Tuesday, December 12, 2017

Medical Medium: Secrets Behind Chronic and My… (Kindle Edition)by Anthony William

I am reading this book. click to follow 

The Truth About Candida

The Truth About Candida

Intro: Find out what’s making you sick and how to heal. Anthony William is the Medical
Medium.
Anthony Williams: Hello! I’m Anthony William. You’re listening to the Medical Medium Radio Show
where each week, I talk about the most advanced healing information and secrets
about health, much of which is not found anywhere else and is decades ahead of
what’s out there now.
As I’ve always said, who has 10, 20 or 30 years to wait for answers to their
illnesses? Life is precious. There’s no time to spare. We can’t waste a decade of
our life just because the information is not out there. It’s not good enough. So we
need to get the information out there. I need to get that information to you. You
need answers. You need to know because knowing is half the battle to healing.
That’s why people can’t get anywhere. That’s right! Because they don’t know.
And even though there’s information out there—and there’s ton of it, it’s on the
Internet, it’s all over the place, it’s in books—it’s still not enough because we have
to know really what’s going on to move forward.
And today’s show is about the truth about Candida. So fasten your seatbelts, really
click those seatbelts in because this is like a jetliner today. I need everything set
up. I need all the safety mechanisms possible because this is just going to blow
your mind really. It’s serious.
Candida is a hot word in the health community. Hundreds of thousands of people
are being diagnosed with every year.
You probably know. Have you been diagnosed with Candida at least once at the
doctor’s office or practitioner’s office in your day? That’s right! So, we’re going to
talk about this.
Yet it’s severely misunderstood. And this lack of understanding is wreaking havoc

on your health and our health.

Tune in to the show today. Don’t click off that dial today. Stay tuned in. Even if
there’s something you don’t like hearing, just ride it out because I’m going to
explain. Keep tuned in. We’re going to talk about the truth about Candida.
A little bit about me. Let’s talk about that for a second if we can. What’s going on
about me is I got a gift at age four. That’s what happened. It’s a gift I didn’t want,
but it was forced upon me whether I liked it or not. I heard a voice perfectly clear
at age four that told me what was wrong with my grandmother, that she had lung
cancer. Since then, everybody I’m around or anybody I’m with, whether it’s
somebody on the phone, whether it’s caller, whether it’s clients, whether it’s
anyone, the information comes through as far as what’s going wrong, whether they
have an illness or a condition, what’s really causing that condition.
And that’s the gift that I received at age four. I had been using it since. I dedicated
my entire life and helped tens of thousands of people recover from Lyme Disease
and CFS and fibro and lupus and everything else that’s misunderstood out there.
So, that’s a little bit about me. Let’s talk about Candida.
This is a big one. I’m a little charged up about this because Candida has a history
—it really does. It has a misunderstood history—it truly does.
So, hang on for the ride on this one. We’re going to go into our time machine a
little bit. We’re going to go back. I don’t know if you’ve seen me do that before, but
I take us back in time a little bit. And there’s a reason. A lot of the clues about
things are in our past.
What happens is as decades go by, new generations (new generations of
practitioners and doctors), everything starts to go different directions and things
are forgotten—most important things too as well.
Also, we’re going to talk about what Spirit has to say about Candida.
So, let’s go back in time. We’re in the 1980s, early 1980s. You know, you probably
have been there, late ‘70s or early ‘80s. This was an interesting time.
People were looking for answers more than ever before at this time, meaning this
was a very important timeframe when people were getting sick, but they were tired
of hearing that nothing was wrong with them at the conventional doctor’s office.
Now, remember, this is the time when everything was divided, really divided. You
had conventional doctors in one room, and you had alternative doctors in another.
And I don’t mean at the same thing. I mean we’re talking about as divided as you

can possibly go in the days of medicine. 

This is when alternative doctors didn’t like the conventional doctors. You would
never find anybody working together. It was rare.
And let me even tell you this. There was just one naturopath—that’s right, you’ve
heard of a naturopath, right? One naturopath in California. Is that suprising? I
guess it surprises me. I actually know that naturopath. I do, I do. He’s still working.
He’s devoted and he’s dictated. He’s like so many other practitioners. But there
was one naturopath in the state of California. And that’s central for alternative
medicine. It’s incredible.
So, people were looking for answers. They were tired of hearing the old chestnut
theory or the old story where “There’s nothing wrong with you, Mrs. Jones. There’s
nothing wrong with you, Mr. Stevens.” People would be like, “We need answers.”
So there was the uprising of alternative doctors coming out of schools right at this
time and they needed something to sink their teeth in—they really did. Their
offices were filing in with people that were tired being told nothing was wrong with
them or told the wrong thing for sure.
So, people were filling into these offices, that’s right, of the natural doctors, the
naturopaths, all the different varieties that we have. And the diagnosis of Candida
was born. Pow!
That’s right! Right there at that time when the two worlds were starkly divided.
Conventional was on one side, alternative was another.
The alternative doctors needed to showcase something because no one really
respected them that much at that timeframe. It’s really sad. There wasn’t a lot of
respect at all.
In fact, going back, I knew doctors that were in the natural field where their family
members were in the conventional field and there was no respect at all for natural
medicine. It was considered a joke.
So, something had to be done about it. And the Candida diagnosis was born. It
was a relief. It was like, “Wow! Finally, something we can hold on to, something we
can grab onto.” That’s right! Think about thousands and tens of thousands and
hundreds of thousands of women getting told finally that it wasn’t in their head
because it was at that delicate place in time.
I don’t know if you’ve heard any of these, but this happened—it really did.
So, the Candida switch was clicked on, that’s right. And it grew, and it grew, and it

