAT HAS ACCUMULATED WITHIN THE BODY THAT GIVES RISE TO TYPE-2 DIABETES, AND NOT THE CALORIES PRESENT IN THE DIET.

Point-15: By now, the understanding of the working phenomenon must have become a bit clearer now.

If normal American one-day diet is assumed to contain 2200 calories AND 1100 mg of CALCIUM, then,

6000 calories containing diet must have contained 3,300 mg of Calcium.

We know that an average adult needs only 500 mg of Calcium.

In this case, each of those six subjects must have been consuming 2,800 mg of Calcium in EXCESS.

If we assume that 1 glass (250 ml) of water/urine can remove only 100 mg of Calcium (at its maximum saturation point), then, each person must have consumed/ urinated 28 glasses of water/urine.

Twenty-eight glasses would measure 7 Litres.

Under normal circumstances, it may NOT be possible for anyone to drink 7 L of water daily, and urinate all of the 7 litres.

None of those six people could have taken this much of water, nor could have urinated this quantity. (Drinking so much of water at one go can give rise to cerebral hemorrhage - rupture of the fine blood vessels in the brain and bleeding.)

They could have drunk about 2 L (8 glasses) of water, and could have urinated about 1.5 L (6 glasses).

If so, only 600 mg of the EXCESS Calcium could have gone out of the body.

This leached 600 mg + 500 mg that was used up by the body totals to only 1,100 mg.

So, out of the total intake of 3,300 mg Calcium, only 1,100 mg has been accounted for.

The remaining 2,200 mg of the Calcium EXCESS must have gone into the soft cells all over the person’s body, EVERY DAY!

2,200 mg of Calcium a day x 7 days, would add up to 15,400 mg.

This is similar to gulping about FOUR 500 mg Calcium tablets, daily, or about 31 such tablets during that ONE week!

Point-16: Naturally, any individual accumulating 2,200 mg of Calcium EXCESS on a daily basis is bound to (a) put on weight drastically, (b) induce the beta cells in the pancreas to overwork enormously, and (c) thereby give rise to resistance / a pre-diabetic situation.

If those people continued to consume that much of food containing that much of calcium for some more time, for sure, they would have developed a full-blast type-2 diabetes!

Continued consumption would have given them (a) kidney stones, (b) heart blockages + atherosclerosis (i.e., thickening of the blood vessels, and narrowing down of the lumen), cancers in multiple locations, etc.

Point-17: When it comes to the above research done by Dr. Boden, if they wanted to have a fool-proof result, then, they must have included in their experimental design the following factors:

They must have measured (a) the quantity of calcium present in all of the 6000 calories of the diet they fed the people (in addition to the measure of calories), (b) the quantities of water those people drank, (c) the quantity of Calcium present in the water consumed, and (d) the quantities (and the number of times) they urinated.

A regular blood test to measure the calcium present in the LYMPH fluid (not necessarily in the blood, for the Calcitonin would have siphoned out the excesses), urine, and other possible locations would help them for a better detection.

A statistical multiple correlation analyses of all the above data would establish the reality of things that had happened to those six people, and thus Dr. Boden would have had a far more meaningful result.

(However, in this experiment, the sample number (i.e., just 6 individuals), and duration of the study would not be adequate for any meaningful statistical analysis. In fact, I am a bit surprised to note that the results of such a mini project of this nature gained publication in the Journal.)

If they monitored all the suggested three variables, in addition to monitoring the total calorie value of their diet, they could have had a different result altogether – which will be exactly similar to what I have predicted in this paper.

So, we can only conclude that Dr. Boden’s results may not be acceptable because of the error in designing the experiment (+ the inadequate sample number).

The above conclusion would mean that over-eating as such (without calcium excesses) will NOT pave a way for the development of type-2 diabetes, or even a pre-diabetic situation.

**********
Thanks to you for reading this article.
With best wishes,
Dr. Palani, Ph.D.