Insulin (Pharmaceutical)

Natural insulin produced by a healthy pancreas converts dietary sugar into a form of glycogen that the body can store and properly utilize. The pancreas under natural conditions produces multiple varieties of insulin, and the entire conversion process, when performed by the body's own insulin, results in a clean, biologically integrated glycogen that the nervous system and other tissues can use without residual harm.

Pharmaceutical insulin, whether described as "natural" from porcine (pig) sources or as a fully synthetic production, is processed through industrial chemical methods that fundamentally alter its biological character. Aajonus stated plainly that even porcine-sourced insulin becomes a chemical through the way it is processed. The result is that when pharmaceutical insulin converts dietary sugar into glycogen, the glycogen produced is not a properly formed, biologically complete substance. It is only utilized by a small percentage of the body's processes and is, in his words, "highly acidic" or "acrid." This poorly processed glycogen then stores in the body, particularly concentrating in the extremities, where it accumulates over years and decades.

Aajonus made the additional point that the body produces multiple distinct varieties of insulin, as was confirmed in his own glucose tolerance testing where medical staff identified not only the standard known insulin varieties but additional ones they had not previously encountered. Pharmaceutical insulin provides none of this variety. It is a single, chemically derived substance that performs a crude approximation of one aspect of a complex biological process.

---

The most severe long-term consequence Aajonus attributed to pharmaceutical insulin use was progressive tissue death leading to amputation of toes, feet, lower legs, thighs, and eventually other extremities. He described this sequence in detail across multiple lectures.

When pharmaceutical insulin converts sugar into glycogen, the resulting glycogen is acrid and highly acidic. This acidic glycogen does not remain circulating but stores in the tissues of the body, concentrating in the legs and limbs because diabetics inject insulin directly into the stomach or thighs, bypassing the digestive tract entirely, introducing chemical poisons straight into the circulatory system without any filtering by digestion. Over years of daily injections, one to three times per day, these chemicals accumulate in the legs and limbs specifically.

The stored acidic glycogen then begins dissolving the surrounding living cells. As live cells are destroyed, the body produces mold organisms to break down the dead toxic tissue, which manifests as gangrene. Aajonus specifically reframed the gangrene as the body's response to the destruction, not the primary cause of it: "The gangrene's trying to help you. What has poisoned you is that toxic glycogen from the toxic insulin." The conventional medical response is then amputation, beginning with a toe, then the foot, then to the knee, then to the thigh, and in severe cases eventually extending to fingers, ears, and nose. Aajonus stated he had personally observed many diabetics go through this full progression, including multiple cousins who developed diabetes by age eight.

He made a stark comparative claim: a person diagnosed with diabetes who refuses pharmaceutical insulin never develops gangrene and never undergoes amputation. The worst outcome for an untreated diabetic who produces no insulin at all is, in his description, passing out and going into a brief seizure lasting at most two minutes, usually thirty seconds, followed by recovery. This, he said, is the worst symptom such a person will ever experience in their entire life. Once pharmaceutical insulin is introduced, the danger of progressive limb loss becomes real. He stated this directly: "Once you take the insulin, you're in danger. Deathly, deformed danger of losing your legs."

The timeline for this deterioration was described as approximately twenty-seven to thirty years of insulin use before gangrene and amputations typically begin. He noted that many long-term insulin users have been taking injections for twenty-seven to thirty-two years before these consequences manifest, which is precisely the population he described successfully transitioning off insulin in his practice.

---

Aajonus described pharmaceutical insulin as chemically addictive. He worked with a twelve-year-old boy who had been placed on insulin, and when the child began vomiting profusely for twenty-four hours, the mother administered insulin, which did not resolve the situation because the child's actual problem was dehydration, not diabetic crisis. The child was hospitalized and given intravenous water, which resolved the acute episode.

What prompted Aajonus's deeper investigation was that the child's reaction to withdrawal from insulin was, in his description, indistinguishable from heroin withdrawal. He ordered samples of the two insulin formulations the boy had been taking in order to analyze what ingredients had been added to produce that specific withdrawal profile. His conclusion was that pharmaceutical insulin manufacturers had deliberately included substances creating addiction and a dehydration effect, ensuring that patients who attempted to stop taking insulin would experience severe reactions that would drive them back to continued use.

He framed this as a deliberate design feature of the pharmaceutical product rather than an incidental side effect. Patients who experience this withdrawal reaction are almost certain to return to insulin, re-enter the medical system, and continue paying for the medication indefinitely.

