https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201006153507.htm

"Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for relatively short periods reduces blood sugar and normalizes the body's response to insulin. The effects are long-lasting, opening the possibility of an EMF therapy that can be applied during sleep to manage diabetes all day."

 

Sure, simple heating effects maybe localized in some absorbent tissues. Sounds possible but most 'cures' seen in mice don't work for humans.

https://cosmosmagazine.com/biology/don-t-believe-the-mice/

When you read that a lab animal with a human disease has been cured with a new drug candidate, do not get your hopes up. The stats for converting these successes into human patients are appalling. Results in animals are often the opposite of those seen in humans. For example: corticosteroids were shown to treat head injuries in animals, but then increase deaths in new-born babies in trials.
...
A final issue with animal studies is how many are carried out, often by trainee PhD scientists or lead researchers looking to publish interesting results. Sometimes outliers in results can be cherry-picked and written about.

“You then build a story of how you logically came to this result, but this is a fairy tale,” says Hartung.

 

Perhaps it would be good for some to work on other models of the human organisms. But that leads to a conundrum: How to do that without going back to "torturing" chimps and other close relatives. :-(

 

We're all exposed to electromagnetic fields continually, so diabetes shouldn't exist .

 

If the cure is important and time sensitive we will test on humans, chimps or close relatives.

https://www.livescience.com/monkey-shortage-for-coronavirus-research.html

COVID-19 vaccines and treatments typically get tested in monkeys before being given to humans, but now, those primates are in short supply, The Atlantic reported.

Prior to the pandemic, the U.S. was already approaching a potential monkey shortage, according to a 2018 report from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The authors of the report proposed establishing a "strategic monkey reserve" in order to meet future demand, and to provide a buffer in case of "unpredictable disease outbreaks," according to The Atlantic. No reserve was ever established, and when COVID-19 emerged in late 2019, the demand for monkeys skyrocketed worldwide.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...ers-call-comparison-covid-19-vaccines-monkeys

Primate researchers in the United States have banded together in a push for an ambitious monkey study that would do head-to-head comparisons of the leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates. Although 10 candidates are already undergoing large-scale tests in people, proponents of the monkey plan say those clinical trials may not deliver the comprehensive data needed to choose the safest and most effective vaccines. The comparison trial in monkeys, in contrast, could shed light in a matter of weeks on how the candidates stack up on measures including potential side effects, the strength of immune responses they trigger, and how well they protect against infection and disease.

“We should take a cold, hard look at all of the data and ask ourselves, ‘What appears to work best?’” says Nancy Haigwood, who directs the Oregon National Primate Research Center and is a key advocate for the comparative monkey study.

 

We're all exposed to electromagnetic fields continually, so diabetes shouldn't exist .

One could argue the same thing about heat... so infections shouldn't exist...

 

We're all exposed to electromagnetic fields continually, so diabetes shouldn't exist .

The mice testing article is missing important details on exactly what the total static electric and magnetic field exposure is. With static fields we're not talking about RF or even 60Hz radiation. The effect, if there is really any effect, must be one of Plain Jane induction and/or polarization in a static field.

At low levels it cures diabetes but also gives you brain cancer. I'm reluctant on believing either effect without some serious evidence.

 

I'm reluctant on believing either effect without some serious evidence.

One could argue that objective evidence is seriously overrated nowadays...

 

One could argue that objective evidence is seriously overrated nowadays...

What ever could have caused that?

 

What ever could have caused that?

Human nature, it's an old story.

 

/skeptic
If anybody in pure science actually came up with such a simple and inexpensive way to cure diabetes, the medical industrial industry would do their best to stifle any such thing, because, treating diabetes is just way too lucrative.
/skeptic

 

/skeptic
If anybody in pure science actually came up with such a simple and inexpensive way to cure diabetes, the medical industrial industry would do their best to stifle any such thing, because, treating diabetes is just way too lucrative.
/skeptic

I used to think that way. And then again now there's a cure for Hep-C and not just "treatment" that would milk your wallet for life. There are also lots of cures for many other ailments that have been developed through the years. It's the result of a truly competitive system... expensive as it might be sometimes.

 

A friend of mine had gastric sleeve surgery done in the United States. Prior to the procedure he was diabetic. He has "lost" his diabetes and it has not returned after many years. His American health insurance covered it.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28843985/