grew. It grew into our—hey, the quickest way we can tell someone something iswrong with that, whether it’s at any practitioner’s office, conventional and
alternative, is, “Hey, you’ve got Candida. It looks like you’ve got Candida. I think
you’ve got Candida.” That’s going like wildfire—and it still is.
But let’s talk about what Candida really is. It’s a fungus, right? You know that.
You’ve heard that. You can hop online and you’ll probably be like, “Oh, it’s a
fungus,” whatever. We’ve heard that.
But here’s the shocking thing. Today is not against Candida. Today’s show is not
against Candida. That’s right. It’s not being against Candida. So, before you shut
off your dial because that might be the one that turns you off because you’re like,
“I know Candida is real. What’s he trying to say?” We’re for Candida for the
positives because we need to make friends with Candida—we really do. We need
to know it’s our friend.
That’s a shocker, right? That’s right. That’s a shocker.
The truth is what people don’t know is Candida is not why people are sick. That’s
right. It’s not why people are sick. And everybody has Candida in them. You do, I
do, she does, he does, they do. Everybody has Candida in them. Without it, we’re
in big trouble.
That’s right. Without Candida in our system, in our instestinal tract, we are up the
creek without a paddle.
There are reasons for this. Candida is the messenger. What’s the messenger
when there’s a fire? You tell me. What’s the messenger? Is it the fire department
coming? It’s smoke. Smoke is the messenger to when we have a fire. That’s right.
That’s right, smoke.
So, Candida is the messenger to something else wrong, something else going on
in your health. That’s right. It really is. It’s a good messenger and it’s a happy
messenger.
There are people out there loaded with Candida—loaded. They’re playing tennis,
they’re happy, they have tons of energy. They’re not being diagnosed with leaky
gut at their doctor’s office, and yet they’ve got more Candida in them than you
people filing into their doctor’s offices being told they have leaky guts.
And there are people with Candida pouring out of their eyes—they’ll do a swab of
their eye—out of their ears, you name it. It’s coming out. They have Candida all
over them—on their skin, they’re drinking wine, no big deal, they’re playing tennis,they’re having fun, they’re going shopping. Life is just normal. That’s right, that’s
right. Life is just normal.
But that high Candida level there eventually is giving them the warning that, “Look,
you’re not eating right. You’re not taking care of yourself.” That’s what it is. It’s the
smoke for fire that could eventually start. It’s the smoke for a fire that may have
started in someone else already.
So, say there’s a fire in someone, in their system. That means a chronic condition.
Say there’s a condition building up. Something is really wrong. They go to the
doctor, the doctor only cares about Candida when that’s not the problem. That’s
right, that’s not the problem at all.
And this is why we don’t move forward fast enough. It’s as simple as that. We
don’t move forward fast enough.
You see, Candida is friendly. It’s a harmless co-factor to viruses, bacteria. Candida
is the messenger to the fact that it’s trying to protect you. Did you know that? Did
you know Candida is trying to protect you? When I said “make friends with
Candida,” I mean that. We have to understand that Candida is trying to protect us
—it really is.
Let me tell you how it’s trying to protect us. Let me just lay this down the line right
now. It’s trying to protect us because it’s eating things in your body that you’re not
supposed to be putting in your body. That’s right. It’s gobbling it up. And thank God
it is. Thank God Candida is gobbling up things you’re not supposed to be eating.
You know why I’m thanking God for that and that all of us have some Candida in
us? Because if it wasn’t there gobbling down things it needed to eat that were bad
for us, guess what would be gobbling it down? E. coli, streptococcal, streptococcal
A, streptococcal B, that’s right, c. diff, h. pylori.
Who’s got h. pylori out there? H. pylori means your Candida was doing everything
it could to gobble out as much junk as it possibly can that we’re eating and loading
into us to try to stop h. pylori from doing the real damage because Candida
doesn’t do harm or damage us. It’s a friendly fungus that we need desperately to
thrive on planet Earth.
And you know what? When somebody says, “What does he know? What does he
know?” Well, I’ve helped tens of thousands of people recover, I’ve helped people
work because of Spirit—not because of me, I’m not a smart guy, because Spirit
knows. That’s right. 
Spirit is not created by man. That’s right. Because what’s created by man breaks
all the time. That’s why we have all these things going wrong everywhere. Spirit
doesn’t have that broken record because Spirit knows. And I’ve been able to take
that information and recover people and get them out of the wrong direction and
get them in the right direction.
So, here’s what goes wrong. You start killing off your Candida because we’ve got a
practitioner, we’ve got a direction that’s saying, “Oh, here’s…”—well, everything
that kills Candida, they’re killing something that’s valuable. Once they strip that
Candida out of you, and you’re doing all those Candida cleanses, then guess what
wasn’t cleansed out? Streptococcal, c. diff, h. pylori, e. coli, eight different strains
of e. coli, mold.
Mold is not Candida. Mold is not Candida, I repeat. Mold is not Candida. That’s
right, that’s right. Interesting.
So, that’s what goes wrong when you’re trying to strip out that Candida. That’s
right. Candida is the warning button. It’s the smoke, like I said, that, “Hey, you
ate…”—
Ifyou’ve gone to the doctor’s office and they say you’ve got Candida, that’s not
why you’re inflamed in the gut. You’re inflamed in the gut because streptococcal is
inflaming the gut.
Look at Crohn’s, look at colitis, look at IBS. That’s not caused by Candida. That’s
right. You have Candida when you have Crohn’s, colitis, IBS. But that’s not
Candida. That’s streptococcal. That’s e. coli. That’s virus such as the shingles
virus inside the lining of the colon, causing colitis, which is not known yet by
medical research and medical science, but Spirit knows. So you just got another
secret right there. Now, you don’t have to get my book because you just got one of
the secrets. No, no, there are hundreds of secrets in there.
So, it’s important to understand. We can’t go on a witchhunt. That’s what we do,
we go on a witchhunt when we’re after Candida. Nothing goes right when you go
on a witchhunt. Nothing goes right. I mean, honestly. We know that. We know what
happened when we went on witchhunts back in the 1600s and 1700s. We know.
So, Candida is like Robin Hood. That’s right. It’s robbing bad food, chemicals in
food, processed foods, other things like that. It’s robbing that from e. coli,
streptococcal, c. diff, h. pylori. It’s robbing that away—that’s right, it really is—so
that that doesn’t grow. If that grows, you’re in trouble. That’s right, you’re in

trouble. 

Candida grows, it’s a warning sign. “Hey, you’ve got to switch gears.” There’s
something trying to protect you. That’s what it is.
So, I hope I got this point across. And honestly, if you say, “Obviously, Anthony
doesn’t know anything about Candida,” okay, well, who knows anything about
Hashimoto’s. That’s right, that’s right. No one does.
Spirit knows what creates Hashimoto’s, but no one else does yet. It’s another
secret—same with lupus, same with Lyme disease and other things.
So, yeah. This information needs to get out to you—it really does. It’s all I care
about, that you have the information. Then I could rest. I could rest. I’m never
going to rest until I know you have the information. I don’t know when that rest is
going to come.
So, the whole point is we need to understand this whole balance.
So, what are we trying to protect ourselves from? We’re trying to protect ourselves
from low HCl, low hydrochloric acid. We’ve got to be careful. We’ve got to keep
our HCl up. We’re trying to protect ourselves from streptococcal, c. diff, h. pylori.
We’re trying to protect ourselves from other bugs like dysentery, like drinking out
of a pond in India or in Mexico, and we get something.
You have to have Candida to protect you for that, by the way. That’s something
that protects you when that happens.
It’s the same thing as keeping your HCl (hydrochloric acid) up, making sure we
take care of our livers—that’s critical, taking care of our livers—keeping our
adrenaline low because when we’re cranking our adrenaline and it’s full [bore]
because of stress, it causes problems in the intestinal tract and our Candida has
to work harder to try to clean up the mess and our immune system has to work
harder to clean up the mess.
B12 deficiencies, I’m always talking about B12 because it’s so critical. B12 is
technically created in your intestinal tract. So, when you’re not eating good, not
taking care of yourself and all these other things are off-balance, your B12 drops
and you get low B12. So, that’s another one that’s really important, that B12.
Look, I’m not saying Candida is the greatest thing in the world since life spread—
it’s not. But it’s there showing us the warning signs. It doesn’t injure us.
One thing that’s completely wrong. This is misinformation, I’m going to tell you
right now. Candida does not drill a hole in the intestinal lining—it doesn’t. The

