Q: What is the Price of Not Detecting Diagnosing Diabetes IT? A: Lifetime of Insulin Shots and Insulin Toxicity of Diabetes ID

Majid Ali, M.D.

President, Institute of Integrative Medicine

140 West End Avenue, Suite 1-H,New York, NY 10023


344 Prospect Avenue, Suite 1-C, Hackensack, NJ 06610



Link to Full Article Presenting Scientific Facts of

1. Diabetes IT

2. Diabetes ID 




of the Article Describing Two Stages of Diabetes: Diabetes A (Insulin Toxicity)

and Diabetes B (Lifetime of Insulin Shots and Insulin Toxicity)



A retrospective survey of insulin responses to a 75-gram glucose challenge in 684 subjects in New York metropolitan area was conducted to investigate: (1) prevalence of hyperinsulinemia in New York metropolitan area; (2) characteristics of optimal insulin homeostasis; (3) stratification of hyperinsulinism for optimal clinical use; and (4) mechanisms of action of risk factors of hyperinsulinism and type 2 diabetes (T2D).


Post-glucose blood insulin and glucose levels were measured with fasting and ½ hr, 1- hr, 2-hr, and 3-hr samples at university and large commercial laboratories. Guided by the initial 100 profiles, a profile peak insulin concentration of <40 uIU/mL accompanied by unimpaired glucose tolerance was defined as the cut-off point for optimal insulin homeostasis. Hyperinsulinism was stratified into three categories based on the doubling of peak insulin values as follows: (1) mild, 40 to <80 uIU/mL; (2) moderate, 80 to <160 uIU/mL; and (3) severe, >160 uIU/mL.


The overall prevalence of hyperinsulinism in the general New York metropolitan population without type 2 diabetes was 75.1%. The rates of optimal insulin homeostasis and the degrees of hyperinsulinism (mild, moderate, severe) in 506 subjects without T2D were 24.9%, 38.9%, 26.5%, and 9.7% respectively. The corresponding rates for three degrees of hyperinsulinism in 178 subjects with T2D were 29%, 24%, and 13.9% (with the overall rate of 66.9%). The remaining 33.1% in the type 2 diabetes group showed insulin deficit of varying degrees. The profile peak insulin concentrations ranged from 11 uIU/mL to 718 uIU/mL.


Our findings call for further study of insulin homeostasis in other general populations in the United States. In addition, we recommend viewing data in the broader context of mitochondrial dysfunction related to recognized dietary, environmental, and other risk factors of hyperinsulinism-to-T2D continuum; a need for a shift of focus from glycemic status to insulin homeostasis for stemming the global tides of hyperinsulinism and T2D is recognized.


Type 2 diabetes is a spreading pandemic. The high prevalence of the disease in China (50.1% of adults)1 is disturbing; the rates in India and some other countries may even exceed this number.2 Hyperinsulinism predates diabetes by five to ten or more years, and its adverse metabolic, inflammatory, immunologic, cardiovascular, and neurologic effects are well established.3-8 There is a clear need for an approach that focuses on: (1) a clear understanding of insulin homeostasis in health and a range of its disruptions in chronic diseases; (2) delineation of the hyperinsulinism-to-type 2 diabetes progression; (3) early detection and appropriate modification of hyperinsulinism; and (4) possibility of reversibility of type 2 diabetes for individuals willing and able to undertake well-informed hyperinsulinism modification plans.

Clinicians will encounter some difficulties in implementing the shift of focus, most notably: (1) a lack of consensus among clinical pathologists and laboratory professionals about how to interpret blood insulin concentrations; (2) absence of an insulin database that allows direct stratification of hyperinsulinism for patient education and assessment of the efficacy of therapeutic options; (3) disparate laboratory reference ranges for blood insulin concentrations in current use in the US (Table 1); and (4) the initial real and imagined difficulties in implementing the shift. This retrospective survey was conducted to address these concerns.