---

Aajonus consistently stated across his lectures that the large majority of people he encountered who had been diagnosed as diabetic and placed on insulin had never been genuinely diabetic. His assessments of this proportion varied somewhat across different talks but were consistently very high.

In several lectures he stated that 85% of the diabetics who came to him should never have been on insulin to begin with, that their pancreases were completely functional. In another passage he stated that 80% of diabetics he sees are not even diabetic. In one passage he said "I would say 90% of all the diabetics that I've seen were not even diabetic. The pancreases were completely working." He also stated that 85% of people diagnosed as diabetic are not truly diabetic, with nearly all type 2 diabetics in this category.

The mechanism by which healthy people end up on lifetime insulin was described as follows. A person eats processed carbohydrates or refined sugars, which cause abnormal blood sugar fluctuations that have nothing to do with the pancreas's functional capacity. They present for a blood glucose test on a day when the pancreas happens to be in a detoxification cycle or otherwise temporarily underperforming. The test shows elevated blood sugar. Rather than watching the situation for a period of two years to establish a pattern, the doctor immediately prescribes insulin. The patient begins injecting daily and never learns that the original test result was transient.

Aajonus described people who had been on insulin for twenty-five or thirty years on the basis of what was, in his assessment, a false positive test result, who then came to him, were placed on a proper diet, weaned off insulin, and functioned normally with no difficulty. He described this as a "big racket" that the drug industry depends on.

He also pointed out that a high blood sugar reading alone does not constitute diabetes. True diabetes, in his framework, means the pancreas is not producing insulin or is producing insulin that cannot function. A person who simply has a high blood sugar level on a given test day, without the actual symptoms of diabetes, being unable to get out of bed, inability to think clearly, complete absence of energy, labored breathing, is not diabetic regardless of what the test shows. He stated explicitly: "A blood sugar level has nothing to do with the pancreas. It has to do with the way you eat."

He observed people with blood sugar readings of 300 to 320 who were completely asymptomatic and functioning normally, and described these as individuals the pharmaceutical system would place on insulin for life on the basis of numbers alone.

He also clarified that not everyone on insulin was placed on it unnecessarily. He stated "15% should never have continued on insulin. They've been on for a short period, and they've been on a good diet." This implies that a small fraction genuinely needed some intervention initially before dietary correction could take effect, but even this group should not have remained on insulin long-term.

---

Aajonus returned repeatedly across his lectures to the financial scale of pharmaceutical insulin revenue as the explanatory context for why insulin is prescribed so broadly and why no cure for diabetes is officially recognized or promoted.

His figures varied somewhat across different talks, which he presented as different points in time with changing industry data, but the framework was consistent. Monthly costs per diagnosed diabetic taking insulin were described at $1,200, $1,300, $1,400, $1,500, $1,600, $1,700, or $1,800, depending on the lecture. Severe diabetics were at the higher end, milder cases at the lower end. He also described some cases at $1,300 to $1,700 per week for the most severe patients. The diagnosed diabetic population in the United States he cited variously as 30 million, 50 million, 53 million, 58 million, 60 million, 63 million, or 86 million depending on the lecture, with the variation reflecting both different time periods and a distinction between official diagnosed figures and his own estimate of actual consumption. He said the pharmaceutical industry claims 53 million while the actual number consuming insulin-related medications is closer to 86 million.

Multiplying even the more conservative figures produces, in his words, "an astounding amount" and "trillions of dollars" from insulin alone as a single drug category. He described this as second in revenue only to Viagra among pharmaceutical products, and noted that both of those are exceeded by vaccines, which he described as mandatory and therefore guaranteed revenue.

He extended the financial calculation to include the downstream consequences of insulin use. Each amputation generated approximately $10,000 in surgical fees. Because long-term insulin users reliably develop gangrene and require sequential amputations, toe by toe, foot, lower leg, upper leg, the amputation revenue stream extends for years and adds substantially to the total revenue generated per diabetic patient. He described this entire sequence, from insulin prescription through progressive amputation, as an engineered financial system rather than medical misfortune.

One third of diabetics on insulin were described as being on Medicare, meaning the general public was paying for this system through taxation.

---

Aajonus described beginning pharmaceutical insulin injections at age fifteen and a half when he developed juvenile type 1 diabetes, meaning his pancreas did not produce insulin. He described spending $650 per month on insulin during the 1960s, which he noted as a substantial sum for that period. He continued injecting insulin until age twenty-two.

