 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / June 2006A big unnecessary problem
Is there a real diabetes epidemic or is it much overdone and may be a case of economics involved? I am seeing so many in a real panic and we all add fuel to the fire. I am still alive and causing problems for over years after being diagnosed with severe blood sugars from the start.. When I see a person reporting blood sugar levels that are in the range of the meter error band. I am starting to question the motive of the profession alarming people unnecessarily. We are using some pills of questionable value long term. Are these pills accelerating the process?. The main thing I see is the massive advertising of items to grab the bucks from those in the panic. The human raced is prone to hysteria. Are we making a mountain out of a mole hill. I think it is time that this question is asked. . I have needed treatment that was not done. So there is a problem for some of us. I see others that need to calm down and live, based on what they post here. Eating less is good advice for all people Guy. > Is there a real diabetes epidemic or is it much overdone > and may be a case of economics involved? [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Guy. Good point. I think there is a probably a large element of drug company interest driving redefinitions of dabetic threshholds, but it's hard to be sure how much is hype and I for one will go with a little controlled hysteria. I find concern about my, only slightly flaky, glucose levels a useful motivator to lose weight and keep up the daily exercise even when it's a tiresome slog. Also, I suspect diabetes research is beginning to make inroads into understanding the general process of ageing and some of that is undoubtedly linked to poor glucose control short of frank diabetes. So expect to see lots more of us around trying to stave off old age if not diabetes. Peter > Is there a real diabetes epidemic or is it much overdone > and may be a case of economics involved? [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that are far too progressive. If you haven't yet read it, I'd suggest you have a look at Richard Bernstein's "Diabetes Solution". I think there is a lot to what he says. Diabetics have a 'right' to normal BG readings with adequate treatment. If A1C is nearing 7, which is the ADA guideline for treatment, you are probably looking at long term issues. I think there is an 'awakening' about to happen. > IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that are far > too progressive. Too progressive? LOL Never heard that charge in here before. >If you haven't yet read it, I'd suggest you have a look > at Richard Bernstein's "Diabetes Solution". I think there is a lot to what > he says. It's surely worth a look, but not definitive. >Diabetics have a 'right' to normal BG readings with adequate > treatment. They also have an obligation to be disciplined enough to achieve that with the tools and knowledge at their disposal. Unfortunately, many are undisciplined, unmotivated, and unaccepting of their responsibility to their own health. >If A1C is nearing 7, which is the ADA guideline for treatment, Not true. The ADA advises a minimum of LESS than 7, with a further explanation that the ultimate goal is to be achieve close to normal numbers: "The better your glucose control, the less likely you are to develop complications of diabetes. An A1C in the sevens (7s), however, does not represent good control. The ADA goal is less than 7 percent. The closer your A1C is to the normal range (less than 6 percent), the lower your chances of complications." > you are probably looking at long term issues. I think there is an > 'awakening' about to happen. Let's hope everyone wakes up. Best, Kurt >> IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that are far >> too progressive. > > Too progressive? LOL Never heard that charge in here before. Sorry - should have said too conservative. Chalk that up to a senior brain fart. >>If you haven't yet read it, I'd suggest you have a look >> at Richard Bernstein's "Diabetes Solution". I think there is a lot to what [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Best, > Kurt > >> IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that are far > >> too progressive. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Sorry - should have said too conservative. Chalk that up to a senior brain > fart. Hey, I've had those myself on here many times...and I'm not even a senior yet! As far as the ADA being too conservative...well, that's another story and I'd disagree with it but not today. :) Be well. Best, Kurt >> IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that are far >> too progressive. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > It's surely worth a look, but not definitive. I would agree, but he does make a good point for a lot which goes contrary to 'conventional wisdom'. >>Diabetics have a 'right' to normal BG readings with adequate >> treatment. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are undisciplined, unmotivated, and unaccepting of their responsibility > to their own health. Absolutely. The point is, that more folks are becoming educated and willing to take responsibility; but they are certainly going to need more information and help with prescriptions, etc. in order to do it. The current guidelines seem to stand in the way of responsible people desiring to attain 'normal' readings. >>If A1C is nearing 7, which is the ADA guideline for treatment, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > closer your A1C is to the normal range (less than 6 percent), the lower > your chances of complications." Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is more like 4.2-4.5 - that should be the ultimate goal. Folks in the sixes should at least be looking at diet modifications and exercise regimes if not medication. IMHO in the 5's they should be praised for the good work and encouraged to get to mid 4's. >> you are probably looking at long term issues. I think there is an >> 'awakening' about to happen. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Best, > Kurt >Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is >more like 4.2-4.5 - that should be the ultimate goal. Folks in the sixes >should at least be looking at diet modifications and exercise regimes if >not medication. IMHO in the 5's they should be praised for the good work >and encouraged to get to mid 4's. For a T2 to attempt to attain an A1c of the mid 4s would be foolish and counterproductive. A lot of the T2s may experience hypos quite frequently. It would be suicide for a T1 to attain such a low value. A T2 staying in the low 5s is much more preferrable, and is difficult to maintain. >>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > A T2 staying in the low 5s is much more preferrable, and is difficult > to maintain. I don't think it is counterproductive or foolish. Dr. Bernstein ("Diabetes Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be doing something right - he claims in his book to have an A1C of 4.5. > >>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. > >>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be doing something > right - he claims in his book to have an A1C of 4.5. And Pat Robertson claims to have leg pressed 2000 lbs! :) Best, Kurt :: ray wrote: ::: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:44:47 -0500, Hi_Therre wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] :: :: And Pat Robertson claims to have leg pressed 2000 lbs! :) I'd believe Bernstein before I'd believe Roberston on their respective claims. :: Best, :: Kurt >>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be doing something >right - he claims in his book to have an A1C of 4.5. I can claim I am superman and am the smartest man in the room. Now that is a tall tale. I can claim I am as rich as Bill Gates. But, fact of matter - am almost broke due to this damn disease. Show me a living T1 with an A1c of <= 5? And, you will find that person *Living* in the ER of the local hospital. Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min to avoid a hypo incident i was having 911 ER lunch breaks when my A1c was 5.5 that's life as a type 1 kate  SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ http://www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience. Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be an expensive teacher. > >>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. > >>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > living T1 with an A1c of <= 5? And, you will find that person > *Living* in the ER of the local hospital. >Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min >to avoid a hypo incident [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >that's life as a type 1 I always thought you were a T2 as I. I didn't know a T1 could attain an A1c of 5.5, but, you did it. A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain let alone maintain. It is difficult. I average 5.2 and I have good control. A couple years ago I had a 4.7, and that only happened once. I doubt I could do it again. It is just to difficult to attain. But, for this Berstein to maintain in the 4s is total bullshit in my opinion. I would like to see any T1 hit below 5 just once. I imagine they would experience several real nasty hypos. I don't mean light headed or something similar. I mean the type worse than the one's Mack mentioned over the past couple years. He has posted a few real nasty ones. An A1c of 4s most likely would produce a hypo that could kill you. Not something a T1 could survive. Does your pump give you a good A1c? _____________________________________ http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free :: On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:10:06 -0600, "TigerLily" <me@privacy.net> :: wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] :: produce a hypo that could kill you. Not something a T1 could :: survive. I have had 4.7 or 4.8 every time I get an A1c...and it's been that way for over 1.5 years now, or more. I'm a T2. :: Does your pump give you a good A1c? :: _____________________________________ :: http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free > >Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min > >to avoid a hypo incident [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > nasty ones. An A1c of 4s most likely would produce a hypo that could > kill you. Not something a T1 could survive. I'm a Type 1 and my last a1c (two weeks ago) was a 5.3. However I'm not your typical Type 1 and in the past 90 days have only had one borderline hypo (tested at 59 and drank some juice to correct.) Not on the pump but consider myself a human pumper as I test about 8-10 times a day and make corrections when need be. Also very active and exercise every day so my insulin injection needs are very low. That being said, even with my extremely tight control, I would never try to aim for an a1c in the 4 range. I also wouldn't worry if I was in the low 6 range. But as long as I can achieve the numbers I'm getting without going hypo crazy then I'll stick with what works for me. Keep in mind that a1c is just one factor that determines what kind of control a diabetic is measured by, albeit a fairly important one. Best, Kurt >> >Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min >> >to avoid a hypo incident [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >a1c is just one factor that determines what kind of control a diabetic >is measured by, albeit a fairly