worst that can happen is because you’re eating bad, and you’re doing all thewrong things, the Candida can make a mild callous on the inside of the lining of
the colon.
That’s right. That’s the worst thing it can do. Exactly! But we still want it there
because it’s trying to stop you from getting sicker, from getting other bugs taking
over in the intestinal tract.
So, when you do your Candida cleanses, you might have had someone say, “Hey,
you’ve got Candida. Here’s a Candida cleanse,” well, it’s probably, “You’ve got
streptococcal. Here’s a Candida cleanse. Let’s get rid of the thing that protects
you.” I’m being sarcastic, of course.
So, the bottomline is we want to protect your body. And one way is understanding
Candida, understanding how it works. Sure, we don’t want the levels of Candida
through the roof. That’s what I meant about it not being the best thing in the world.
We don’t want it through the roof because that means something else is going
wrong. That’s right.
And for that rare case of someone hospitalized with Candida, that very rare case,
they always find out in the end, it was a bacteria, not the Candida that was really
the big one, that’s right, that was rampant and loose in the person. It’s the
bacteria, not the Candida. It always gets figured out along the way.
And that’s for that really rare case, that person, “Well, I had Candida. I was
hospitalized. I had a fever.” No, you’re hospitalized because of a bacteria. Candida
happened to be present.
It’s that innocent victim, it really is. You don’t want to be an innocent victim. Well,
Candida is an innocent victim in this.
So, understanding this is critical, let’s talk about what to do to protect your gut and
to give the Candida a chance to balance out. Balance out, that means you’re
protecting yourself. You’re balancing out the Candida. It’s putting it in line. It’s
balancing it.
Raspberries, who likes raspberries? That’s a great antiviral, antibacterial and antimold.
That’s right, anti-mold. Someone may say, “Well, a raspberry is a fruit and
there’s mold on fruit.” Fruit mold isn’t mold. It isn’t the black mold growing inside of
a sick building. That’s right. You have to know your different molds. They all
matter. They all matter.
So, if you see raspberries, you see a moldy raspberry, you don’t have to eat it, that
one raspberries, but you just make sure you get raspberries in you because they’re anti-mold. They destroy the bad mold. They destroy bacteria, viruses. So,
raspberries are a really good one.
Grapefruit strengthens hydrochloric acid that protects you and it helps the
Candida. It’ll lower the Candida.
See, when you do good things like take out bad food, taking out processed sugar
—that’s different—taking out too much GMO products, wheat, corn, taking out lard
in a cupcake, whatever it is.
When you take out these bad foods, what you’re doing is you’re supporting the
Candida in a good way. You could reduce it. Your Candida will reduce because it
doesn’t have to feed off of garbage. So, when you take out those bad foods, your
Candida reduces.
Someone scratches their head and they say, “Hey, my Candida is lowering.” Yeah,
that’s right. You see how it works?
So, cucumbers strengthens your HCl as well. Cucumbers calms the digestive
spasms, digestive problems, people that have all that loading. They have gas and
they have swelling. That’s not from Candida. That’s from other things going on like
low HCl, liver problems. We’ve talked about in other shows. We’ll do more shows
about it, cucumbers.
Spinach. Spinach massages and brushes the linings of the intestinal tract. It
sweeps out the toxins. Who’s eating spinach? We want to make sure we get that in
there. We want to have a spinach salad. Throw a little bit of avocado on there.
That can’t hurt. It’s really helpful.
And you could put tomatoes and cucumbers. You’ve got cucumbers, that’s number
two. You’ve got spinach and cucumber.
Tomato strengthens and purifies the liver, which is a lot of what happens with
people who have Candida elevations, their gut is a mess. Tomato strengthen the
liver. It helps with that. So, absolutely, it gets the liver functioning so we can expel
toxins out of the body. You don’t have to do a coffee enema. Just make sure you’re
eating more tomatoes.
So, okay, your spinach salad has spinach, cucumber. You’ve got three things.
Avocado, I mentioned it before. That’s another great food. That one is a great one.
These foods like avocado, avocado feeds good bacteria. It feeds good bacteria.
That’s right. Candida doesn’t want avocado. Candida wants the other foods to
protect you against the other bugs. Remember that. That’s so important to know. It really is. And you heard it here. You’re not going to hear that one anywhere. You
heard it here.
Avocado feeds good bacteria, microorganisms in the gut. It’s a powerful food. An
avocado a day, that keeps the doctor away. That’s right. An avocado away keeps
the doctor away.
Coconut, coconut oil, coconut itself. Try to get coconut from a good quality source.
Look out for sulfur. Look out meaning when they douse the stuff with chemicals
and sulfur. Certain dried fruits you see at the other store—not at the healthfood
store, the conventional market—they’ve got coconut. You’ve got apricots that are
shining like they came from planet Mars. Why are they so shiny and orange? Just
look out for that preservative, that poisonous preservative that’s put on that.
But coconut, get the good quality stuff. Good coconut water, that one too. It feeds
good bacteria. And that matters. It really does. It reduces other bacteria and mold
and viruses.
So, these are some of the foods. Let’s talk about supplements. Top supplements
for Candida—oil of oregano. Oil of oregano, yeah. Hey, eat oregano too. So, if you
don’t want to get the supplement, you have oregano growing in your backyard or
whatever, you can do oregano. It keeps the bacteria that’s bad down, so then your
Candida lowers. It lowers not because oregano is killing the Candida. Oregano is
killing the other bugs, so that Candida doesn’t have to work so hard and multiply. It
reduces. Pretty cool, right?
And then probiotics, get the best probiotic you can. Stay tuned. We’ll talk about
other supplements in other shows as well. We’ll talk about different probiotics. But
get a good probiotic.
B12, the good B12 that we always talk about here that no one really knows about.
Very few people know about adenosylcobalamin mixed with methylcobalamin. This
is for the ileum in the gut. This is for the gut, the ileocecal. That’s right, that’s an
important one.
Barley grass juice powder. Now, I’m picky about my barley grass juice powders. I
like Vimergy. That’s the one I like. It’s V-I-M-E-R-G-Y. That one is important. I like
barley grass juice powder. It feeds all good bacteria. That’s what barley grass juice
powder does. It feeds all good bacteria. It cleanses the liver as well. That’s really
important. 

Another little thing it does is it gets the thyroid cleansed. It cleanses the thyroid,
upgrades the thyroid. It can get it out of hypo. So I like that. It’s just another little
zinger.
Lemon balm, that’s right, lemon balm. Lemon balm, you can do a lot of things with
it. You can get the tea. You can buy it as a supplement. Lemon balm kills off
unnecessary fungus—yeah, unnecessary fungus that’s not Candida. Candida is a
necessary fungus that we need. And lemon balm kills off the other ones, the bad
guys.
It’s like a gang hanging out. There’s a couple of peeps in the gang that maybe are
a little bit more trouble possibly, and then you’ve got some good ones in the gang.
It’s like the old saying, “There’s a bad apple in the bunch,” or a rotten apple. We
have fungus that’s more of that, of a rotten apple, not a good apple.
And so lemon balm kills off those rotten apples. That’s right, it gets those bad, bad
little bugs in there. That’s how it works.
So, I hope that you got some good information today about Candida. Candida is
something that we have to learn a little bit more about in order to protect
ourselves. If our eye is not on the ball, and it’s on something else, if it’s on the
wrong thing, it’s called bait-and-switch. That’s what it’s called, bait-and-switch.
That’s right, bait-and-switch.
Bait-and-switch is an interesting thing. Bait-and-switch is this. It’s where a store
tells you that they have something there that they’re selling and it’s at a certain
price. You go to that store looking for it, and it’s not there because they never
intended to have it there.That’s right. So, you go there and you buy something
else. Your antenna went somewhere else and you bought something else that they
wanted you to buy.
Candida is like a bait-and-switch. That’s what it is. It sends you off in the wrong
direction if you don’t know. Not knowing and having the eye on the wrong ball, we
don’t move forward and we don’t get better. That’s how it all happens. That’s how
it happens on planet Earth and the world of medicine, all the medicines.
So, look, I’m about watching your back. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. That’s
what it’s really about. I try not to hurt feelings out there, but it’s about watching
your back because it matters to me. That’s why the gift was given to me that it
was. It’s for you. That’s the whole point or it’s useless, absolutely useless.

So, let’s take some callers. We’ve got line eight. We’ve got Ruby. 

Ruby: Hi, how are you?
Anthony: Good! Hi, Ruby.
Ruby: Hi! So, I was wondering, I switched to a vegan diet probably three months ago,
and I still have a little bit of anxiety and fatigue. I just wondered…
Anthony: If you switched to a vegan diet, one thing you have to know, that your calories
could’ve reduced. Now, what happens is—going vegan is fine. There’s nothing
wrong with that. I like all diets out there. I like everything. But it’s about knowing
certain things that are critical.
Spirit supports you over here in going vegan. Spirit says that’s fine for you.
Everybody’s different, so Spirit may say, “Actually, bring in some salmon or
something.” But with you, it’s fine to go vegan.
And so here’s the deal. Your calories could’ve dropped substantially. You need to
know that. There’s a heck of a lot more calories (even though it doesn’t say it on
the package) when you’re eating meat or you’re eating grass-fed beef or you’re
eating a high-quality chicken, free range or whatever it is, or eggs.
There are a lot of calories that nobody knows about. They’re in the fat. That’s right,
they’re in the fat. High calories, that’s why some people say, “Oh, I really needed
that. That hit the spot” because they needed a lot of calories.
So, if you go vegan, which is fine, you just have to make sure you didn’t reduce
your calories substantially.
Number one, you need to graze. You need to eat every couple of hours. You need
to eat every couple of hours because of the anxiousness—the anxiousness, any
kind of anxiety. The anxiety stems from the brain. It stems from the brain.
I don’t know if you caught the last show…
Ruby: Yes, I did.
Anthony: You did, okay. It’s all about the brain. What do you need for the brain? You need
glucose. So, if you run low, if you run low on brain sugar, glucose, I don’t care
what fat is out there, what trend is out there, what fancy idea is out there, what
fancy book is out there, the brain runs on sugar. That’s what it runs on.
And we’re going to learn that all over again. As the trend takes us out, takes us
away and it tries to teach us that our brain runs on fat, it doesn’t. It runs on sugar.

It runs on glucose. 

