The deeper meaning of PKD. Be careful, very hard!

The deeper meaning of PKD. Be careful, very hard!

The deeper meaning of PKD. Be careful, very hard!



People of the Arctic regions of Canada and Greenland are undergoing a gradual assimilation to “civilised” society. They buy food in supermarkets, and hardly anything remains of their traditional lifestyle. By contrast, certain peoples of Northern Russia are experiencing a population growth, and were able to preserve their traditional ways of life.

In 30 years, the population of the Nenets has grown from 29,000 to 44,000.

Reindeer meat, generally consumed fresh and raw, is the most important part of their diet. The Nenets like reindeer kidney and liver; fresh reindeer blood is also very popular. It may be difficult to imagine, but children of 4 or 5 years drink fresh blood from processed reindeer meat from their mugs like we used to drink cocoa when we were children. Obviously, the Nenets also like reindeer fat, and attach special importance to some parts of the antlers of young reindeer. The Nenets have never consumed vegetables, fruits or milk; they cover their needs for vitamins entirely from food of animal origin. In the summer months, they often eat fish (mostly raw).

Watch the video below to learn more about the traditional diet of a Nenets family.

4-year long progression-free and symptom-free survival of a patient with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme

4-year long progression-free and symptom-free survival of a patient with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme

Samizdat of Medical Science

Coffee consumption from the perspective of toxicology and nutrition. Let us see the facts.

Coffee consumption from the perspective of toxicology and nutrition. Let us see the facts.

Coffee consumption from the perspective of toxicology and nutrition. Let us see the facts.

Csaba Tóth, Zsófia Clemens


Coffee consumption from the perspective of toxicology and nutrition. Let us see the facts.

There are many recreational drugs, but while alcohol, tobacco, carbohydrates, and, above all, narcotics and intoxicants are officially recognised as having a detrimental effect on human health, coffee enjoys unwaning popularity. Coffee smells pleasant, and it always accompanies social events and simple home meals alike. Some drink one coffee a day, others several mugs – and this does not necessarily depend on national culture. The media loves the topic of coffee; an online article on coffee is bound to attract many readers and many clicks. But this article is not meant to be a clickbait.

So if you are interested in the origin, cultivation and processing of the coffee plant or in consumer habits, I recommend a Google search. This article focusses exclusively on the impact of coffee on human health, and puts gastronomic considerations aside. Now, let us look at the facts. These facts differ from what we would like to hear to justify that our addiction is good. They also differ from what is in the interest of coffee traders.

You can read or hear contradictory statements about coffee on the very same day or in the very same media. In the morning, you are told that three coffees improve memory. In the evening, you hear that you must be careful because coffee consumption contributes to the development of dementia. My favourite “fact” is that, according to Swedish researchers, there is a correlation between female breast size and coffee consumption; more specifically, three coffees a day shrink the breasts, but reduce the risk of cancer. This is bad news for women who then must choose between breast size and good memory, but at least they can avoid breast cancer. But let us be serious.

From a botanical perspective, coffee is not a bean. Apparently, the term “bean” was applied in the early days, but coffee, in fact, is a fruit. It is the seeds of the fruits that are processed and then used as a recreational product.

To see the impact of coffee on human health, we must approach the issue from the perspective of toxicology. Of course, the first factor to examine is always caffeine. Caffeine is a large chemical molecule synthesised by the plant to protect the fruit from being damaged prematurely by insects and herbivores. Just like tea bush, the coffee plant contains caffeine and theobromine (the penultimate metabolite of caffeine synthesis). Incidentally, tea contains twice as much caffeine as coffee does. Obviously, these substances are also found in chocolate and cocoa. This means that caffeine is a poison which can potentially be deadly to insects; what is more, in some mammals theobromine causes deadly poisoning. Caffeine is an insecticide produced by the coffee plant as a form of self-protection.

Caffeine has been studied extensively; the results are diverse. I do not want to bore the reader with details of contradictory scientific studies on coffee. However, there are two major problems with these studies.

  1. The test of a nutrient will bring reliable and usable results only when studied in the context of a healthy diet. It will not suffice to analyse coffee consumption habits alone and then to associate them with a symptom or physiological event. Persons on the average Western diet consumes, on a daily basis, thousands of substances that affect their physiological processes. These substances, both individually and in combination, have an impact on the biochemical functioning of the human organism.
  2. When a study focusses on caffeine alone, it will fail to give information on other substances contained in coffee – and there are plenty of them. More than 800 affecting only the aroma have been identified so far. There are approximately 200 substances which affect the taste. All these substances will have an effect on coffee drinkers.

