MRC_Hans said:Kumar, you will have to stop pronouncing it a MISS every time you encounter something you cannot understand. Try to realize that thousands of very qualified researchers are working in these fields, and while they have surely missed something here and there, the chance that an entirely uneducated person is going to stumble on the answer is, for all practical purposes, non-existent.
Anything & anyone can catch any idea, we can't consider it absolute sence that anyone can't catch any idea. It can be esp. possible in 'not yet known' aspects as lot more or most already seen by people in this field, but could not yet see it. There can be some mistake in theory(seed) which they are following. You can well feel it if I say to you same words as: "Try to realize that thousands of very qualified researchers & homeopaths are working in this field, and while they have surely missed something here and there, the chance that an entirely uneducated person is going to stumble on the answer is, for all practical purposes, non-existent.[/b]
Now for sodium: It is true that if there was no sodium available in our body, then we could not absorb clucose. But there IS ALWAYS sodium available in the body. The concentration of NaCl in our body is kept within very close limits, and if you stop salt intake, you will be dead from sodium deficiency long before it can influence your BG. Likewise, if you take surplus salt, it will kill you before it can affect your clucose uptake.
This is the reason BG is not connected to salt intake.
But sodium in intestine goes with gulucose not our bogy's internal sodium. You can study the links deeply. About gulucose: you cant say our inside glucose is absorbed in intestines. Therefore it is indicated in one link that in dehydration both salt & sugar in given.
Finally, as I have said before, your observations (increased BG 3 days after snack binge) do not support your theory. Salt and glucose uptake is fast, and any effect would show within 2-4 hours, not days.
Actually, it takes some time to accumulate sat & sugar for showing effects or causing severe/felt toxic effects. It may also be linked to some processing/metabolising delay. Homeopathic remedies are given in potency for proving purpose may hold this reason i.e. to initiate the symptoms early or quickly.
....
About your "one very senier diabetic doctor": If this is the same doctor who prescribes high doses of insulin to initial type 2 patients, then excuse me if I am less than impressed.
All may be somewhat alike as allopathic knowledge spread world wide quickly & practiced accordingly.
A final note: This is my answer to the question. If you don't like it, live with it, don't ask again, because there will not be a different answer.
Pls avoid mentioning "final" or absolute types of words as it may not be practical. Moreover it resist & restrict forthur knowledge to us & to humanity esp. with those who are pure & clear in intention & honest in thinking with a true motive of try better knowledge gor just gain to humanity--nothing else----probably.
Now the other consideration:-
Whether clear motions & un-clear(delayed emptying of feces or constipation) in diabetes are linked to (i) a reason of imbalances in BG levels (ii) effect of excess/low salt/sugar intake (iii) effect Insulin resistance??
Whether clear motions & un-clear(delayed emptying of feces or constipation) in diabetes are linked to (i) a reason of imbalances in BG levels (ii) effect of excess/low salt/sugar intake (iii) effect Insulin resistance??
This is the reason BG is not connected to salt intake.
Mr.Hans,
Pls read it & also look at animation given below this link.
Also:-
"The dependence of water and salt absorption on the absorption of glucose is the reason why oral rehydration solutions contain all three components.
http://www.gpnotebook.co.uk/cache/818937895.htm
Another thought:-
Due to Absorption of sodium in the small intestine plays an important role in the absorption of chloride, amino acids, glucose, and water AND due to their realtions by homeostatis" with Potasium, Magnesium,Calcium, Phosphate, Fats etc. all these Sodium, chloride, amino acids, glucose, water ++ Potassium, Magnesium,Calcium, Phosphate, Fats etc. can be effected.
Mr.Hans,
Pls read it & also look at animation given below this link.
Also:-
"The dependence of water and salt absorption on the absorption of glucose is the reason why oral rehydration solutions contain all three components.
http://www.gpnotebook.co.uk/cache/818937895.htm
Another thought:-
Due to Absorption of sodium in the small intestine plays an important role in the absorption of chloride, amino acids, glucose, and water AND due to their realtions by homeostatis" with Potasium, Magnesium,Calcium, Phosphate, Fats etc. all these Sodium, chloride, amino acids, glucose, water ++ Potassium, Magnesium,Calcium, Phosphate, Fats etc. can be effected.
(I can't believe I'm actually getting suckered back into this... 
... okay, one more cookie for the troll...)
KUMAR-
Try to follow your own logic here, if you can.
You have been trying to make an argument that increased salty foods in the diet increases insulin resistance. Yet, everything you've posted here in support of this faulty assertion would suggest that, if you were to increase the amount of salt in the diet, you'd actually improve the transport of glucose into the cells - the exact opposite of insulin resistance, by definition.