So, I don’t care what book comes out and says it runs on fat, it’s wrong. I’m just
saying that to protect you and others out there. It runs on glucose. You may know
what it really runs on if you want to know about the brain.
So, if you’ve got anxiety, that’s the brain, that’s the nervous system. So you do
have to keep your glucose up and you do have to eat every couple of hours. That’s
for sure.
If you go every three or four hours, you’re going to lower in calories because
you’re not eating meat. You’re going to lower your calories. That’s one thing that’s
going to go wrong. So you have to be mindful about this—you really do.
Ruby: Okay. I guess I’m just not hungry very much, but I completely feel aligned with
what you’re sharing because I keep telling my husband, “We’re not eating
enough.”
Anthony: Well, what happens is when you’re eating meat or chicken, you could do small
portions but it’s dense calories, so your stomach stays small—your stomach itself,
the pouch. See? So, when you eat more vegetables, your stomach expands a
little. But you’re not going to be hungry really. You’re going to feel not as hungry
because your stomach is still small.
And it’s healthy to expand that stomach a little bit. We don’t want it shrunk and
small because we’re eating dense, little meals. We want some bigger meals—
more salads, more vegetables.
And I say that for anybody who’s also into eating meat or into eating chicken or
turkey, whatever it is they like. Still do some big salads so that your stomach
doesn’t shrink and you end up losing appetite when you need those calories to
keep you going in your busy life.
So, really, take on any of that if you can. Thanks for calling.
Ruby: Thank you.
Anthony: Great! Wonderful! So, line two, Surrey. Infertility, I think, let’s talk about that.
Surrey: Hello.
Anthony: Hi!
Surrey: Hi, how are you? I’m so excited to talk to you.
Anthony: Good, good. I’m excited to talk to you too. How are you?
Surrey: I’m good. I’m a raw vegan and I’m trying my best for my fertility. But I lost my

period since I went raw vegan. I’ve had two ectopic pregnancies in the past. 

Anthony: Well, you mean as far as being vegan, you had those?
Surrey: Well, I was vegan for a long time. I went raw vegan about almost a year ago. But I
had my two ectopic pregnancies before I was raw.
Anthony: Okay. Well, I’m doing the scan here…
Surrey: And since then, I haven’t been able to conceive.
Anthony: Yeah, I’m doing a scan. Spirit is taking a look and I’m listening to Spirit. So if I
sound kind of not there for a second, bear with me.
Surrey: Okay, sure.
Anthony: It’s like someone else yelling in your ear at the same time you’re trying to talk to
someone else.
Reproductive system looks fine. I don’t see any illnesses in there or diseases
that’s holding anything back. I don’t see that on the scan. I’m just double checking.
Okay, your reproductive system is on low battery, that’s what it is. Low battery
means that your body’s reserves are not going to the reproductive system. That’s
what’s happening. So, it’s low energy, low reserves to your reproductive system.
Surrey: Oh, I see. Why? Is it going somewhere else?
Anthony: Yeah, absolutely. It’s going other places in the body. Your body thinks it needs to
be in other places. So, we have to connect this, we really do.
First of all, you have to connect the mind to your reproductive system. You have to
tell your reproductive system that you’re charging it up, you’re going to start
charging it up now. You know how you plug in your cellphone?
Surrey: Yeah.
Anthony: Well, you have to have…
Surrey: But how do I do that? I’m eating the best foods in the world. I’m eating fruits and
vegetables all day.
Anthony: …which is going to pay off, it really is. And it’s going to head you in the right
direction. Spirit says you’re in the right direction for what you need for infertility.
But you’ve got to imagine that you’re plugging a wire into your reproductive system
. You have to start connecting. You have to see a vision that you’re recharging
your reproductive system. You have to say, “Okay, we’re going to charge you up.”
Just like you’re charging up a device, your iPad, your phone or whatever it is, you

have to envision that you’re charging up your reproductive system. You have to tell your body that it’s time to work on the reproductive system. That’s number one.
That’s critical.
Another thing, you have to have enough fruit in your diet if you want the
reproductive system to be fed because, basically, you’re trying to produce a fruit.
Surrey: Right.
Anthony: That’s what you’re doing. You’re trying to produce a fruit. So, fruit is critical.
Surrey: Any particular fruit?
Anthony: Avocado, that’s actually the most important.
Surrey: Oh, okay. I cut that out because I went to low fat raw vegan.
Anthony: Look, here’s the deal because everything changes. If you want to have a baby, you
don’t want to be a low fat raw vegan. Now, you don’t want to be a high fat raw
vegan. You want to have enough fat in the diet if you’re trying to have a baby.
Surrey: Okay, so one avocado a day?
Anthony: And it’s not because of the fat that’s going to protect your reproductive system. It’s
because of the type of sugar that’s in an avocado that feeds the reproductive
system.
Avocadoes have got a lot of sugar in it. It’s got fructose in it. People say, “Well,
avocadoes are really high in fat.” Actually, it’s not. It’s got water, pulp, a little bit of
fiber, minerals, vitamins, nutrients, two kinds of water.
There are different kinds of co-factor waters (which science won’t discover for
another 30 years).
Surrey: Wow! Most people look at it as too much fat.
Anthony: Yeah, of course, they do. We judge. We’re a society that judge. We judge. That’s
what we are. We judge everything. We judge people, we judge things. We just
judge. That’s all we do all day long. We think we’re a judge.
But here’s the point. It’s the sugar that’s in the avocado that’s critical for the
reproductive system.
Raspberry leaf, Spirit says is important for you.
Surrey: Mm-hmmm… okay. I do that every day.
Anthony: Raspberry leaf tea is critical. You drink that every day. What that does is it tells
your body—it’s a lactating herb. It tells your body to start thinking about breastmilk
because we need to get pregnant. That’s a secret right there to really click it in. It’s not a secret about raspberry helping as a lactating herb. It’s a secret that it tells
the body it’s time to click on the switch and recharge the reproductive system.
Surrey: Mm-hmmm… gottcha!
Anthony: So raspberry leaf is important. Nettle leaf is another one.
Surrey: Okay.
Anthony: Yeah, nettle leaf recharges the reproductive system. But Spirit says your diet is
fine. Don’t go so low fat.
Other people need to be low fat, absolutely. And meat eaters need to be lower fat
because meat eaters are too high in fat and they like those kinds of animal fats,
that’s not good. That hits the reproductive system all the wrong way. But you can
somewhere middle of the road. Make sure avocadoes are in there.
Spirit is proud of you, really proud of you.
Surrey: Oh, thank you. It’s hard word.
Anthony: Well, yeah…
Surrey: Let me ask you. I have one more question. I have a friend that [I’ve spoken to] and
she’s really sick. Her name is Nikki. I think she’s listening again to you. She’s
really sick and she’s trying so hard. She drinks green juices and she’s just eating
the best food, and she’s just feeling sick every single day.
Anthony: Yeah. When did she start doing all that?
Surrey: I know that she’s been vegan for three years. And then, recently, she went fully
raw.
Anthony: Okay.
Surrey: High fruit, very high fruit. She’s doing more greens now.
Anthony: But she’s still not feeling better yet?
Surrey: She actually ordered the B12 you recommend a few days ago, and she just started
I think Saturday.
Anthony: That’s going to help. When she gets that B12 in her, then life is going to change
for her. That’s the kind of B12 that actually changes everything. That’s the one the
liver takes in. That’s the one the nervous system takes in. That’s a critical piece of
it.
Surrey: And should she be on any adrenal glandulars?
Anthony: How old is she? 

Surrey: I’m not sure of her age. I think she’s in her low twenties.
Anthony: Sorry, you cut out.
Surrey: She’s on her low twenties I believe.
Anthony: Yeah, yeah. She’s on the right track with her health, Spirit says. So, Spirit says
she’s on the right track.
Surrey: And is there any adrenal glandulars should she take because she’s on them and
she’s not sure about it.
Anthony: Yeah, Spirit says try to be—as far as the glandulars, adrenal support is fine, but
plant-based adrenal support is better.
Surrey: Oh, okay. So, just move away from the…
Anthony: Yeah, when she’s on B12 long enough, then she’s going to start seeing the big
shifts she’s worked so hard for. Spirit says she’s headed in the right direction for
what she needs. Thank you, Surrey.
Surrey: Excellent! Thank you so much. I appreciate it.
Anthony: Okay, great. Bless you. So, we have line six, Ari.
Ari: Hi, Anthony. Oh, my God. I’m so happy to hear from you. I hope that you and Spirit
can help me because I’m about to make my new [name] scared and confused
because that’s really how I feel.
Anthony: Yeah, I understand completely. It breaks my heart to even know that you’re even
feeling that way, really. It saddens because it’s not easy when you’re not feeling
ood. And when you feel that way, it breaks the spirit. Your spirit gets broken and
your soul gets a little tattered along the way.
And have you been to your doctor? Have you been to your practitioners? Tell me
what’s going on.
Ari: I’ve been to the doctor’s. I’ve been to an iridologist. I just feel like I’m spending
money and everybody is telling me something totally different.
Anthony: So, one person is saying you’ve got a parasite. Another one is saying you’ve got
Candida. Another one is saying you have adrenal problems. Another one is saying
you have thyroid problem. Is this kind of similar?
Ari: Yes. And I’m buying supplements here. And then I’m buying different supplements
here. My husband is like, “This is costing a lot of money, and you’re just spinning

your wheels.” 