Although we are still at the beginning of our article, we can safely conclude that currently there is no available medical study that examines the effect of coffee reliably, and, therefore, the conclusions of relevant studies are not valid. This is why there are many contradictory statements and conclusions. These studies and their practical implications should be discarded right away.

As for substances in coffee other than caffeine, most of them change during preparation: their structure changes under the influence of heat. Caffeine, being a thermostable molecule, is an exception. It is not destroyed until the coffee beans are charred and burnt. Its molecular structure does not change when the beverage is prepared. The aroma and taste of the beverage are results of the change of other molecules, such as those which give the smell of soil and gasoline (plus, as I have mention, at least 788 more).


Volatile components identified in a type of coffee after roasting: hydrocarbons, pyrroles, nitrogen compounds (non-heterocyclic), alcohols, benzopyrroles, sulphur compounds (non-heterocyclic), aldehydes, pyrazines, phenols, ketones, benzopyrazines, furans, acids, pyridines, benzofurans, esters, benzopyridines, pyrans, ethers, tiophenes, pyrons, acetates, benzotiophenes, lactones, oxazoles, thiazoles, anhydrides, benzoxazoles, benzothiazoles, Total)


Coffee also contains various acids. With brewing, acids may break down into smaller molecules; still, plenty of them are left.

Because of the above, the details of roasting, temperature, pressure and brewing time are very important. It is possible to make disgusting coffee drinks even from the best ingredients.

The effects of caffeine are easy to sum up. Caffeine increases heart rate, and slightly increases blood pressure (only by 3–5 mmHg). It increases the cardiac output and diuresis (that is, the amount of urine), and stimulates the central nervous system. As for the latter, let us put it this way: caffeine blocks inhibitory mechanisms so that stimulatory mechanisms start to predominate, which means that caffeine clearly has an impact on the functioning of neurotransmitters. This is due to the fact that its chemical structure is similar to that of a transmitter called adenosine, and, therefore, it can bind to cells where adenosine would bind.

Most questions about coffee pertain to its impact on blood pressure. Is it advisable to drink coffee if one has high blood pressure? Does coffee increase blood pressure differently? It is impossible to say why it is retained in our collective consciousness and why medicine has left the previous piece of information as a heritage to us, but we can now safely say that coffee (more specifically, caffeine) increases the diameter of most blood vessels, and, therefore, lowers blood pressure. Coffee has nothing to do with the development of or maintaining high blood pressure. Even a few cups of coffee will not raise the blood pressure.

Another common statement is that coffee causes heartburn. Yet, in fact, relevant studies failed to take into account subjects’ diet.

Heartburn and reflux are not caused by coffee, but by cereals, dairy products and other carbohydrates consumed at the same time, such as the large amount of sugar or honey added to the coffee drink. It has been observed for nearly 10 years that coffee drinkers on a paleo-ketogenic diet do not develop reflux.

At this point, it is to be noted that most scientific publications on coffee are based on questionnaires, and, most often, on the subjective opinion of respondents. No measurements or physical examinations are conducted to substantiate the findings. This fact, coupled with the criticism discussed above, also leads to the conclusion that none of the studies are to be considered valid; not to mention that it is practically impossible to make two identical coffee drinks in which chemicals are present in the exactly same combination.

The chemical composition of coffee:

  • sugar, mainly polysaccharides
  • alkaloids
  • trigonellines
  • nicotinic acid
  • amino acids/proteins
  • caffeine
  • theobromine
  • theophylline,
  • carboxylic acid and other acids
  • volatile components (currently, approximately 800 of them are known; all of them can be present at the same time). See the Figure above.
  • vegetable oils

Evidently, when speaking about coffee, the products of a smaller chemical plant are listed. It is also easy to see that such substances do have an effect on the human organism.

Now, let us discuss the factors that basically determine whether coffee consumption is healthy or not.

As shown by the author’s nearly 10 years of experience in nutrition intervention, patients on a paleo-ketogenic diet (i.e. a meat/fat-based diet) often have complaints that cease once they quit coffee. Such complaints include fatigue, tightness in the throat, numbness, cramps in the calves, muscle ache, changes in vision, eczema on the scalp and back of the hands, low back pain, swelling of the face, papular rash on the back (autoimmune nodules) diarrhoea, etc. The cause of low back pain and muscle pain is rhabdomyolysis, or the disintegration of muscle cells due to an autoimmune process. This is the most sever effect of coffee.