Tables 1 to 4 .pdf

Study Subjects

Insulin and glucose profiles retrospectively gathered for this survey belonged to individuals (“survey subjects”) with digestive-absorptive, metabolic, inflammatory, cardiovascular, allergic, autoimmune, and degenerative disorders. Some of them consulted clinicians for wellness. Blood glucose and insulin tests were done as parts of complete laboratory evaluation of clinical issues, including the metabolic status. Specifically, glucose and insulin profiles comprised levels obtained with fasting blood samples and those drawn ½-hour, 1-hour, 2-hour, and 3-hour after an oral 75-gram glucose challenge. The ordering clinicians did not recognize any consent concerns in including insulin tests in their laboratory workup and did not use the results to implement hyperinsulinism modification plans with any pharmacologic agents or specific commercial brands of nutrients. There were no financial relationships or conflicts among clinicians ordering the tests, laboratories performing the tests, and the authors.

Survey of Laboratory Insulin Ranges

Table 1 displays wide variations in the lower and upper limits in the reference ranges for fasting and post-glucose challenge blood insulin concentrations employed by six major laboratories in the New York City metropolitan area. The insulin ranges of 0 to 121.9 uIU/mL for one-hour (Lab 2) and 40 to 300 uIU/mL (Lab 5) for two-hour values are most noteworthy in this context. Photographs of some lab reports are posted

at http://alidiabetes.org/2016/02/25/insulin-laboratory-ranges/

 to underscore the importance of this crucial point.9

Cut-off Points for Optimal Insulin Homeostasis and Degrees of Hyperinsulinism
The selection of the peak insulin value of <40 mIU/mL as the cut-off point for optimal insulin homeostasis was arbitrary, albeit based on a preliminary review of the first 50 sets of insulin and glucose profiles. We opted for cut-off points for hyperinsulinism stratification based on doubling of the levels (to <80, <160, and >160 uIU/mL for mild, moderate, and severe hyperinsulinism) with two considerations: Might these cut-off points prove appropriate (1) for this study and (2) provide a frame of reference for future investigations of diverse aspects of insulin homeostasis and hyperinsulinism-to-type 2 diabetes progression? There are four other issues in this context: (1) No opinions on what constitutes optimal insulin homeostasis and what the insulin cut-off point for it might be were found in English literature; (2) No adverse effects of low insulin levels when accompanied by unimpaired glucose tolerance have been reported; (3) Ten of twelve survey subjects with peak insulin concentration of 20 uIU/mL reported negative family history of diabetes (grandparents, parents, uncles, aunts, or siblings); and (4) Hyperinsulinism and the metabolic syndrome are commonly spoken in the same breath, explicitly or implicitly considering them as the two faces of the same coin. However, there is a crucial difference between the two. The peak insulin level and other features of three-hour insulin and glucose profiles provide clinicians with specific and quantitative cut-off points for detecting and stratifying hyperinsulinism—no such criteria have been established for the metabolic syndrome. In addition, three-hour insulin and glucose profiles shed light on other aspects of glycemic status and insulin homeostasis, some of which are presented later in the report.

A subgroup of twelve survey subjects was designated “exceptional insulin homeostasis” for two reasons: (1) It showed extremely low fasting insulin value of <2 uIU/mL and peak insulin concentrations <20 uIU/mL (mean 14.3 uIU/mL) accompanied by unimpaired glucose tolerance; and (2) ten of the twelve had no family history of diabetes (parents, siblings, grandparents, children, uncles or aunts). The mother of the eleventh subject developed diabetes type 2 in the closing months of her life at age 74, and both parents of the twelfth subject had type 2 diabetes. This subgroup appears to reflect ideal metabolic efficiency of insulin in the larger evolutionary context.


Grease buildup in a kitchen sink increases the rate of further grease accumulation in the sink unless grease is removed. The same holds for grease buildup on the cell membrane which houses the insulin receptor protein. The larger the amount of cellular grease buildup on the cell membrane (and the insulin receptor protein embedded in it), the greater the receptor dysfunction and its resistance to insulin hormone.

Tables 1 to 4 .pdf





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s