Anthony: What you do because we can’t have a session actually online right now, but what
you do is you look at some of the archive shows and you go to the baseline.
There’s a supplement show—I think it’s one of the supplements show I did where
there was a baseline of things. So, that baseline is critical to understand. It’ll have
the B12 in it. It’ll have a few things in there, a zinc. That baseline is important,
number one, so that you’re not buying—
There are a million supplements out there, a million of them. It’s insane. I think
there’s some 10,000 new ones that are being stamped out every minute. That’s
probably not accurate.
So you have to know that the baseline is critical to understand for sure. Spirit says
you have a low-grade viral problem. So, if your practitioner hasn’t told you that,
what your problem is—meaning being viral—you’re at the wrong door.
So, what you do is you look for a naturopath or you look for a functional medicine
doctor or somebody, and you tell them, “Do I have a low-grade viral condition?”
And if they’re onboard, then you’re getting a great start.
Ari: And how do I fix that?
Anthony: Well, first of all, hopefully, we find a smart guy. And then, he’ll know, “Okay, let’s
start doing some anti-virals and stuff” and you’ll at least be on the right track.
But one of the ways to fix that is that baseline I was telling you about. You go back
to one of the old shows, you find the baseline of some of the things. That helps
you on a viral level. That will get you started.
The B12 that we talked about—I was just talking to Surrey a few minutes ago—
that B12 is critical in the baseline. You can start at least pulling out of this.
And then, you find yourself a practitioner that understands you’ve got a low-grade
viral issue.
So, that’s where I would start, Ari.
Ari: Okay.
Anthony: Great, great. Thanks for calling.
Ari: Thank you.
Anthony: Okay, bye. So, we have line nine. We have Michelle.
Michelle: Hello.

Anthony: Hi, how are you? 

Michelle: Well, I’ve been very sick for 13 months now. I’ve gone to many practitioner,
naturopaths, many GI doctors.
I’ve had burning for 13 months. My [innings] are so bad that I’m literally screaming
into my pillow. And no one has been able to help me—not medication-wise,
naturally.
I’ve gone to acupuncture, colon therapist. I’ve lost 50 lbs. I’ve been very, very, very
sick. I’m down to skin and bones almost.
I’m drinking and eating almost anything, I’m mostly doing cantaloupe, watermelon,
mostly fruits right now because everything is so painful, even water. If I drink
water, it will make bile acid just come up. It’s been a living hell really.
Anthony: And you went to every doctor. You went to the regular conventional doctor, and
they did all the tests?
Michelle: Yeah, naturopaths. Well, recently, I was diagnosed with bile reflux and acid reflux.
That’s what they’re telling me. I’ve had colonoscopies. They’ve gone upper, lower.
They’ve taken tissue samples. I mean, I can’t tell you. I’ve had the pH study done
four times.
Anthony: Oh, poor thing, honestly.
Well, first of all, Spirit says you’re going to get better. You are going to heal. So,
you have to know that. Don’t lose hope at all. Don’t let your spirit get broken.
Michelle: It is broken.
Anthony: No, no. We have to glue that back together, for sure. We have to keep your spirit
strong through this.
Michelle: Thank you, Anthony.
Anthony: Yeah, you’re going to heal.
And so you have to know that it’s just going to take a little time, but you have to
plan it out basically. You have to know, “Hey, it’s going to be a little bit. You’re not
going to heal next month.” Spirit tells me though that it’s going to be a slow
recovery, but in about a year, a year and a half, you’re going to be back to getting
to where you need to be.
But you can’t panic about it taking a little time. You’re going to heal.
Michelle: What do I just do? I’ve done your B12, zinc, l-lycine, spirulina, your barley wheat

grass juice.

Anthony: It’s amazing you can even take anything and that’s incredible because that is
huge. It’s a huge part of you getting to the healing process.
Michelle: What do you mean?
Anthony: …meaning like you’re doing all the right things. Spirit says it’s going to heal on its
own, but doing the support and doing the things you’re doing is amazing in all part
of it. It’s going to be all part of it. It’s all going to work together and get you there
faster.
But Spirit says you have the gastric spasm. See, the vagus nerve spasm. So,
basically, your vagus nerve is on fire.
Michelle: My intuition told me that my vagus nerve was involved because I had a very bad
back injury and it got to the point where I was bed-ridden. This came on super
sudden. I mean, I never had a heartburn or problems with any kind of food my
whole life. And then all of a sudden, I can’t still eat barely anything.
Anthony: Be patient. Yeah, be patient with it, really be patient. Try to keep a light heart in
any way you can even though you’re in agony. Do little things that give you joy
even though you’re laying in bed and you can barely sit on a coach. Do little, tiny
things that you can try to learn to enjoy whether it’s getting a puzzle out and
putting a puzzle together. But you’re going to get there.
It’s a spasm. It’s like the switch was turned on and you have a vagus nerve spasm.
That’s what’s occuring. That spasm will ease off and will ease off over time, but
you have to stay light-hearted because you’re going to heal. Keep your Spirit
strong.
And Michelle, thank you for calling.
Michelle: But what do I do about food or calories? What do I do about…?
Anthony: You’re doing the right thing. You’re actually doing the right thing with that. Exactly
what you’re telling me is all right, everything you’re doing. You’re trying to put
various fruits in you. Fruits have calories. You’re trying to get calories and you’re
doing the right thing. Just don’t let too many hours go in between so your calories
drop.
Bless you, Michelle. And listen, just stay strong because you’re going to get
through this Spirit says. Okay, bye bye.
So, we’re at the end of the show which is always a sad thing because, really, I just

love giving out the information in any way I can.
Also, follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest where, every day, I post
about the healing power of different fruits, information nobody knows about,
vegetables, herbs, spices and teas that’s decades ahead of its time. And I also
give out other information too that inspires you and keeps you going.
Listen, it’s all about you healing. That’s what matters to me, you healing. It really
does. That’s why the gift was given to me. It was to help you. Blessings! 

LAST DAYS OF DIABETES

CONTENT
Why Should I Read This Book ?............7

1. Consensus...........................................9
2. Calculation .........................................37
3. Conspiracy .........................................53
4. Cure ..............................................82

WHY SHOULD I READ THIS BOOK ?

To know why, attempt answering the following questions:
Q. 1) Which is correct ?
a) High Blood Pressure leads to Heart Disease 
/Risk of Brain Stroke

b) Risk of Brain Stroke/Heart Disease leads to 
High Blood Pressure

Q. 2) Is Mango good/ bad for diabetic patients?
a) Bad      b) Good

"Mango is good for Diabetic Patients"

Q. 3) If your blood sugar reading (with glucometer) comes to about 250mg/dl consistently then
you are a diabetes patient ?
a) True      b) False

Q. 4) The primary function of heart is to pump blood across the circulatory system?
a) True      b) False

Correct Answers : All (b) options are correct.

If you are among 99% of doctors then chances are, you must have opted for option (a) as correct
answer.


Think again, it’s time to Unlearn and Relearn.. Read on!

Chapter 1 CONSENSUS

Get ready to be pleasantly shocked! The first chapter has the
potential for some amazing outcomes:

1. 100% of Diabetic patients will abandon their anti-diabetic pills...
permanently.

2.Up to 70% of Diabetic patients will come to know 
that they are no more diabetic....