All these complaints are clearly linked to coffee consumption. Obviously, they are not necessarily specific.

The substances in coffee, even when consumed in small amounts, increase the permeability of the natural biological membrane in the gut system, which, in turn, may trigger inflammatory, allergic and autoimmune processes. The resulting inflammation can cause, among others, fatigue. These changes and processes are shown by laboratory tests.

The figure below indicates the results of an intestinal permeability test of a patient conducted in our laboratory. As shown in the figure, intestinal permeation switched back to normal after the patient had quitted coffee. The patient had been on a paleo-ketogenic diet for three years.

The substances in coffee drinks can also inhibit the absorption of certain nutrients, such as iron. Iron deficiency has been identified in a very large number of cases; it has not necessarily resulted in anaemia, but still remains a characteristic manifestation of coffee consumption.

As evidenced by our anamnestic data, among patients with certain diseases the rate of those who consume coffee is very high. In such cases, the consumption of tea, cocoa and chocolate can actually have impacts similar to those of coffee. Such impacts include glioblastoma (one of the fastest-growing tumours), hypothyroidism, enlarged prostate, multiple sclerosis and low back pain.

When it comes to coffee consumption, quantity and frequency obviously matter. It is very difficult to consume the lethal dose: LD50 (i.e. the amount that causes fatal poisoning in 50% of people) is approximately one cup of coffee / kg body weight. Obviously, it is not easy to drink that quantity.

It is recommended that people with autoimmune diseases or tumours quit coffee completely. People who have recovered from their autoimmune disease can experiment with coffee consumption once their intestinal permeation has returned to normal, but they should consume very small amounts, up to one espresso a day. For cancer patients, it is recommended to avoid coffee consumption for life.

Pregnant women are also advised not to drink coffee. The placenta acts as a biological membrane between the mother and the fetus, similarly to the membrane which separates the intestinal cavity from the blood. Coffee has an unfavourable effect on the permeability of the placental membrane similar to its effect on intestinal permeability. This may worsen unpleasant problems during pregnancy. Large amounts of coffee can even cause miscarriages or act as a teratogenic factor. It is better to avoid such risks.

To conclude, from the perspective of medical toxicology, coffee is not healthy. It modifies the functioning of biological membranes, and triggers inflammations, allergies or autoimmune processes. Those who still choose to consume even a small amount of coffee can expect unpleasant symptoms and effects.

Mention must be made of one more thing about coffee: addiction. Unfortunately, coffee (similarly to alcohol and tobacco) causes physical and mental addiction. The addiction can be overcome, but it still can cause weeks of discomfort and put one’s perseverance to a very difficult test. Addiction to caffeine used to be included in the International Classification of Diseases until 2010. When you drink coffee, the number of adenosine receptors on cell membranes grows in your organism. The organism senses that something is taking up the space of adenosine and inhibition is decreasing; in response, it builds new receptors into the membrane. When you quit coffee, the number of receptors suddenly will be too high, and adenosine will overwork, which means that you experience slowness, tiredness and drowsiness. These are the worst symptoms of coffee withdrawal. It is good news that this condition lasts only a few days or, at most, a week or two. Another common symptom of withdrawal is migraine-like headache, which occurs as a result of the narrowing of blood vessels. As they say, addicted persons are weak, but, fortunately, addiction to coffee is easy to overcome physiologically. But it may take a long time, even years, to give up attachment to the bodily movements associated with coffee drinking, to the smell of coffee or to the social aspects of coffee consumption.

As a doctor, I can say only what is evidenced by the facts. Coffee is not healthy. It is not clear as yet how long or in what quantities someone on a healthy diet can consume coffee without having to face negative consequences. So, I suggest that you refrain from coffee consumption, or consume it as a rare treat (black or with honey) only on special occasions, and you should drink only coffee made from real coffee beans with a real coffee maker.


International press conference – A breath of fresh air in diabetes care

International press conference – A breath of fresh air in diabetes care

International press conference – A breath of fresh air in diabetes care



“A modern discovery is a discovery because it goes against all established knowledge. If it doesn’t, it’s just a tiny addition.” Albert Szent-Györgyi (Nobel Prize laureate biochemist)

Diabetes is one of the biggest health and public health problems in the world. Unfortunately, the medical methodology applied in the past decades has not been able to stop the spread of the disease: in Hungary the number of both type 2 and type 1 diabetics is increasing.