important one. I thought you were a T2. I don't see how a T1 can maintain a A1c that a T2's have trouble maintaining. I have difficulty maintaining my 5.2. And, my pancreas is still functioning while your pancreas in broken. Last November, when there was a fairly long allergy season, the additional spiking raised my A1c to 5.7. And that was using Humalog constantly. Is it possible your pancreas still has some active beta cells left? That is the only reason I can fathom as to your 5.3 and being a T1. The only periods I spike badly is spring and fall during allergy seasons. And, boy, can it get nasty where I use Humalog almost constantly. But, other than that, I don't spike that much. You have to use insulin to maintain life, whereas I need insulin when I eat the wrong foods or eat to much. Due to having a broken pancreas, a T1 will experience more highs and lows than a T2 will experience. You cannot change that with any amount of testing and corrective insulin useage. What do you eat? I mainly eat chicken, broccoli, yogurt, and cheese. With that, I still have trouble maintaining a 5.2. :: On 13 Jun 2006 17:03:18 -0700, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> :: wrote: [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] :: What do you eat? I mainly eat chicken, broccoli, yogurt, and cheese. :: With that, I still have trouble maintaining a 5.2. Just because you have trouble maintaining a 5.2 doesn't mean that others will. I don't (a T2) and Kurt doesn't (a T1). Hence, your logic is flawed. Or, we are all comparing apples and oranges since we aren't stating the respective lab's "normal" range. > A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain > let alone maintain. Why do you say that? Priscilla, T2, last A1c 5.5, d/e & met >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain >> let alone maintain. > >Why do you say that? I have trouble staying below that. I know of several people who are recent DX and cannot stay below it. :: On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 13:30:30 -0400, "Priscilla H. Ballou" :: <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] :: I have trouble staying below that. I know of several people who are :: recent DX and cannot stay below it. I think that's entirely possible. Your system is different (body) from mine (for example), as are theirs. The underlying causes for our diabetes might also be different, too. Hence, because I who I am, determines how this disease affects me. Frankly, T2 diabetes should be broken down into several subgroups. Or, perhaps, there should be T3, T4, T5, etc. > I think that's entirely possible. Your system is different (body) from mine > (for example), as are theirs. The underlying causes for our diabetes might > also be different, too. Hence, because I who I am, determines how this > disease affects me. Frankly, T2 diabetes should be broken down into several > subgroups. Or, perhaps, there should be T3, T4, T5, etc. There are over 300 types of diabetes. We are lumped together because for most of us there is no reason to do extensive testing to ferret out exactly what we have. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm ::: I think that's entirely possible. Your system is different (body) ::: from mine (for example), as are theirs. The underlying causes for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] :: because for most of us there is no reason to do extensive testing to :: ferret out exactly what we have. Perhaps in someone else's eyes there is no reason...however, I suspect that many of us here would like to zero in on what's the reason for ours. So, what are these 300 types of diabetes? > So, what are these 300 types of diabetes? Ha! There is no way I could type all that out here. If you really want to know, get the book entitled Joslin's Diabetes Mellitus by C. Ronald Kahn, Gordon C Weir, George L. King, and Alan C. Moses. It's available from Amazon.com for $229.00 use and from $198.99 used. Carrying that book around is a workout in and of itself. It's that big! And if you understand most of what's in it you're doing better than I am. I bought the last edition when it came out, thinking it would help me. It didn't. It's written for physicians. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm > >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain > >> let alone maintain. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I have trouble staying below that. I know of several people who are > recent DX and cannot stay below it. And from N=3 you generalize to all T2s, regardless of the evidence repeatedly demonstrated in this newsgroup? Priscilla > > >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain > > >> let alone maintain. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > And from N=3 you generalize to all T2s, regardless of the evidence > repeatedly demonstrated in this newsgroup? The last time I saw my GP, she was extremely happy with my 5.6 and puzzled that I wasn't. So, at my appointment this morning, I asked her what proportion of her diabetic patients have comparable numbers. She didn't give proportions, but said that most didn't; most don't even get below 6, which is what she targets. Mind you, she doesn't *object* to my trying to get lower; she just sees it as a bit unusual. SignatureAF > > > >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain > > > >> let alone maintain. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > below 6, which is what she targets. Mind you, she doesn't *object* to my > trying to get lower; she just sees it as a bit unusual. Ah, but have they *tried*? For Bruce to say that 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain let alone maintain, they have to know enough and actually try it. How many do? Priscilla > > > > >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain > > > > >> let alone maintain. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > T2 to attain let alone maintain, they have to know enough and actually > try it. How many do? That I don't know. She told me at one point that the patients who do best with diabetes are folks who like to cook and are creative in the kitchen. She recommended _Sugar Busters_ to me when I was first diagnosed, and is generally supportive of low-carb diets. She encourages post-prandial testing and, of course, exercise. What people do with this advice is a whole nother kettle of fish, of course. SignatureAF >> > > > >> A 5.5 is difficult for a T2 to attain >> > > > >> let alone maintain. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >post-prandial testing and, of course, exercise. What people do with this >advice is a whole nother kettle of fish, of course. EXERCISE YES. OF THE USEFUL KIND THAT DOES NOT DRAIN YOUR BUDGET. wHERE THE MUSCLES ARE STRESSED. guy > That I don't know. She told me at one point that the patients who do > best with diabetes are folks who like to cook and are creative in the > kitchen. She recommended _Sugar Busters_ to me when I was first > diagnosed, and is generally supportive of low-carb diets. She encourages > post-prandial testing and, of course, exercise. What people do with this > advice is a whole nother kettle of fish, of course. Of course, another problem is that I suspect that kind of advice is rare as hen's teeth. My GP hates low-carb diets and doesn't believe T2s should test at all - he is quite into exercise, but doesn't think walking counts... Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.4/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine 95/73/72Kg > Of course, another problem is that I suspect that kind of advice is rare as > hen's teeth. My GP hates low-carb diets and doesn't believe T2s should test > at all - he is quite into exercise, but doesn't think walking counts... I keep wondering what the bias against low-carb diets is about. Has your GP ever given you a reason why you should eat a standard higher carb diet? What possible benefit does he/she think the extra carbs have that could possibly make the higher BGs worthwhile? Michelle T2 diet & exercise >> Of course, another problem is that I suspect that kind of advice is rare as >> hen's teeth. My GP hates low-carb diets and doesn't believe T2s should test [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Michelle T2 >diet & exercise ************** You refer about bias against a low carb diet. The advocates are the low carber. The new boy on the block is the low carber. A better way to say the non low carber says it not proven to be a absolutely good solution. I really do care what one eats. The problem overselling it. No one has as the long term experience to oversell it. It may be the perfect solution but we do not know yet. As we look around the world, we see some results of "survival of the fittest". Just maybe the diet is different for different genetic strains. some say that fact is the cause of the current increases in T2's and even obesity. Super skinny people in the upper climates faced food shortages in the winter and the "fatties" survived. The answers requires the test of time. I think it is OK if a person selects any diet they want. I strongly object to use of advocating any one diet to make money. A friend was looking for a automobile salesman's job. The person that was interviewing her said " YOu will never make a salesman until you learn to lie" Examine the motivation of anyone that offers you advice where the advice helps them get richer. IN the end low carb may prove out. We do not know that today. Guy > >> Of course, another problem is that I suspect that kind of advice is rare as > >> hen's teeth. My GP hates low-carb diets and doesn't believe T2s should test [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > A better way to say the non low carber says > it not proven to be a absolutely good solution. For me, it makes the difference between whether my BG falls within normal range or is high. I suspect for *most* diabetics their diet makes a difference in how high their BGs are--although may not be completely applicable to the T1s since they have an insulin deficiency which must be replaced. > I really do care what one eats. The problem > overselling it. No one has as the long term experience > to oversell it. I don't care what anyone eats either. However, if we are trying to lower BG in the diabetic population, eating lower carb, or really I should say "slower carb", is a good place to start. Diet can do much of the work of lowering BG--either eliminating meds entirely or reducing them. However, I'm certain the pharmaceutical companies wouldn't approve. ;-) > It may be the perfect solution but we do not know > yet. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > climates faced food shortages in the > winter and the "fatties" survived. True. Diabetic metabolism would have been a benefit in times of famine. > The answers requires the test of time. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > IN the end low carb may prove out. We > do not know that today. Low carb may not be the answer for the general population who can properly metabolize starches. However, if high BG causes drastic complications, then I'm going to go by what my meter tells me and stay away from the foods that cause BG to spike. Michelle T2 diet & exercise :: guy wrote: ::: On 17 Jun 2006 10:56:23 -0700, "Michelle" <bookbug2005@gmail.com> [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] :: complications, then I'm going to go by what my meter tells me and :: stay away from the foods that cause BG to spike. I advocate low carb and I have no interest in making money from it. I am lucky to have bought a $6 book written by an MD who advocated LC and recommended it to his patients, who saw success. That $6 book provided me with the key to getting excellent control over my BG. I have other books written by MDs who advocated LC, too. Personally, I don't need the medical community to prove anything to me about the benefits of eating normal food: meat, fish, fowl and fibrous veggies and lower carb fruits. The very idea of having it "proven" is, in fact, insulting. Me meter, my doctor's meter, my A1Cs, my lipid results, have proven it to me. oh...personally, I don't get the concept of "slow" carbs. Which ones are they? "Roger Zoul" <.com> wrote in message ... > oh...personally, I don't get the concept of "slow" carbs. Which ones are > they? the 'slow carbs' as i understand it are the ones that are low on the glycemic index (they have more fibre and water in them too) www.mendosa.com has an explaination of the glycemic index, the glycemic load and tables for different food types meats aren't included in the glycemic index because you can't eat enough of them to match the testing requirements to measure how they affect bg levels kate SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ http://www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience. Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be an expensive teacher. > :: guy wrote: > ::: On 17 Jun 2006 10:56:23 -0700, "Michelle" <bookbug2005@gmail.com> [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] > oh...personally, I don't get the concept of "slow" carbs. Which ones are > they? LOL Roger. :-) People have such a bias over the term "low carb" that I coined "slow carb." After all, it's not as if we're eating no carbs at all--just those that don't go through our systems like a freight train. Michelle T2 diet & exercise ::: oh...personally, I don't get the concept of "slow" carbs. Which ::: ones are they? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] :: no carbs at all--just those that don't go through our systems like a :: freight train. Poor people! :) >> Of course, another problem is that I suspect that kind of advice is rare >> as [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > carb diet? What possible benefit does he/she think the extra carbs > have that could possibly make the higher BGs worthwhile? So far as I can tell, it seems to be all caught up in the low-fat myth. And remember he can medicate against higher BGs : {} Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.4/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine 95/73/72Kg :: In article <vze23t8n-B38A78.13294415062006@individual.net>, :: "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] :: she doesn't *object* to my trying to get lower; she just sees it as :: a bit unusual. This is where it gets interesting. I think it very well is unusual in a doctor's office. My ex gf is a doctor and she says the same thing. However, whenever she get's her patients to follow a low carb diet in addition to other treatments, see shes almost immediate improvements. So, my point is that while many diabetics of today don't get those kinds of numbers (low 5s), that doesn't mean they aren't achievable. A lot of people don't really try to get such numbers (with Docs happy to get 6's, it's understandable). But settling for a 6 when you can get a 5 without too much trouble might mean giving up some complication free years down the road. Since none have a crystal ball, though, it's hard to say anything for sure. > But settling for a 6 when you can get a 5 without too much trouble But "without too much trouble" might mean something entirely different to you than it does to me or someone else. What might work for you, and be "easy" for you, might be a lot harder for someone else. I'm not saying they *couldn't* do <whatever it takes> but that it may go far beyond "not too much trouble". bj ::: But settling for a 6 when you can get a 5 without too much trouble :: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] :: may go far beyond "not too much trouble". :: bj And of course, if one doesn't try a thing in earnest, one can't really know what "too much trouble" is. Each diabetic can decide what the worth of several complication-free years is. >::: But settling for a 6 when you can get a 5 without too much trouble >:: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Each diabetic can decide what the worth of several complication-free years >is. When the complications come the sense of values will shift. An example is the neuropathy where he burning of the limbs is like being in hell. It does not take an gross thing to reduce the probability of this end result. nothing like common sense in all aspects of life. The alternating cycle of overdoing something and then oscillating to neglect is not a good thing. Guy > :: In article <vze23t8n-B38A78.13294415062006@individual.net>, > :: "Priscilla H. Ballou" <vze23t8n@verizon.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > :: she doesn't *object* to my trying to get lower; she just sees it as > :: a bit unusual. > This is where it gets interesting. I think it very well is unusual in a > doctor's office. My ex gf is a doctor and she says the same thing. > However, whenever she get's her patients to follow a low carb diet in > addition to other treatments, see shes almost immediate improvements. > So, my point is that while many diabetics of today don't get those kinds of > numbers (low 5s), that doesn't mean they aren't achievable. A lot of people > don't really try to get such numbers (with Docs happy to get 6's, it's > understandable). But settling for a 6 when you can get a 5 without too much > trouble might mean giving up some complication free years down the road. Not necessarily years down the road. When I was tested at the time of diagnosis of diabetes I had an A1C of 5.6% and slowly worsening neuropathy in feet and hands. It took a few months of learning how to pull my seriously high post-prandial BG peaks down before the neuropathy started to get better. So at least in my case an A1C of 5.6% co-existed with prgressively worsening peripheral neuropathy due to high postprandial BG peaks. If I slip up in BG control and indulge in some high carby meals and snacks the neuropathy starts to come back. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] :: Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: ::: Alice Faber wrote: [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] :: co-existed with prgressively worsening peripheral neuropathy due to :: high postprandial BG peaks. So, at least you had high PP BG peaks to explain this. It would be very scary indeed if this happened while maintaining within normal PP BGs and an A1C of 5.6.. :: If I slip up in BG control and indulge in some high carby meals and :: snacks the neuropathy starts to come back. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] :: IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK :: [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >The last time I saw my GP, she was extremely happy with my 5.6 and >puzzled that I wasn't. So, at my appointment this morning, I asked her >what proportion of her diabetic patients have comparable numbers. She >didn't give proportions, but said that most didn't; most don't even get >below 6, which is what she targets. Mind you, she doesn't *object* to my >trying to get lower; she just sees it as a bit unusual. Tuesday I asked my endo, "You wanted my A1c at 5.5, right?" and he said no, that he had set the goal at SIX point five. I just nodded and thought yep, that is a long way from where I am now but I am still going to try for 5.5 even if I never make it. I think sometimes they make the goals as easy to attain as they dare, so people won't give up before they start. My optometrist has told me that many of her glaucoma patients grumble that using eye drops twice a day is "too much trouble" and she has to beg and plead with them to use them. It amazes me that someone would risk going blind rather than spend the 2.3 seconds twice a day it takes to use the drops. Yes, my eyes are almost always pink-tinged from them and my eyelashes are freakishly long but it's an itsy-bitsy trade off for keeping my eyesight. So I'll bet to your GP you *are* unusual, and you probably delight her by being so. :) Leigh -- Consequences, shmonsequences, as long as I'm rich. - D. Duck > Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min > to avoid a hypo incident [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > kate Any doctor can not only afford to test more frequently, but (s)he also has access to much better test equipment. There is a Swedish meter, not for sale in the U.S. which retails for about $600 and has consumable costs over $1/test - it also yields laboratory quality results. :: On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:10:06 -0600, TigerLily wrote: :: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] :: consumable costs over $1/test - it also yields laboratory quality :: results. Which, of course, aren't need to attain good control. boy you hit the nail on the head, I have diabetes and am staying around six on my A1c, was at five once and was sick most of the time with low blood sugar, my doctor is happy with me staying at six so am I as long as I feel great. SignaturePatsie M. Hatley Tustin, CA, USA bookmage@pacbell.net > Bernstein can probably afford to test every 20 min > to avoid a hypo incident [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > find that person > > *Living* in the ER of the local hospital. >>>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >living T1 with an A1c of <= 5? And, you will find that person >*Living* in the ER of the local hospital. I agree with you. It is so easy to offer advice as an outsider. I have achieved number in the mid fives but it created other problems. Recently, with other problems I have let it rise. MY big problem is I was hauled to the ER so many times. The greed has took it's toll on mu savings. So many think a hypo is a weak or shaky feeling for a few minutes. How being found under a running large backhoe. Or a passerby seeing you on you driveway and calling for help. Each diabetic must find their own story and use it to deal with their diabetes. The great numbers are a goal; and may have to be ,compromised. I really do not know what the final numbers should be. I guess that like a non diabetic. For example, my wire's blood sugar stays fixed With all food inputs. Mine rises about 100 points for each 100 calories. And it does not stop The important thing is that each person understand their situation. I am alive because I fought like hell for knowledge. The docs years ago said "take you NPH in the morning and it last 24 hours. A silly joke. Today docs are doing much better and the knowledge is available. It is up to you. Grabbing at easy fads does not do the job.. Guy . f >>>>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] >does not do the job.. > Guy . Do you use a pump? What is your A1c? >>The important thing is that each person understand >> their situation. I am alive because I fought like hell [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Do you use a pump? What is your A1c? For years I was considered a T2 because I was diagnosed at age 46. It seemed to develop after a series of abdominal infections. I had no real problem when I went on insulin with hypos. This was a around five years after diagnosis. Then they decided to put me on an insulin resistance drug. several problems became apparent . Then I had a 011 run. Then over two months