At age twenty-two, he encountered raw milk and began drinking it. He stopped insulin cold turkey, not because he had a plan or understood it as a cure, but because, as he described it, he simply did not want it anymore. He did not experience the extended recovery one might expect from years of chemical dependence, and he described his pancreatic function as subsequently rebuilding over years through his raw food diet.

Later in his adult life, he submitted to a formal glucose tolerance test as part of a medical study, the first time he had consumed sugar since approximately 1972 or 1973. He described the experience of ingesting the glucose as intensely uncomfortable, causing shaking and wired nervous energy, because his system had not processed refined sugar in so long. Blood was drawn every thirty minutes throughout the test.

The standard expectation in this test is that blood sugar rises sharply after glucose ingestion, reaching levels of 324 to 360 or higher, then gradually decreases over several hours, stopping at approximately 102 to 104. His results were different. His blood sugar was driven down to 52, 54, or 57 (he described this result slightly differently in different lectures, the range was consistently in the low to mid-50s), a level the medical staff said they had never previously observed. The standard lowest observed result was described as 96. His pancreas produced not only all the standard insulin varieties but additional varieties not previously encountered. The attending physician told him he had the healthiest pancreas they had ever seen, and that it was also smaller than any pancreas they had seen, consistent with his view that proper diet keeps the pancreas compact rather than swollen from carbohydrate processing.

He described the medical staff as incredulous given his documented history as a juvenile diabetic, and noted that conventional medicine holds that type 1 diabetes is irreversible and requires lifetime insulin. He presented his own case as direct disproof of this position.

His personal insulin use was also described as contributing to the damage he accumulated throughout his teenage years. By age sixteen he was taking amphetamines, smoking heavily, and drinking alcohol, all of which he described as attempts to manage energy and sleep around the metabolic disruption caused by insulin and poor diet. The insulin was part of a cascade of pharmaceutical and stimulant dependencies that he ultimately resolved through dietary change rather than continued pharmaceutical management.

---

Aajonus was careful to state that he did not tell people to simply stop taking insulin. He distinguished between people who genuinely had true diabetic symptoms and people who had been placed on insulin based solely on blood sugar measurements without corresponding functional impairment.

For a person who could not get out of bed, could not breathe adequately, could not think clearly, and had genuine inability to function, he acknowledged that insulin might be necessary as a temporary support while the body rebuilt its pancreatic capacity. His position was not that insulin is useless in every case but that it should be judged against functional symptoms, not blood sugar numbers.

For people who had been taking insulin for at least two years, the protocol described in his written work specified weaning off insulin gradually over a long period, up to two years, waiting until the pancreas had rebuilt enough function to sustain the person without pharmaceutical support. He provided a specific clinical indicator for when to reduce insulin dosage: when an insulin-taker began experiencing itching of the skin, that was the signal to decrease insulin intake.

He described successfully helping over 120 diabetics in his practice, of whom only two still took any insulin at all by the time they were working with him, and those two were taking only three units per day "just in case" rather than as a medical necessity. Approximately 20% of his diabetic clients had been taking insulin for twenty-seven to thirty-two years before transitioning off it.

The dietary supports he described for rebuilding the pancreas during the weaning process included raw milk, large quantities of unheated honey (approximately three-quarters cup daily, consumed in small amounts throughout the day), raw fish particularly tuna and salmon combined with raw beef at least once weekly to rebuild the nerves of the pancreas, avocado and other raw fat combined with raw fresh unripe fruit and unheated honey when pronounced energy decreases occurred, and avoiding all cooked sugars and all pasteurized juices. He specified that fat should be eaten every time something sweet was consumed during this transitional period.

For people with severely impaired pancreases, he acknowledged that raw milk alone was not sufficient and that meat and pancreatic tissue from animals were required to support regeneration.

---

In his written material, Aajonus described unheated honey as capable of replacing the functions of insulin that are missing in the blood while simultaneously healing the pancreas and encouraging its regenerative functions. The recommended amount was approximately three-quarters cup throughout each day, taken in distributed amounts rather than all at once.

He also described inulin, the natural substance found in Jerusalem artichokes and some yams, as an insulin-like substance that the body could use in the interim. He recommended juicing Jerusalem artichokes and yams and mixing the juice with carrot and other juices for people in whom the emotional and neurological effects of low insulin were prominent, noting that natural inulin entering the system in juice form was more effective for severely affected individuals than eating these foods whole. He did not specify a single fixed dose but said he preferred not to introduce it abruptly, preferring to build the amount gradually according to the individual's response.