At the same time, a new approach spreading worldwide is clearly proving effective. This method is nutrition intervention, the most efficient form of which, according to relevant scientific literature, has been created and implemented by a Hungarian team.

This Hungarian medical research group was the first to achieve the stabilisation and resumption of insulin production in type 1 diabetes patients.
This Hungarian medical research team was the first to achieve the stabilization and resumption of insulin production in type 1 diabetes patients and the first one in publishing a scientific paper in October 2014.

In 2019, French researchers have reached the same scientific result as the Hungarian medical team and published another scientific paper about the topic. The findings: nutrition intervention can stop the autoimmune process of the pancreas in type 1 diabetes. This disease primarily affects children, but the method can also cure type 2 diabetes.

This discovery could give doctors a new tool to treat diabetes, the details of which will be communicated at an international press conference.

Date: November 6, 2019. 11 am
Location: Semmelweis Medical History Museum Library Hall

ICMNI speakers:
• Dr. Csaba Tóth
• Dr. Zsófia Clemens
and other colleagues of the team

International speakers:
• Prof. Dr. Timothy David Noakes, South Africa
• Dr. Ian Lake, UK
• Arjun Panesar, UK

Moderator of discussion:
Balázs Borka

There will be an opportunity to interview Hungarian and foreign doctors and researchers, as well as a foreign and a Hungarian patient. The press conference will be held in English; simultaneous interpretation will be provided. The press conference will be broadcast live.

Follow the event on facebook!

Brilliant scientific success! Type 1 diabetes has been overcome. There is only one question left: will Hungarian or French researchers take credit for this groundbreaking discovery?

Brilliant scientific success! Type 1 diabetes has been overcome. There is only one question left: will Hungarian or French researchers take credit for this groundbreaking discovery?

Brilliant scientific success! Type 1 diabetes has been overcome.

There is only one question left: will Hungarian or French researchers take credit for this groundbreaking discovery?


Before we get started, here is a brief explanation of the title and of its practical implications.


The diet which is radically different from the current recommendations of diabetologists can cure “regular” autoimmune diseases and can be used successfully in type 1 diabetes. It may stop the death of the cells producing insulin in the pancreas, can help maintain self-production of insulin, and may help achieve insulin-free condition if therapy is initiated close to the time of diagnosis.

These findings have been reported by both Hungarian and French researchers. The Hungarian research team is made up of Dr Zsófia Clemens and Dr Csaba Tóth, the doctor-clinicians and researchers of Paleomedicina Hungary (ICMNI-Medical Rehabilitation Center), and the French doctors are based in Dijon University Hospital. Paleomedicina -ICMNI preceded the French team by 5 years. Our team produced three scientific papers on the subject, while the French team published only one; additionally, the French colleagues call their results unprecedented, thus ignoring earlier results of the Hungarian team.


The results suggest that medicine (especially diabetology) has been given a simple, yet more effective tool to cure newly diagnosed diabetics; in most cases, the patients are children or young people.

This discovery may have further positive consequences. It is a known fact that the efficacy of beta cell transplantation in type 1 diabetics has not yet met the expectations. However, in light of these new findings, patients who have been living with type 1 diabetes for a longer period of time may have better chances in getting a beta cell transplant and even become insulin-free thanks to our therapeutic approach. This makes our findings very important not only for newly diagnosed patients but also for all type 1 diabetics.

Let us see the publications:

The French team’s publications:

Bouillet B, Rouland A, Petit JM, Vergès B. A low-carbohydrate high-fat diet initiated promptly after diagnosis provides clinical remission in three patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Metab. Jul 10, 2019

The Hungarian team’s publications:

Tóth C, Clemens Z. Type 1 diabetes mellitus successfully managed with the paleolithic ketogenic diet. Int J Case Rep Images 2014; 5(10):699–703.

Tóth C, Clemens Z. A child with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) successfully treated with the Paleolithic ketogenic diet: A 19-month insulin freedom. Int J Case Rep Images 2015;6(12):752–757.

Clemens, Zsófia and Tóth, Csaba (2019) “Paleolithic ketogenic diet (PKD) in chronic diseases: Clinical and research data,” Journal of Evolution and Health: Vol. 3: Iss. 2, Article 6.




In the scientific world, there is constant interest and sometimes serious debate over who solves a medical problem first, partly because the purpose of a researcher’s life is to discover or answer a question. Recognizing and respecting discoveries is also important because it is a significant pillar of the research community; respect for colleagues and predecessors and for the path they have taken as well as the results they have produced is an important part of scientific behavioral culture.