The Universal Consensus says that:

• The 10 year risk of cardiovascular diseases 
(CVD) in a Diabetic population is just 2% higher 
than in the non-diabetic population.

"The 10 year
risk of cardio
vascular
diseases
in case of
a person
suffering from
diabetes is
2% higher
than in the
non diabetic
population "

• Lifetime risk of Dialysis in case of a Diabetic patient is just 1.5% higher than the normal
population.

• Lifetime risk of blindness is 4% higher in case of Diabetes patients. [1]

It is clear from all the clinical studies specifically done on PIMA Indians (population with highest rate of Diabetes) that High Blood Sugar increases the risk of Cardio Vascular Disease (CVD),
Retinopathy, Neuropathy and Nephropathy.

Higher Blood Sugar = Higher risk of Diseases.

in other words

Lower Blood Sugar = Lower risk of Diseases

but, does that automatically mean lowering blood sugar with medication = Lower risk of diseases!


It seems obvious. But the reality is just the opposite!

It is Natural lowering of Blood Sugar = Lower risk of Diseases: 

True

and

Lowering Blood Sugar with Medication = Lower risk of Diseases:

False

Let me prove my point by considering each group 
of diabetes medication one by one, starting with 
Metformin the highest prescribed pill among all.

Given in the next page is the meta-analysis of 13 
Randomized Control Trial (RCT) - 9500 
Metformin cases / 3500 Placebo for 5 years 
(PLOS Medicine-2012). It can be clearly seen 
that the Risk Ratio Interpretation (RRI) for all 
the risk factors increase among patients on 
Metformin.


"Lowering blood
sugar with
medication does
not lower the risk
of heart failure or
retinopathy "

Risk factor RRI
Cardio Vascular disease mortality 1.05
Heart Failure 1.03
Amputation 1.04
↑PLOS Medicine 2012

Conclusively, it means being on Metformin, one can lower the blood sugar level. But our prime aim is not just to target a particular blood sugar range rather, our aim is to reduce the risk of suffering from heart disease and other complication because of increased sugar levels in the blood.

What about the other class of diabetes medication?

To find an answer, a large study called ADOPT (A 
Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial) blinded RCT 
(Randomized Controlled Trial) in which 4360 
patients were followed up to 4 years to compare 
the effects of Glyburide, Metformin and Rosiglitazone.

The result showed that Glyburide and 
Rosiglitazone performed worse than Metformin 
with more mortality rate, more edema and more 
weight gain.

Class of Drug Mortality Rate % Edema % Weight Gain %
Glyburide 2.2 8.5 3.3
Metformin 2.1 7.2 1.2
Rosiglitazone 2.3 14.10 6.9

With these heart breaking results of the above 
class of glucose lowering agents, it is worth-
while to consider the performance of remaining 
class of anti-diabetic medications such as GLPS,
Meglitinides and SGLT2.

"Risk ratio
interpretation
(RRI) for all
the risk factors
increase among
patients on
Metformin"

Upon searching the entire medical database, I 
came across several research papers but the 
most relevant research paper is as follows:

[[Diabetes Matab: 2014 Jan, 40(3):169-75 doi:10.1016/).diabet.2013.12.010. Epup 2014Feb3.
Effects of pharmacological treatments on micro and macro vascular complications of type 2 diabetes: what is the level of evidence?

BoussageonR1, GueyffierF2, Cornu C3.
Author Information
“In 2013, the level of evidence for the clinical efficacy of anti -diabetic drugs is disappointing
and does not support the millions of prescriptions being written for them”.]]

All the above reports conclude that although high blood sugar may be bad for your health, reducing the high blood sugar with medication is worst for your health and also a loss of significant
amount of wealth.

Here, we must understand that diabetes or high 
blood sugar itself is not a disease, but a risk factor 
for various diseases however, various developed 
countries (under the influence of medical industry) 
are irresponsibly propagating Diabetes as a 
dreaded disease (learn more in 3rd Chapter - Conspiracy).

[[“Type 2 Diabetes is a Lifelong (chronic) disease.” - 
A service of the U S National Library of 
Medicine. National Institute of Health- USA

“Type 2 Diabetes is one of the fastest growing 
diseases in Canada.” Government Of Canada ]]

The fundamental question here is, How high 
should the sugar level be, to be called 
Diabetes? The universal consensus or a
worldwide understanding is, ‘if your Random 
Blood Glucose or Oral Glucose Tolerance Test 
(OGTT) is more than 200 mg/dl, then you are 
diagnosed as a diabetic patient. In simple words, 
if in each litre of your blood there is more than 
2gm of sugar (after 2 hrs of eating food) then 
you are diagnosed as having diabetes or in other
words you have 2% higher chances of suffering 
from CVD (Cardio Vascular Diseases) in next 
10 years in comparison to the person with blood 
glucose less than 200mg/dl.

"Glyburide and
Rosiglitazone
performed worse
than Metformin
with more
mortality rate ,
more edema and
more weight gain"

Here, the important point of consideration is, from where this number 200mg/dl arrived?

It all happened in 1979, when the expert committee of National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) observed that the PIMA Indians (population with highest rate of diabetes) with higher blood
sugar levels were at higher risk of retinopathy. Here, it is important to note that if you go through the original trial (learn more in 2nd Chapter-Calculation) you will find that it was never 200mg/dl.

All the trials which were conducted to establish a cutoff point for Diabetes arrived at same conclusion i.e. 250 mg/dl as a threshold beyond which the risk of retinopathy and CVD increases
steeply.

Along with postprandial (PP/OGTT), other diagnostic parameters were also set such as:

• Fasting Plasma Glucose
• Intermediate Glucose Tolerance
• Impaired Fasting Glucose
• HbA1c

But the efficacy of these parameters were questioned from time to time and were considered only as a surrogate to PP/OGTT and not the main criteria to define or diagnose Diabetes.

My experience with more than 5000 Diabetic patients has shown that diabetic patients specially non-insulin dependent upon quitting their anti-diabetic medication are still able to maintain their blood sugar below 250 mg/dl. This means they were never diabetic patients but were falsely diagnosed as diabetic patients on the basis of the commercially promoted ( learn more in 3rd Chapter - Conspiracy) fasting blood glucose ≥ 100mg/dl or HbA1c ≥ 5.6% as a criteria to diagnose diabetes and had fallen in the trap of lifelong medication, diagnostics and doctors’ visits and ultimately ending up being a drug induced diabetic or hypertension patient (learn more in 4th Chapter-Cure).

“What you have just read may not only be an eye opener but also shocking and a matter of disbelief”. At this point you may have certain questions including, “if all kinds of anti-diabetes drugs do more harm and no good then why are millions of prescriptions being written for them?”

"Whole concept
of prescribing
Metformin is
based on
just one trial" 

To answer your question let me start with Metformin, the first line of preferred drug for the newly diagnosed diabetes patients. The whole concept of prescribing Metformin is based on just one trial i.e. UKPDS (The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study) where the number of patients on Metformin were followed up till the end of the trial were 136. Just 136! It is too small a number, to qualify for the world wide approval for prescription of Metformin as an anti-diabetic drug.

Here, it is important for us to understand that not all types of trials are same. Based on various factors, the trials are graded from highest to lowest level of importance. Refer to the table:

[[Hierarchy of Evidence2
Highest - ➤Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial
➤Randomized Controlled trial
➤Non Randomized Controlled Trial
➤Cohort Studies


Lowest - ➤Case Reports ]]

"All the trials
to establish a
cut-off point for
diabetes arrived
at 250 mg/dl as a
threshold beyond
which the risk of
retinopathy and
CVD increases
steeply"

What is Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trial?
Meta-analysis is a statistical technique for 
combining the findings from independent 
studies. Meta-analysis is most often used to
assess the clinical effectiveness of healthcare 
interventions; it does this by combining data 
from two or more randomized control trials.

What is Randomized Controlled Trial?
A Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) is a type of 
scientific (often medical) experiment, where the 
people being studied are randomly allocated one 
or other of the different treatments under study. 
RCT is often considered the gold standard for a 
clinical trial.

What is Non-Randomized Controlled Trial?
A study where participants have been assigned to 
the treatment, procedure, or intervention 
alternatives by a method that is not random. The 
investigator defines and manages the alternatives. 