Even you don't understand the details of the argument you're trying to make. Everything you've posted only serves to refute your basic premise. You're actually arguing against yourself.
Of course, the amount of salt in the diet - as I've already repeatedly stated - has nothing to do with increased blood sugar or insulin resistance. If you get too much salt in the diet, the body will simply flush it out through the kidneys. This, again, has nothing to do with blood sugar or insulin.
That is all.
-TT
... okay, one more cookie for the troll...)Kumar said:
KUMAR-
Try to follow your own logic here, if you can.
You have been trying to make an argument that increased salty foods in the diet increases insulin resistance. Yet, everything you've posted here in support of this faulty assertion would suggest that, if you were to increase the amount of salt in the diet, you'd actually improve the transport of glucose into the cells - the exact opposite of insulin resistance, by definition.
Even you don't understand the details of the argument you're trying to make. Everything you've posted only serves to refute your basic premise. You're actually arguing against yourself.
Of course, the amount of salt in the diet - as I've already repeatedly stated - has nothing to do with increased blood sugar or insulin resistance. If you get too much salt in the diet, the body will simply flush it out through the kidneys. This, again, has nothing to do with blood sugar or insulin.
That is all.
-TT
Kumar said:
(1) The intestinal lumen is not where insulin resistance occurs, nor is glucose transport across the lumen insulin dependent. Therefore, sodium is irrelevant to your argument in this sense.
(2) Don't assume (which you apparently have) that secretions produced by the body entering the lumen do not contain sodium (among many other things). They do, and they are being constantly secreted into the lumen. In fact, the spaces between the cells in the lumen are always at a higher sodium concentration than the bloodstream specifically to suit this purpose. So, even if you were to drink a solution of only pure table sugar dissolved in water, you'd still absorb all of it into your body. A high additional dietary sodium load will not enhance glucose transport as you suggest.
(3) If excess sodium does happen to be absorbed, your body will fairly rapidly (within a few hours) turn on other mechanisms to flush it out. Your body's sodium level is very carefully regulated and maintained. So, even if a high dietary load of sodium got into your bloodstream, healthy kidneys would very quickly restore the balance of sodium to its normal range.
Now, I think I've pretty much completely worn out my patience on this discussion at this point. You either accept my educated answers or you don't, Kumar. That part is not up to me.
-TT
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,363
Kumar said:
No.
ThirdTwin said:(1) The intestinal lumen is not where insulin resistance occurs, nor is glucose transport across the lumen insulin dependent. Therefore, sodium is irrelevant to your argument in this sense.
Yes, it is correct & I nowhere mentioned alike it. But if more glucose is absorbed due to excess salt with food by this active transport, it can effect IR in IR patient as 'higher BG".
(2) Don't assume (which you apparently have) that secretions produced by the body entering the lumen do not contain sodium (among many other things). They do, and they are being constantly secreted into the lumen. In fact, the spaces between the cells in the lumen are always at a higher sodium concentration than the bloodstream specifically to suit this purpose. So, even if you were to drink a solution of only pure table sugar dissolved in water, you'd still absorb all of it into your body. A high additional dietary sodium load will not enhance glucose transport as you suggest.
In other sense, can you agree that no sugar/carb. is excreted in stool or no ingested sodium is absorbed? Inspite, some sodium is there in mucus of intestinal secretions, ingested sodium( as salt or as part of food) will be addition to normal sodium in lumen. That will cause more absorption of salt as well as glucose--I am not sure but this may also be a reason for delayed emptying/movement/constipation in intestines.
(3) If excess sodium does happen to be absorbed, your body will fairly rapidly (within a few hours) turn on other mechanisms to flush it out. Your body's sodium level is very carefully regulated and maintained. So, even if a high dietary load of sodium got into your bloodstream, healthy kidneys would very quickly restore the balance of sodium to its normal range.
That is true in normal health.
Now, I think I've pretty much completely worn out my patience on this discussion at this point. You either accept my educated answers or you don't, Kumar. That part is not up to me.
Pls don't irritate with questiong type students. Thanks.
Furthur, I have become bit doubtfull about that: working of NA+/K+ATPhase pump can be bit effected or release of Na+ & glucose in blood can be bit delayed if BG levels are higher.(??) Can you tell if intestinal & other cells can do it?
Do you have any idea that:-
1. Why phelgum/mucus in mouth & sweat on prespiration are differant is quantity & tastes(more or less saline) differantly at differant times even under similar tempreture & humidity conditions?
2. Can volume/quantity of water/fluid in blood can show differant levels of blood glucose/other minerals due to there low or high concentration but still total quantity of glucose/other minerals in whole body remains the same? How then these can be related to their effects, accordingly?