There are significant and less significant scientific results and discoveries. Obviously, recognition of achievement and innovation is more important when it comes to a major issue; that is a problem which is universally relevant to humanity, or a major discovery which promotes the health of some people. Even more so when it comes to sick children. The subject of this paper is such an important issue.

Sometimes, the priority of a scientific discovery is relatively difficult to determine due to ongoing parallel researches. There is also the issue of giving credit for medical results and its ethical implications, which are difficult to follow up on. We Hungarians are particularly affected. Although it is not widely known, but this is what happened to Albert Szent-Györgyi when the American biochemist Charles Glen King tried to claim credit for Szent-Györgyi’s groundbreaking discovery of vitamin C. However, the investigation of the Patent Office and later the Nobel Prize Committee made it clear that it was Szent-Györgyi’s discovery, and thus he received the Nobel Prize in 1937 instead of King.

The same is true for our case in which a French medical team is trying to claim credit for the groundbreaking result of our medical research team.


We published our first paper in 2014, in which we uniquely propose that the method we use can stop the progress of type 1 diabetes in children, and can maintain or boost their insulin production. No similar paper had been published before our article.

We had presented our results at a Hungarian scientific conference before the first scientific article was published. This was followed by numerous foreign conference proceedings and reports in Europe and the Americas., which is and will continue to be the largest civilian diabetes organization in the world, has repeatedly reported on our work  (e.g. here, here and here), and its founders and representatives have visited our clinic. Several low-carb forums, including the French-language nutrition magazine LaNutition, have reported on our results in type 1 diabetes (here and here). We even came across a statement claiming that we are at least 10 years ahead of everyone, but the discovery is so incredible that it is precisely why it cannot trigger change yet.

Five years later, a French medical team achieved similar results and now try to take credit for this discovery. The five-year gap, especially considering the accelerated flow of information in our age, leaves no doubt about the significance of our research. Half a decade is a very long time in the scientific world and there is no doubt that our team was first to establish this medical method. Now, this does not seem to be clear for everyone.

Figure: The founders of visiting Hungary to learn about our work. Background of a poster detailing the sensational results.


How come the French diabetologists were not informed about our results for five years (even though they were published in a French-language specialist magazine too)? At the same time, researchers from other countries in the United States, Turkey, Brazil, Italy, Germany, South Africa etc. have quoted these articles on a regular basis and we can reasonably assume that our studies are accessible for the research community.

The editors of the magazine Diabetes & Metabolism, which published the French team’s paper, and the diabetes experts who reviewed the article do not seem to have known about the results of the Hungarian medical team either.

We do not suspect intentional silence on the part of our French medical colleagues and we assume that our publications were not deliberately overlooked, although it is undoubtedly a pleasant feeling to be first in the discovery of such magnitude. We know that.

In any case, facts remain facts and error is error. Of course, the latter should be corrected, which is possible as the study is “in-press”, that is, before publication and could be corrected without retracting the article. Of course, we asked both the professional journalist and the authors of the article to correct the error. It has not been done so far and the authors of the French article did not respond; however, the editor-in-chief acknowledged the problem. Will it be corrected before the publication or will we have to ask for a rather unpleasant article retraction due to ethical and legal issues? We will see.


Part of understanding the importance of giving credit for discoveries is that no method or procedure for restoring human health can be patented; this is due to ethical and humanistic reasons. So while an engineer or IT professional can protect his or her own discovery, a doctor cannot. If it had been possible, we would have done it in 2014, because the method could have received much more attention due to patent protection and could have saved much more of the 250-300 newly diagnosed children with diabetes in Hungary each year.

The paleolithic ketogenic diet (PKD), as a method for stopping autoimmune processes, cannot be protected through law or patent regulations. However, paleolithic ketogenic as a word composition has been protected with the aim of preserving the original content of the term. In Hungary, the word composition is protected, and its registration in Europe and the United States is almost completed. However, this, as mentioned, does not mean that the methodology is protected, nor does it automatically recognize the creator of the method and the team of physicians who deliver the results for the first time.

Getting credit for our discovery is extremely important for us because we did and do our research on our own merits, without the support of the state and without scientific grants; we have to face many difficulties (see Hungarian Diabetes Society). We acknowledge our colleagues’ work and respect our forerunners.