For managing hypoglycemia and excess insulin effects, he described a combination protocol using cooked starch, raw fat, and fresh fruit taken together. The cooked starch would bind with excess insulin, the raw fat would bind with that complex and carry it to the bowels for elimination, and the raw sugar from the fresh fruit would be time-released because it attaches to fats, preventing a sudden blood sugar spike. This combination kept blood sugar at a stable level and served as a practical remedy for people continuing to consume sweets during the dietary transition.

---

Aajonus invoked Hippocrates repeatedly as the evidence that diabetes is curable and that the pharmaceutical framework of lifetime insulin dependency is a departure from known medicine, not its continuation. He described Hippocrates as having cured every case of diabetes, including juvenile type 1, by placing patients on an exclusive raw milk diet for six to ten weeks, with nothing else allowed. He stated this worked for 100% of cases in England and described Hippocrates as having achieved these results routinely.

He noted that modern raw milk does not produce this result as reliably because refrigeration destroys or permanently inactivates growth hormones in milk once it is chilled below 72 degrees, hormones that cannot be reactivated by warming. For this reason, patients with severely impaired pancreases now require meat and animal pancreatic tissue in addition to raw milk, and he said some of his own patients needed this expanded support to achieve what a raw milk diet alone accomplished in Hippocrates's era. Even so, he described being able to help most people cure their diabetes on a raw milk diet and reported that none of his over 120 diabetic clients remained diabetic.

He described the medical profession's use of Hippocrates as their icon while ignoring his actual methods as a deliberate tactic to create false credibility. Hippocrates's actual position, "let food be your medicine and medicine be your food," stands in direct contradiction to pharmaceutical insulin as a lifetime intervention, yet the medical establishment claims his legacy while practicing the opposite of what he demonstrated.

---

Aajonus specifically noted that pharmaceutical insulin is injected directly into the body, entering the bloodstream without passing through the digestive tract. This distinguishes its toxicity profile from orally consumed substances. When something is ingested, the digestive system provides some filtering and processing that reduces direct chemical damage to tissues. Injection bypasses all of this, delivering chemical compounds directly into circulation and into the tissues at the injection site.

Diabetics who inject one to three times daily are, in his description, "constantly injecting chemical poisons all the time without going through the digestive tract, damaging their system." Over years, these chemicals accumulate specifically in the legs and thighs, the areas where injections are typically made, which he identified as the reason gangrene develops preferentially in the extremities rather than elsewhere in the body.

He distinguished this from the general principle that pharmaceutical compounds are damaging, noting that the direct injection route makes the damage more severe and more targeted than it would be from an oral pharmaceutical.

---

Aajonus framed the glucose tolerance test and blood sugar monitoring as pharmaceutical sales mechanisms rather than genuine diagnostic tools. His specific criticisms were several.

First, a single or even a double elevated blood sugar reading on consecutive test days is meaningless as a lifetime diagnosis, because any person eating processed carbohydrates or refined sugars will show elevated blood sugar periodically, and a pancreas that is detoxifying or temporarily under stress will show reduced function on that day without being permanently impaired. He said the correct diagnostic approach, which no doctor follows, would be to observe the pattern over a two-year period before concluding that diabetes is present.

Second, the threshold at which insulin is prescribed is set arbitrarily low. He described doctors prescribing insulin whenever blood sugar exceeds 120, with instructions to take additional units when it reaches 130, without any consideration of whether the person has functional symptoms.

Third, blood sugar numbers do not correlate with functional impairment in the way the pharmaceutical framework implies. He described patients with blood sugar readings of 300 to 320 who were asymptomatic and fully functional, and he stated explicitly that these individuals are not diabetic regardless of their numbers. The only valid measure of a blood sugar problem is functional: if a person literally cannot stand after lying or sitting, becomes extremely disoriented even after eating, and breathing represents the entirety of their energy output, there is a genuine insulin-related problem. If a person can get out of bed after a night's sleep, there is no insulin or glycogen problem, regardless of measured blood sugar levels.

He described the fasting insulin test specifically as "simply another trap to get people addicted to insulin or other drugs."

He also noted that his own blood sugar is high much of the time, and that he was not diabetic, suggesting that his own body maintained elevated sugar levels during detoxification processes in which old stored toxic sugars were being released, and that these elevated readings would result in a diabetes diagnosis if he were tested by conventional medicine.

---