• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Consciousness question

Did you know that there have been lots of studies done on the use of Chromium and diabetes? In fact the week after I started taking it (in synthetic form, instead of organically bound which, is what the book I was reading recommended), I was high as a kite. And when reading the label, it says to be sure and consult your doctor if, you were taking insulin. But I wasn't taking insulin, and I still had this horrendous reaction. I had also read elsewhere (later) that most normal people could take up to a thousand times as much Chromium (200 micrograms) without any kind of adverse reaction. Yet obviously with my sensitivity to it, it was a clear indication to me that my problem was related to diabetes. So I opted to take a different form of Chromium (organically bound or, GTF Chromium) and at a smaller dosage (100 micrograms). And sure enough my energy level increased (to a steady level), the angina pains I was experiencing began to subside (and gone in about a month), as well as the rest of the symptoms I was experiencing. So, it began to look like smooth sailing ... that is, until the drug companies began to discontinue it a month or two later. And I eventually wound up going to the doctor because I couldn't find a suitable replacement.

I found some interesting information about GTF Chromium and other forms of chromium. Is your blood sugar okay now or haven't you had it checked? Were you ever told that you have Type II diabetes?

I probably shouldn't be asking about your medical history but since you were discussing your experience with chromium, I thought it was OK since you were talking about some of your symptoms anyway. Perhaps I shouldn't have asked additional questions or save it for a PM.

http://www.mendosa.com/chromium.htm
 
Last edited:
Did you know that there have been lots of studies done on the use of Chromium and diabetes?
I have never had need to know this. But now that you mention it, I go to the databases, and find the peer-reviewed journal Diabetes Care has a number of articles on it. Lemme just give you some of the titles:
Chromium Treatment Has No Effect in Patients With Poorly Controlled, Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes in an Obese Western Population: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Chromium Supplementation Does Not Improve Glucose Tolerance, Insulin Sensitivity, or Lipid Profile: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Trial of Supplementation in Subjects With Impaired Glucose Tolerance.
Chromium Supplementation Does Not Improve Glucose Tolerance, Insulin Sensitivity, or Lipid Profile: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Trial of Supplementation in Subjects With Impaired Glucose Tolerance.
Or, a different journal, also peer-reviewed, though, Communicating Food for Health: for this one, you get both the title and the very brief abstract.
Chromium supplements don't work.

While chromium is an essential mineral, deficiency is a rare occurrence in the U.S. Claims that chromium supplements can build muscle, prevent or treat diabetes or aid weight loss are unfounded.

There were some positive articles, too, but even those warned of untested safe dosage levels...

My point is...information is out there about these treatments, and it is in your best interest to make the effort to educate yourself. It is, after all, your life.
 
I found that only the GTF Chromium worked, as opposed to say, Chromium Picolinate which, many of these studies seem to tout. GTF Chromium is organically bound in brewer's yeast, Chromium Picolinate is not. This seems to be the active ingredient. In fact I can take Selenium bound in yeast (called Selenomax) without taking the Chromium and achieve the same results. Whereas if I take either one without the yeast or, if I take brewer's yeast by itself, still no results. So, not just any Chromium supplement will work.
 
Last edited:
I found that only the GTF Chromium worked, as opposed to say, Chromium Picolinate which, many of these studies seem to tout. GTF Chromium is organically bound in brewer's yeast, Chromium Picolinate is not. This seems to be the active ingredient. In fact I can take Selenium bound in yeast (or Selenomax) without taking the Chromium and achieve the same results. Whereas if I take either one without the yeast or, if I took brewer's yeast by itself, still no results. So, not just any Chromium supplement will work.

Actually, you've touched on the subject of GTF Chromium in a thread at Dionysus (archived):

See Post #12
http://archives.dionysus.org/showthread8e70.html?t=68

Just a little note: When you click on page 2 of this thread, it goes nowhere. You can get to it from the main page of the Roy Masters forum showing all the other threads (click on that page 2 and you'll be able to view it).

Goozleberry told you to "get this through your chromium cranium." She is witty, I must admit. :D

See Reply #35 (or post)
http://archives.dionysus.org/showthread2e80.html?t=250&page=2&pp=20
 
Last edited:
I found some interesting information about GTF Chromium and other forms of chromium. Is your blood sugar okay now or haven't you had it checked? Were you ever told that you have Type II diabetes?
As I said earlier, when I went to the doctor nine years ago (when I was really having problems), he couldn't find anything wrong with me.
 
I found that only the GTF Chromium worked, as opposed to say, Chromium Picolinate which, many of these studies seem to tout. GTF Chromium is organically bound in brewer's yeast, Chromium Picolinate is not. This seems to be the active ingredient. In fact I can take Selenium bound in yeast (called Selenomax) without taking the Chromium and achieve the same results. Whereas if I take either one without the yeast or, if I take brewer's yeast by itself, still no results. So, not just any Chromium supplement will work.
You are attempting to weigh the experience of one person in a non-blinded, non-controlled experience, where spontaneous remission cannot be discounted, against multiple double-blind properly controlled studies.

If you are smart enough to read those abstracts, you should be smart enough to understand why you should pay attention to them.
 
As I said earlier, when I went to the doctor nine years ago (when I was really having problems), he couldn't find anything wrong with me.
So...the "problem" that chromium is fixing is one that is self-diagnosed. I suppose that makes it a lot easier to cure, if you are the only one saying whether there is a problem or not.

Iacchus, the only think that makes me think it is not all in your head is that surely somebody would have noticed the rattle.
 
This is one reason why I don't have kids. Because how can you justify bringing them into a world which you don't believe in? Of course there was this girl I was mad about way back when, and that's one of the only things I could think about but, that's another story. I honestly can't see something like that happening again.