Recently, research on the etiological role of nutrition has become more important. Many professionals deal with it through different methods, although it is still difficult to break free from mainstream medical conventions. We built a compact and functional rehabilitation and research system parallel to academic medicine. We successfully operate this system in Hungary and in Norway. It is also true, as international representatives of nutrition science have pointed out, that there is currently no other research-clinical center in the world that has accumulated so many and valuable clinical data in the field of nutrition intervention. Our groundbreaking results with type 1 diabetes can be transferred to the treatment of other autoimmune diseases and tumors; however, these results are still not acknowledged by mainstream medicine, and it was the case with type 1 diabetes for 5 years. When the results were finally noticed, the Hungarian Diabetes Society, instead of giving us credit for the findings, attacked us.

In light of the current debate, the reaction of the Hungarian Diabetes Society at the time now seems ridiculous. It will be interesting to highlight the professional and moral responsibility of the leaders of the Hungarian Diabetes Society.


Many may argue that there had been research on the use of low-carbohydrate diets in type 1 diabetes before our publications. This is true and we reference them in our articles. What is new compared to existing results is that we demonstrated first that a low-carbohydrate diet (or any method) can stop the decline of the own insulin production, or even increase insulin production, while patients may become completely insulin-free if therapy begins shortly after the diagnosis. This is a great scientific realization.

The French colleagues achieved similar results in three patients: they stopped the decline in their own insulin production and their patients became insulin-free; in fact, they reproduced our results. Our original contribution to the field, as opposed to that of the French team, is that we were able to substantiate this result in more patients and in more detail through more accurate patient follow-up (years of C-peptide measurements over years) 5 years earlier. In addition, we introduced a methodological innovation specifically designed for low-carbohydrate diets.

The essence of this methodological innovation is the introduction of the paired C-peptide measurement, which is the measurement of the stimulated C-peptide in addition to the fasting C-peptide measurement within a very short space of time. This measurement methodology provides a solution to the methodological problem of a low carbohydrate diet. We have also published this in the articles.

Figure: Sequential C-peptide measurement over a three-year follow-up of a type 1 diabetic patient. Figure from a presentation by Paleomedicina staff at the 2018 Giessen Congress of Evolutionary Medicine.


Of course, we are not bitter, because this debate is not at all about the possibility of stopping the autoimmune process in type 1 diabetic children. This is possible, as shown in the results of two independent medical teams. This is clearly a positive development.

The fact that the French medical team repeated our results is satisfying for us because years ago Hungarian diabetology would have attacked and discredited us for the claim that Type 1 diabetes can be cured and our diet may stop the process of destroying insulin-producing cells in the pancreas.

To put it mildly, they disparaged us for what we do, and Hungarian diabetology used all their means to block our progress. Let us add that many representatives of Hungarian popular nutrition science have been also partners in this. Another difficulty was that, despite the excellent results, it was not easy to publish our findings, because mainstream nutrition science (and of course the diabetics journals) rejected our studies without further review.

And now, the French team is presenting our results in a diabetology journal, the same findings we have been attacked for 5 years. Very few people were interested in our publication, and we were laughed at, while the French results are being celebrated all over the world.

What has been proved is a scientific fact and one important criterion is that science does not depend on its practitioners. In Hungary, France and everywhere, the same laws operate biology, and the same scientific truth applies. However, finding a method to save children and applying it first in a clinical environment is not merely of symbolic significance.

Figure: Blood glucose with insulin and standard diabetes diet and during Paleo-Ketogenic diet without insulin: the difference is striking in our patient.


It looks like we will be able to rewrite a delicate point in medicine, and we are going to rewrite many more similarly fascinating details here in Central Europe. Hopefully, we will give many children a chance to recover. We did all of this here in Hungary, lacking billions in research funding, relying on our own mental and financial strength, perseverance and determination, with a small hard-working and creative team.

At this point, we also note that in Poland the official pediatric protocol two years ago has included the paleolithic ketogenic diet for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease in children. It seems that the news of this has not yet returned to our country.

Thanks to the staff at our clinic and our laboratory; they are always going against prevailing mainstream ideas because they know that this is the only right way in medicine:

Dr. Zsófia Clemens, Dr. Csaba Tóth, Dr. Andrea Dabóczi, Dr. Enikő Andrásofszky, Dr. Péter Váczi, Dr. Péter Merész, Dr. Tibor Nagy, Dr. Mária Köteles, Katalin Lőrincz, Mária Schimmer, Gyöngyi Klukné, Natalie Daniels, Michael Graeme, Balázs Borka, Ferenc Nagy


WARNING: For type 1 diabetes, especially type 1 diabetic children, do not experiment at home without medical advice! Although treatment has become much easier, it requires professional medical assistance.