Why we should NOT bother preventing diabetes

Here’s why one person dies every 6 seconds from diabetes type 2. The ignorance and perversion in the system is rarely this obvious.

During the world diabetes congress in Canada this week there was a debate on whether we should “bother” trying to prevent diabetes. An epidemic that is now affecting 415 million people around the world (up from 30 million in the 80s) – threatening to bankrupt the economies of entire countries.

Apparently the organizers did not think staging this debate was in poor taste.


IDF: Session Details

So, who argued for “no, let’s not bother helping humans”? Professor Guntram Schernthaner.

Professor Schernthaner is also on the payroll of Amgen, AstraZeneca/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier and Takeda. All companies selling drugs for treating diabetes.

Let’s not bother preventing diabetes. If we don’t, hundreds of millions of people will die painful deaths and the health care systems of entire countries may crash. But the more people get the disease, the more these companies will profit. And the more their pet doctors will be paid.


The correct topic for the debate would have been: “Why are our diabetes prevention attempts failing so badly? Are we doing this completely wrong?”

And the correct answer would be yes.


How to Cure Type 2 Diabetes

“Thanks to LCHF, I Reversed My Type 2 Diabetes and Life Is Good Again”

Another Cured Type 2 Diabetic

“I’ll Introduce Myself as an Ex-Diabetic From Now On”

Sugar Clinics Helping Mexico Control Diabetes Epidemic – Or Do They?

Type 2 Diabetes Reversed After 26 Years of Insulin Dependence!

How to Reverse Diabetes and Lose 93 Pounds Without Hunger

Diet Coke Helps Weight Loss More Than Water, Media Reports – Based on Coca-Cola Funded Report


  1. Christoph
    Oh my God, I know Prof. Schernthaner. I really have to say I'm shocked but I guess - after all - the fact that shouldn't bother (or disturb) ME anymore is that doctors with such opinions exist everywhere on earth...
  2. Valerie
    1- Wharpt are the affilitions / conflicts of interest of S. Kahn?

    2- What were Schernthaner's arguments?
    (I'd rather hear the arguments than the ad hominem attacks.)

  3. tw
    Great shot of Vancouver right there.
    This is both upsetting and disturbing ! As a species it seems we can justify anything if it suits us.
  5. Murray
    It's a debate. Often the best way to improve one's understanding of an issue is to reverse perspectives.
  6. chris c
    More proof that what is actually occurring is eugenics. The Final Solution is to remove all carbohydrate intolerant people from the population, even if this is a majority. First making them fat is profitable as they eat more low fat food, by definition. Making them diabetic AND NOT TELLING THEM HOW TO CONTROL IT is profitable as they will require increasing quanities of medication until going on to insulin for life. Making them die prematurely is profitable for the pension industry. Preventing diabetes requires people to start/return to eating Real Food rather than wheat, sugar/HFCS and industrial Omega 6 seed oils mixed with byproducts of the petrochemical industry. This is not profitable.
  7. Jennifer
    Looking at the "more info" link is very illuminating. He is saying that we should not work to prevent diabetes because weight loss is hard and sometimes does not work. So instead of looking into what could help prevent (or might cause in the first place) diabetes, he just assumes that weight is the big issue. He takes some real statistics about the issues with weight loss and conflates them with diabetes prevention. The line of reasoning that weight loss is hard, it takes " energy restriction, regular physical activity, and frequent contact with health professionals" and that "LOOK AHEAD, intensive lifestyle intervention did not significantly reduce CVD-related morbidity/mortality e.g. CVD death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, hospitalized angina after nearly 10 years of follow-up."
    He is very much looking inside the box. I think I agree that traditional "eat less, move more, avoid fat" is bad advise and does not work to reduce diabetic complications. If one does not see any other way of preventing diabetes, it could be seen as futile.
    Reply: #8
  8. chris c
    Precisely! If doctors never see people improving their health, controlling their diabetes and losing weight (and regaining energy) they blame the people, not the diet.

Leave a reply

Reply to comment #0 by

Older posts