I had about a dozen 911 runs. On one doc informed me the insulin resistance drug had shutdown my normal glucose releases which come in when the you have low glucose levels. Many years later it has not returned so I have to use care all of the time. It was decided that a pump might be a bad idea. I had a major problem in that if I let my insulin level drop below basal, I get gross glucose releases. Sent my A1c very high. and severe complications. I have to keep a good basal 24/7. When Lantus was available it allowed me to drop the three hour schedule around the clock. For quite a few years I have had fairly decent A1c around 6. I go to bed after I achieve two blood glucose reading under 140 and I usually wake up in the same range. When I eat it is almost impossible to prevent a peak. If I get the insulin ahead of the food I am in a bit of trouble. This is one persons experience as I perceive it. Read many experiences to develop a picture that allows you to make good decisions. >>>The important thing is that each person understand >>> their situation. I am alive because I fought like hell [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >Read many experiences to develop a picture >that allows you to make good decisions. You are a bad candidate for a pump, while Billie, Mack, RK, Kate, and numerous others are good candidates for a pump. An interesting concept. Works for one, and only creates problems for another. I would have thought a pump would be a godsend for all T1s since it is more uniform and consistent which tends to prevent highs and lows. But, I can see where a pump might increase your chance of increased lows if you do not test often. > >>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. > >>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > living T1 with an A1c of <= 5? And, you will find that person > *Living* in the ER of the local hospital. No, that's not where he lives. Priscilla :: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:44:47 -0500, Hi_Therre wrote: :: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] :: ("Diabetes Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be :: doing something right - he claims in his book to have an A1C of 4.5. That's still not at the bottom of his testing scale, if normal is 4.2 to 4.5. > :: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:44:47 -0500, Hi_Therre wrote: > :: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > That's still not at the bottom of his testing scale, if normal is 4.2 to > 4.5. 1) I've never actually been able to find reliable numbers for what 'normal' is, I think it's somewhere in that region. 2) There is less margin of error for type 1's. Dr. B. attempts to have his type 2 patients maintain BG of 85 - for type 1's he shoots for 90. Quite frankly I don't see how they do it given the inaccuracies of available meters. : > :: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:44:47 -0500, Hi_Therre wrote: : > :: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : frankly I don't see how they do it given the inaccuracies of available : meters. My meter isn't inaccurate. Each time I have a blood draw from the lab, I use that same blood draw on my meter and I'm always within a few points of what the lab comes back as. You seem to forget (a lot apparently) that you can use the same drop of blood and test it 20 different times, one right after another and each and every time you will end up with a different glucose reading no matter what you do. This is perfectly acceptable as is 105, 115 and 98 should really all be considered the "same" number because of meter variances and back to the fact that you'll never get the same glucose result from the same glucose stick. BTW, that reason is because even after the blood drop is on the fingertip, the glucose is changing, same as it changes within the finger all the time. :: On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:44:46 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote: :: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] :: 1) I've never actually been able to find reliable numbers for what :: 'normal' is, I think it's somewhere in that region. Look in the sheet that comes back from the lab. If you doctors office doesn't give it to you, ask for a copy of it. :: 2) There is less margin of error for type 1's. Dr. B. attempts to :: have his type 2 patients maintain BG of 85 - for type 1's he shoots :: for 90. Quite frankly I don't see how they do it given the :: inaccuracies of available meters. Obtaining tight control isn't necessarily a function of a meter but more so a function of doing the right stuff (assuming such is even possible). >> :: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:44:47 -0500, Hi_Therre wrote: >> :: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >frankly I don't see how they do it given the inaccuracies of available >meters. In my opinion, Dr B is total crap with his 4.5 A1c. It is next to suicidal for a T1 to even think of going so low when most T2's can't even attain such a low value. > I don't think it is counterproductive or foolish. Dr. Bernstein ("Diabetes > Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be doing something > right - he claims in his book to have an A1C of 4.5. While I think attempts to maintain tighter control are to be lauded, even Dr B is quick to remind folks that everyone responds differently. If tighter control can be maintained without putting one's overall health in danger, do it. If not, get as close to optimum as possible. >> I don't think it is counterproductive or foolish. Dr. Bernstein ("Diabetes >> Solution") has been a type 1 for 60 years - so he must be doing something [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >If tighter control can be maintained without putting one's