On Sunday, June 9, search and rescue teams confirmed the death of Dr. Michael Mosley (British doctor), who had popularized Intermittent Fasting in 2012, and is in the news these days. Dr. Mosley had been diagnosed with diabetes and had experimented with Intermittent Fasting as a cure and having succeeded, proceeded to call the results as a remission and not a cure or a reversal. See the links to the resources for more information.
He died apparently under unnatural circumstances and presumably not due to diabetes. The focus of this post is to discuss his philosophy, not his unfortunate accident, but the above commentary is necessary for context.
The news prompted me to think in the same mindset of the doctor. His insistence of calling asymptomatic diabetes type 2 as a remission instead of as a reversal struck a chord with me. Sustained Intermittent Fasting can in time result in normal test results indicating the absence of diabetes. Yet if one fell back into old habits and ways, diabetes can return. Hence the doctor 's choice of words. Makes sense, doesn't it?
Why is the same goal and choice of words not a desire in the Parkinson's community? This is reflective of the research and doctor and patient population of Parkinson's patients where our only desire is the full reversal or cure for Parkinson's. Why is remission not a satisfactory, intermediate goal, rather than reversal being the ever elusive goal which is frankly akin to expecting manna from the heavens?
For added context, diabetes is linked to the death of beta cells in the pancreas. Parkinson's is linked to death of neurons in the substantia nigra.
Please chime in
Related links :
abc.net.au/news/2024-06-08/...