What is Cohort Study?
Cohort Studies are a type of medical research used to investigate the causes of disease, establishing links between risk factors and health outcomes. Cohort studies are usually forward looking
- that is, they are “prospective” studies, or planned in advance and carried out over a period of time.

What is Case Report?
In medicine, a Case Report is a detailed report of the symptoms, signs, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of an individual patient. Case reports may contain a demographic profile of the 
patient, but usually describe an unusual or novel occurrence.

From here you can make out that the meta-analysis of RCT’s are the best evidence to understand the efficiency and effectiveness of a particular treatment protocol. But the problem 
with meta-analysis is that it is possible only 
when there are few RCTs already available. 
Till that time the Medical Care has to rely on 
Cohort Studies or Case Reports, which can be 
misleading and even life threatening. Here is a 
classic example of it. 

“Should Oxygen therapy be given for acute Myocardial Infarction (heart attack patients)?”

The general consensus on the basis of various 
Cohort Studies and Case Reports was that, “giving 
oxygen therapy to heart attack patients, increases 
the chances of survival,” till the meta-analysis 
of Cochrane Database 2013 was published and 
concluded that, ‘giving oxygen therapy to heart 
attack patients doubles the chances of death.”

Sometimes the consensus is based on a weak 
evidence and the public at large has to suffer.

Here is another example, “imagine all the 
cardiologists of the world vanish for 3 days from 
the world. What will happen to the heart patients 
and the patients who arrive in the emergency 
ward with heart attack?” General understanding 
would be, ‘the patients would suffer and certainly 
the mortality rate will drastically increase in the
absence of cardiac doctors in emergency units.’

"Up to 70% of
people were
falsely diagnosed
as diabetic
patients on the
basis of the
commercially
promoted fasting
blood glucose≥
100mg/dl or
HbA1c ≥ 5.6%
as a criteria to
diagnose diabetes"

Now, here is a jaw dropping surprise!

Every year National Cardiology Meeting is being organized by American Heart Association (AHA) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) in the month of March, where around 25000
Cardiologists participate in the conference leaving behind their hospitals for 3 days. In Dec 2014, a retrospective analysis was published in JAMA Internal Medicine with the objective to analyze
the mortality rate among the high risk patients with heart failure. The outcome was about 8% reduction in mortality during the cardiology meeting dates.

Sometimes the general consensus and expected outcome may be far from truth. Here, it is important to understand how to distinguish between the low quality & biased medical report from a true medical outcome.

"Meta-analysis
of RCT’s is
considered as the
highest level of
evidence"

As a trained medical analyst (trained at Penang Medical College, Malaysia) I follow 3 rules to identify the true picture of expected medical outcomes, which has also become the basis of my
writing this book:

1) If it is ‘industry-funded’ then ‘scrap it’.

To understand it, read the full story of Cholesterol Guidelines.

DECODING MEDICAL GUIDELINES

U.S. Department Of Health and Human Services 
have projected themselves (successfully though) 
as a self styled medical parameter and guidelines 
deciding authority for rest of the world. Under it 
is a department called National Institute of 
Health, under National Institute of Health sits 
National Heart Lung and Blood Institute
(NHLBI) which runs ‘National Cholesterol 
Education Program (NCEP). An 8 member 
committee of NCEP decides the Cholesterol
Guidelines ( similarly there are other department 
in NIH, engaged in creating guidelines for 
diabetes, hypertensions etc.) Now to decide the 
Cholesterol Guidelines they refer to some of the 
past trials related to cholesterol. In the present 
case they referred to two major past trials, 
1)” ALLHAT-LLT” and 2) “PROSPER”, and
concluded for “aggressive treatment for primary 
prevention with Statin”, in patients with 
cholesterol more than 200. 

Please refer below:

{CHOLESTEROL}
U. S. Dept. of Health & Human Service; 

National Institute of Health

National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI)

National Education
Cholesterol Program

2004 *
Aggressive treatment
for primary prevention
with statin

Cochrane Collaboration

University of British
Colombia

2005 *
Statin shows no health
benefit in primary of
prevention

* *ALLHAT-LLT PROSPER

 Please refer below for profile of the 8 Members of 
the Committee of NCEP.

[[ 1. Dr. Cleeman: (Chairman)  has no financial relationships to
disclose. 

2. Dr. Grundy: has received honoraria from Merck, 
Pfizer, Sankyo, Bayer, Merck/Schering-Plough, 
Kos, Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Astra
Zeneca; he has received research grants from
Merck, Abbott, and Glaxo Smith Kline. 

3. Dr. Bairey Merz: has received lecture honoraria 
from Pfizer, Merck, and Kos; she has served as a 
consultant for Pfizer, Bayer, and EHC (Merck ); 
she has received unrestricted institutional grants 
for Continuing Medical Education from Pfizer, 
Procter & Gamble, Novartis, Wyeth, Astra
Zeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Medical 
Imaging; she has received a research grant from 
Merck; she has stock in Boston Scientific, IVAX, 
Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Johnson & Johnson, 
SCIPIE Insurance, ATS Medical, and Biosite.

4. Dr. Brewer: has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Lipid Sciences, Merck, Merck/ Schering-Plough, Fournier, Tularik, Esperion, and Novartis ; he has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Lipid Sciences, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, Fournier, Tularik, Sankyo, and Novartis. 

5. Dr. Clark: has received honoraria for educational presentations from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, and Pfizer; he has received grant /research support from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, and Pfizer. 

6. Dr. Pasternak: has served as a speaker for Pfizer, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, Takeda, Kos, BMS-Sanofi, and Novartis; he has served as a consultant for Merck, Merck/ScheringPlough,
Sanofi, Pfizer Health Solutions, Johnson & Johnson -Merck, and. Johnson & Johnson.

7. Dr. Hunninghake: has received honoraria for consulting and speakers bureau from AstraZeneca, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, and Pfizer, and for consulting from Kos; he has received research grants from AstraZeneca, BristolMyers Squibb, Kos, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, Novartis, and Pfizer.  Dr Pasternak: has served as a speaker for Pfizer, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, Takeda, Kos, BMS-Sanofi, and Novartis; he has served as a consultant for Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough, Sanofi, Pfizer Health Solutions, Johnson & Johnson -Merck, and. Johnson & Johnson.

8. Dr. Stone: has received honoraria for 
educational lectures from Abbott, AstraZeneca, 
Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kos, Merck, Merck/
Schering-Plough, Novartis, Pfizer, Reliant, and 
Sankyo; he has served as a consultant for Abbott, 
Merck, Merck/ScheringPlough.]]

"Giving oxygen
therapy to heart
attack patients
doubles the
chances of death"


"Mortality rate
increases
considerably
by intensive
blood glucose
lowering among
the ICU patients
in comparison
to the standard
treatment "

It is now clear that these members can be greatly 
influenced by the drug companies from whom they 
receive regular grants /funding or have several 
monetary tie-ups. So to understand the real picture 
of cholesterol guidelines it is important to draw 
your attention to Cochrane Collaboration, a highly 
regarded medical organization being recognized 
by and referred by all major medical agencies 
across the world. They have branches in more 
than 130 countries and are known for not accepting 
any sponsorship or any kind of grant from any 
pharmaceutical company. Under Cochrane 
Collaboration, is University of British Columbia 
who on the basis of same ‘ALLHAT -LLT’ and 
‘PROSPER ‘ trial concluded that “Statin shows 
no health benefit in primary prevention.” Even in 
the past, several medical agencies proved beyond 
doubts that lowering Cholesterol through drugs is 
not only worthless but also injurious to human health.

Consider the following reference:

20 yrs (1960 to 1980) study by World Heath Organisation

Lowering Cholesterol with medication increased overall risk of death by 47%.

2010 British Medical Journal
Observational study of more than 2 million people treated with statin.

Result: Significantly increased risk of liver dysfunction, kidney failure and cataract.


Honolulu Heart Program
Low cholesterol had significant association with mortality, which was an increased  risk of mortality by 64%.

The above conclusion was so clear that Pfizer, the largest manufacturer of Statin was forced to write a disclaimer for several years as below:

“Statins have not been shown to prevent
heart disease or heart attack”-Pfizer 

On the other hand, it was observed that the residents of Rural China and Central Africa were always found to have cholesterol levels which were considered dangerously high by the present medical standards, but these residents are known to rarely suffer from heart diseases and often live beyond 100 years.