Yes--please don't have children and bring people into this world that you don't believe in.

I, personally, could not have children knowing that there was the potential that they could burn in hell for Eternity. So, Icchus, do you think Andrea Yate's ensured her children's blissful eternity by killing them before they could be tempted by the evil in this world? (Atheists could entice them into biting from the tree of knowledge or give them blood transfusions to save their lives without regard to their "souls")--She already thought she was doomed to hell because she didn't discipline her children correctly--she attempted to spare them the same fate.

I strongly encourage birth control among the uneducated and unintelligent. Unfortunately, it is the intelligent and educated who have the fewest children. I find this world fascinating (thanks to science)--and raising a brood of children would take cut into my pursuit of knowledge (plus I might have to convince myself that the afterlife would be better to make this one more tolerable.)
 
I, personally, could not have children knowing that there was the potential that they could burn in hell for Eternity. So, Icchus, do you think Andrea Yate's ensured her children's blissful eternity by killing them before they could be tempted by the evil in this world? (Atheists could entice them into biting from the tree of knowledge or give them blood transfusions to save their lives without regard to their "souls")--She already thought she was doomed to hell because she didn't discipline her children correctly--she attempted to spare them the same fate.
As I understand, those who die as little children are automatically recieved into heaven. But, I guess I'm spared that option because I don't plan on having any kids. And no, not because anyone won't have me ... albeit I am getting a bit too old.
 
Well, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it! ;)
That's you in a nutshell.

Interesting...you are presented with evidence that actually applies to your real-life health, and rather than accept this evidence, which would be in your own best interest, you stick to your story.

Is your fantasy world more important than your health? This is not an idle question, Iacchus. This is one of those real, important, vital questions. The kind that, once in a while, can save your life. Do you really, honestly, truly believe that this life is nothing? Because you really have the chance to act on that belief.

I can't help but hope you are a liar.
 
That's you in a nutshell.

Interesting...you are presented with evidence that actually applies to your real-life health, and rather than accept this evidence, which would be in your own best interest, you stick to your story.
This was with respect to the notion of the soul which, is what the link Hardenberg had referred to. It's the same difference really, though.
 
No surprise there--you have said only about 5 things in your entire time here. You just repeat them an awful lot.
Well, at least I don't suggest the entire thing is meaningless which, is about all I keep hearing from you. ;)
 
Well, at least I don't suggest the entire thing is meaningless which, is about all I keep hearing from you. ;)
No, you don't suggest it is meaningless...you simply have no way of demonstrating that it has meaning. And for the record, "meaningless" is your own strawman. i have never suggested such a thing. If we give meaning, there is meaning. There need be no god to give meaning. If you cannot accept that as meaning, that is your problem. For all your swedenborgian golden-paved streets of heaven, your imagination is a tiny and impotent thing.

Dreams...the children of an idle brain, Begot of nothing but vain fantasy...
 
No, you don't suggest it is meaningless...you simply have no way of demonstrating that it has meaning. And for the record, "meaningless" is your own strawman.
I look around me and all I see is structure. From the magnificence in the cloud formation ahead, to the robin which just pooped in the bark dust and started scratching for worms. It didn't get here by itself.

i have never suggested such a thing. If we give meaning, there is meaning. There need be no god to give meaning. If you cannot accept that as meaning, that is your problem. For all your swedenborgian golden-paved streets of heaven, your imagination is a tiny and impotent thing.

Dreams...the children of an idle brain, Begot of nothing but vain fantasy...
Yes, and whatever I say of course is meaningless.
 
I look around me and all I see is structure. From the magnificence in the cloud formation ahead, to the robin which just pooped in the bark dust and started scratching for worms. It didn't get here by itself.
Well...when you intentionally remain ignorant, it is much easier to be amazed by things you do not understand. You see structure because you assume structure to begin with. Circular reasoning is your reasoning of choice, after all.
Yes, and whatever I say of course is meaningless.
Of course? I doubt it. I am sure it is just coincidental that you have as yet said nothing of meaning.
 
See what I mean? ;)

I have to agree with Mercutio, Icchaus--

Why come to a skeptic forum if you need to believe a certain way for your life to have meaning? Of course you see design (check out the ebola virus under a microscope)-- but people also see the virgin mary in cheese sandwhiches and a face on Mars. They find "secret meaning" in books and poetry. They experience something they don't understand and lable it with meaning ("everything has a purpose", "scientists haven't explained it fully so it must be god", "forces of evil made me lascivious", "I saw someone who wasn't there--it must be a ghost"; etc.). It's actually sort of a charming part of our species, I think--but that doesn't mean it's the truth.

I feel bad that you need to believe a certain way to find meaning and joy in life--but your need and desire for a particular brand or type of meaning is sad. It seems like you are trying to convince others of notions you can't pin down so that you can convince yourself and continue to receive whatever joy, hope, "meaning", and purpose you derive from your beliefs.

That's fine, but if you want agreement--visit a woo forum. We live in a woo world; I'm sure you can find plenty of those who will prop up your beliefs and find "meaning" in the stuff we feel is ethereal, banal, and useless.

You can continue to pretend that those who don't believe like you have meaningless lives and that you'll live happily ever after for believing in magic.

(but if it's all too much to bear, try on the skeptical cloak for a day or two--you might find it liberating--even meaningful and wonderous.) I find much more satisfaction in my non-woo life--I outgrew the woo, I guess.

Trust your invisible soul friends, gods, etc. to fight their own battles. You've done your best. If there are brownie points for believing, I will write a letter to your personal savior swearing that you've believed with ferverance and tried to get us naysayers to see the light. We remain firmly entrenched in the reality based community despite your best efforts.
 

Back
Top Bottom