1. Why phelgum/mucus in mouth & sweat on prespiration are differant is quantity & tastes(more or less saline) differantly at differant times even under similar tempreture & humidity conditions?
2. Can volume/quantity of water/fluid in blood can show differant levels of blood glucose/other minerals due to there low or high concentration but still total quantity of glucose/other minerals in whole body remains the same? How then these can be related to their effects, accordingly?
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,363
Do you have any idea that:-
1. Why phelgum/mucus in mouth & sweat on prespiration are differant is quantity & tastes(more or less saline) differantly at differant times even under similar tempreture & humidity conditions?
Don't even want to think about the taste of your mucus, thanks
2. Can volume/quantity of water/fluid in blood can show differant levels of blood glucose/other minerals due to there low or high concentration but still total quantity of glucose/other minerals in whole body remains the same? How then these can be related to their effects, accordingly?
Read a biochemistry book about blood components that are partially free and partially bound
1. Why phelgum/mucus in mouth & sweat on prespiration are differant is quantity & tastes(more or less saline) differantly at differant times even under similar tempreture & humidity conditions?
Don't even want to think about the taste of your mucus, thanks
2. Can volume/quantity of water/fluid in blood can show differant levels of blood glucose/other minerals due to there low or high concentration but still total quantity of glucose/other minerals in whole body remains the same? How then these can be related to their effects, accordingly?
Read a biochemistry book about blood components that are partially free and partially bound
Kumar said:
No! This is a wrong assumption. Unless you are so severely hyponatremic that you are sick, the amount of concomitant dietary sodium intake WILL NOT materially affect glucose (or other monosaccharide) absorption in the intestinal lumen. How many times do I have to say this before it sinks in?
Kumar said:
Yes, no sugar/carb is excreted in the stool. If it were even to make it into the large intestine (as happens in people who are lactose intolerant), you would develop severe gas pains, bloating, and diarrhea as the microbes digested the remnant sugars. And, I made no assertions about sodium being absorbed. But, the GLUT1 receptor is not the only mechanism for sodium absorption, Kumar. Glucose and sodium are not mutually and exclusively dependent on each other for absorption, as you seem to think. Dietary sodium will not cause any more or any less absorption of the other because THEY ARE NOT MUTUALLY AND EXCLUSIVELY DEPENDENT ON THE DIETARY LOAD OF ONE OR THE OTHER FOR ABSORPTION!!! (Say this 20 times aloud until it sinks in).
Kumar said:
This is true period, unless you have kidney disease and/or a problem with your hypothalamus - neither problem of which we have discussed (nor will we) on this thread.
Kumar said:
Kumar, you are so completely lost. Stop trying to deduce and make inferences about such complex things when you haven't yet demonstrated that you even remotely grasp a basic understanding of how they work. Please.
-TT
Badly Shaved Monkey
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,363
ThirdTwin said:
Ah, sub-Dr Twin, you are struggling the concept of infinity. Might I suggest you seek a mathematician who may explain the properties of some of the bigger alephs. Then truly ye shall know many times Kumar will need to have this explained.
TT,
What does then the above quote means?
It is true that sodium & sugar can also be transpoted by other means also but Na/KATPhase active transport system is also of great importance. It looks that any imbalanced absorption due to any disorder via this system only. In IR/diabetes, cell will be starved of glucose inspite lot of sugar in there in blood. But this starvation can trigger signals of more sugar requirement which body will try to compensate by using more of this Na/K pump. It can be thought that this pump works more in any disorder and more of salt & sugar is present in intestine this pump will absorb more of both on these. Just look at this link;
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
The most ridiculous thing about this "discussion" is that Kumar's idea is based on an observation that does not support the idea at all!
Kumar has observed an increased BG three days after binging on salty snacks. Now, we are not informed of how many times this has been observed, so it is not possible to judge if there is a connection at all, but let's us, for now, assume that there is.
However, both salt and glucose are metabolized quickly, certainly within 24 hours. So IF excess salt caused elevated BG, this would show up within 24 hours, probably MUCH less (I'd guess a couple of hours).
I have pointed this out to Kumar a couple of times, but of course he is just ignoring it.
So we have one of the usual Kumar Scenarios [tm]: A foggy idea, with no facts to support it.
Hans
Kumar has observed an increased BG three days after binging on salty snacks. Now, we are not informed of how many times this has been observed, so it is not possible to judge if there is a connection at all, but let's us, for now, assume that there is.
However, both salt and glucose are metabolized quickly, certainly within 24 hours. So IF excess salt caused elevated BG, this would show up within 24 hours, probably MUCH less (I'd guess a couple of hours).
I have pointed this out to Kumar a couple of times, but of course he is just ignoring it.
So we have one of the usual Kumar Scenarios [tm]: A foggy idea, with no facts to support it.
Hans