2) For the final verdict of any expected medical outcome, a given medical care protocol and pharmacology also relies on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. For this, ‘the most
preferred source is the Cochrane Database.

3) You should be able to ‘read between the lines’. Sometimes the final conclusion of a particular trial is too illusive and deceptive. It may mislead you in a direction which will in-fact harm 
the patients.

To understand further, consider the following RCT of 11,140 patients with Type 2 Diabetes to undergo either standard glucose control or intensive glucose control. This widely quoted trial
ADVANCE (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Released Controlled Evaluation) Collaborative Group was published in New England Journal of Medicine June
12, 2008 .


The Final Conclusion of this trial is given below:

[[A strategy of intensive glucose control, involving gliclazide (modified release and other drugs as required), that lowered the glycated hemoglobin value to 6.5% yielded a 10% relative reduction in the combined outcome of major macrovascular
and micro-vascular events, primarily as a consequence of a 21% relative reduction in nephropathy. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00145925]]

"Cochrane
Collaboration
2013 defines
the hypertension
guidelines as
having blood
pressure
more than
160/100 mmHg "

At the face of it, it is clear that the strategy of 
intensive glucose control is a wiser decision for 
the patients. However if you carefully read the 
complete 13 page report, you will find a 
contradictory (true) outcome.

Here in the box is given an extract from the ADVANCE trial:

Subgroup Intensive Control(N-5571) Standard 
Control (N-5569)
All Cerebrovascular Events 6.3% 5.9%
All Cardiovascular Events 22.1% 22.4%
Visual Deterioration 54.4% 54.1%
New or Worsening Neuropathy 42.2% 41.5%
Dementia 1.1% 0.9%

When you compare various medical events /risk 
factors of intensive control v/s standard control, 
you can clearly see that there is more neuropathy, 
more dementia, more visual deterioration and 
more cerebrovascular events in intensive glucose 
control group in comparison to the standard group 
and only in cardiovascular event it is insignificantly 
better than the standard group.

Reading, interpreting and implementing the out-
comes of a medical trial is far more important 
than understanding the pharmacology. Our modern 
doctors are not trained and are ill equipped to
interpret the outcomes of the medical trials. As a 
result of this misinterpretation, sometimes the 
mass popular practice by the doctors becomes a 
harmful practice . For instance, it is a common
practice to tightly control the blood sugar level of 
a patient, admitted in Medical ICU, whereas the
truth is, the mortality rate increases considerably 
by intensive blood glucose lowering among the
ICU patients in comparison to the standard 
treatment as reported in New England of 
Journal of Medicines Feb 2, 2006. The 
disparity in understanding of medical protocol 
and medical diagnostic guidelines were clearly 
demonstrated in 17th World Conference Of The 
Hypertension League Council held in Montreal 
in 1997 where 27 National Hypertension 
Societies participated. Among them 14 used 
140/90 mmHg as a threshold to diagnose 
hypertension and 13 used 160/95 mmHg.
However, now 120/80 mmHg as a threshold is 
prevailing globally as hypertension cutoff point. 

Here as a medical doctor, your ability to identify 
the right resources to find most reliable reference 
to diagnose hypertension will play an important 
role for the well being and safety of patients.

For that you can refer to the meta-analysis of 
Cochrane Collaboration, 2013, which defines the 
hypertension threshold as 160/100 mmHg 
specially in case of diabetic patients.

Besides your ability to find a reliable source to 
decide the protocol of your treatment and 
diagnostic parameter, one more factor will help 
patients to recover from the disease as it has helped 
me to reverse diabetes of thousands of my patients. 
And that is, ‘your understanding of making of the 
diagnostic parameters.’ In the present context of 
this book, let’s try to understand the making of
diagnostic parameter for diabetes.

"There was about
8% reduction in
mortality rates
during National
Cardiology
meeting dates"

It was somewhere between year 1965 and 1978, 
an attempt was made to define the cutoff point for 
the diagnosis of high blood sugar i.e. the amount 
of sugar in the blood beyond which there is a steep 
rise in the risk of retinopathy, nephropathy and 
cardio vascular disease. For that PIMA Indians, 
the population with highest prevalence of diabetes 
was chosen. After 75 gm of oral glucose load, 
blood sugar was measured after 2 hrs and the 
results were plotted in histogram form as shown 
below.

 Fig A, Page 34. Blood glucose after 2hrs of OGTT
against % of population
 Fig B, Page 35.

In figure B, a superimposed composite curve has 
been drawn and there is a point where the 2 curves 
meet and cross one another. This is called 
Bi-modality, which separates the two populations.
Here the 2nd curve represents the diabetes 
population and cutoff point is a little above 200 
mg/dl somewhere near 225 mg/dl which can be 
called as a threshold for the diagnosis of diabetes.
Bi-modality point


"Blood sample
taken from finger
tip (capillary
blood) always has
about 10% more
sugar level than
venous blood"


Here, we must note that the blood samples taken 
here were venous blood samples whereas in home 
set- up, the blood sample is taken from finger tip 
(capillary blood) which always has about 10% 
more sugar level.

In the light of the above factors, it is evident that 
the well being of the patients depends on the
ability of the doctor to interpret the medical trial, 
treatment protocol and diagnostic parameter.

References:
1. Cardiovascular risk factors and their effects on 
the decision to treat hypertension: Evidence
Based Review. BMJ-2001.

2. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, Smith H Jr. 
(1983) Bias in treatment assignment in controlled
clinical trials. New England Journal of Medicine.

Chapter 2  - CALCULATION

Are you a Diabetic Patient? How do you know 
that you suffer from diabetes? 

First of all we must remind ourselves that 
diabetes is not a disease but a condition in which,
 if sugar (glucose) concentration in the blood is
 below or above a certain level, then the chances 
of heart disease, kidney failure, blindness and 
even death may increase substantially (it may be 
noted that at any level of sugar, there still remains 
about 20% chances of heart disease and 
reasonable chances of blindness and kidney failure).

"Retinopathy
– a specific
micro-vascular
complication is a
basis for deciding
a cut-off point for
diabetes"

The basic question is how many grams of sugar 
per litre of your blood is safe or will lead to risk 
of dying from previously mentioned causes. Prior 
to 1979, there were at least 6 different sets of 
criteria to diagnose diabetes,[1] all of them 
lacking evidence and standardization. In 1999, 
the National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) 
attempted to resolve this issue by arriving at a 
clear cut value of sugar level in the blood above 
which the diabetes associated risk factors 
increased steeply.[2]

Subsequently, the bimodal frequency distribution 
of sugar concentration in the blood was suggested 
which allowed a separation of the population in 
two groups- Normal and Diabetic. This provided 
a base for determining the degree of sugar level 
in the blood that could be regarded as diabetes[3,4].

Out of all the complications that high level of 
sugar may attract, they selected Retinopathya
specific micro-vascular complication as a basis 
for deciding a cutoff point above which the
chances of retinopathy increases sharply. Three 
major studies5,6,7 were available to the NDDG 
on which they based their decision. A total of 
1213 patients were followed up for 3 to 8 yrs after 
Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) and 77 of 
them developed retinopathy.

Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) was 
conducted only at the beginning of the trial. It is 
very likely that only these 77 patients with 
increased glycemia (high sugar) in the years 
between the Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) 
and the Onset of Retinopathy were considered by 
NDDG (National Diabetes Data Group) to 
establish the cut off point /diagnostic criteria. 
So, on the basis of these 77 patients, the NDDG 
(National Diabetes Data Group) defined that 
anyone with blood glucose level above 200 mg/dl 
(or 2 gm sugar per litre of blood) should be 
recognized as diabetic. Thus, the gold standard 
of blood sugar ≥200 mg/dl after 2hr of consuming 
75 gm of glucose (OGTT), as a cut off point for 
diagnosis of diabetes is actually based on results 
from less than 100 individuals[8].

Adoption of similar guidelines by World Health Organization
(WHO) attracted a lot of worldwide criticism and dissatisfaction as
they seemed to be arbitrarily accepted as universal guidelines for
diagnosing diabetes5
. A Bimodal distribution method was applied
on two civilizations - PIMA Indians and Nauruans (Micronesian 


https://www.biswaroop.com/9312286540.pdf