overall >health in danger, do it. If not, get as close to optimum as possible. I will be the first to admit I fall short of the goals. What the problem seems to me to be is we find excuses for failing. Accepting less here may be the easy route. One factor is the mental stress. I am motivated by the compilations. The nerve damage can be very painful. My loss of some vision is not preferred. The goal is to learn and try to achieve what is possible.Without becoming a basket case. Changing eating habits can be achieved. Guy >>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is >>more like 4.2-4.5 - that should be the ultimate goal. Folks in the sixes >>should at least be looking at diet modifications and exercise regimes if >>not medication. IMHO in the 5's they should be praised for the good work >>and encouraged to get to mid 4's. > For a T2 to attempt to attain an A1c of the mid 4s would be foolish > and counterproductive. A lot of the T2s may experience hypos quite > frequently. It would be suicide for a T1 to attain such a low value. > A T2 staying in the low 5s is much more preferrable, and is difficult > to maintain. Not necessarily. I was only in the mid 5s when diagnosed, so it's been easy to lower it, if you're prepared to call "eating to your meter" on the low-spike diet easy. It was hard learning how to do it. Now I've learned the ropes it's easy staying there (touching all available wooden surfaces with crossed fingers :-) SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >learned the ropes it's easy staying there (touching all available >wooden surfaces with crossed fingers :-) When your were diagnosed, didn't you have a few beta cells left? I think Mack called it a T1's honeymoon. Your pancreas just does not drop dead. It dies over some period of time. The pancreas for a T2 dies over many years whereas the pancreas of a T1 may die over a period of months. What is your present day A1c? >>>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >What is your present day A1c? The is no typical diabetic. A wide range of people that we call diabetic. Diabetes is an ancient term. The original reply here is very well stated. :: On 14 Jun 2006 11:47:05 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> :: wrote: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] :: :: What is your present day A1c? I'm 48...I was dx'ed at 23. My last A1c was 4.8. I've been hovering near 5 since I started low carbing and working out. I have my medical record that shows A1c's of 11 to 13 during a period between '91 and 01'. 10/01 is when I started low carbing. That's been very easy for me since I'm committed to low carb. I think it is fair to say that some T2's will have difficulty staying in the low 5's, but some can. I'd like to see data that says that most can't. Most may not, but it's likely not because they can't. > I'm 48...I was dx'ed at 23. My last A1c was 4.8. 23 year old T2's must be quite rare. I thought my dx in the early 30's was rare enough. > I've been hovering > near 5 since I started low carbing and working out. Those are fabulous numbers. Is it possible for you list out some of your typical meals? Also what meds/insulin do you take currently? > I have my > medical record that shows A1c's of 11 to 13 during a period between > '91 and 01'. I assume you weren't on any sort of diet at that time. I have achieved 5.5 without being on a low carb diet. This was shortly after I was dx'ed at 6.9 > 10/01 is when I started low carbing. That's been very > easy for me since I'm committed to low carb. > > I think it is fair to say that some T2's will have difficulty staying > in the low 5's, but some can. I'd like to see data that says that > most can't. Most may not, but it's likely not because they can't. :: Roger Zoul wrote: ::: I'm 48...I was dx'ed at 23. My last A1c was 4.8. :: :: 23 year old T2's must :: be quite rare. I thought my dx in the early 30's was rare :: enough. I honestly don't remember being told it was rare...but I surely did come by it honestly, as I was overweight, inactive, and eating junk food everyday. From what I read, it's not rare today. ::: I've been hovering ::: near 5 since I started low carbing and working out. :: :: Those are fabulous numbers. :: Is it possible for you list out some of your typical :: meals? Well, it varies. I'm a simple eater most of the time. Like for dinner , I'd have salmon as a meat, then broccoli mixed up with mustard, pickle relish (Sf), and olive oil. Lunches are typically salads with bits of cheese, black olives, bell peppers, dill pickles, and a bit of range dressing (that what I had today). I follow a low carb diet that includes meat, fish, fowl, and fibrous veggies. Fruits are berries. I have blueberries in the fridge now. I have 3 different colors of cauliflower, radishes, cucumbers, mustard greens, romaine lettuce, and broccoli in by box now. I also have low carb wraps that I use for slices of cheese (I eat some kind of cheese on a regular basis). I'll eat that stuff this week. Lifting weights and doing cardio helped me get my HDL over 100. My trigs were 49 last time I checked them. :: Also what meds/insulin do you take currently? No meds.... ::: I have my ::: medical record that shows A1c's of 11 to 13 during a period between ::: '91 and 01'. :: :: I assume you weren't on any sort of diet at that time. Good assumption. :: I have achieved 5.5 without being on a low carb diet. Great! :: This was shortly after I was dx'ed at 6.9 Good you weren't so high. Likely less damage! I take no pleasure or pride in having my head in a hole in the ground about my diabetes for all those years. I would like to spend the remainder of my life without any complications from diabetes. ::: 10/01 is when I started low carbing. That's been very ::: easy for me since I'm committed to low carb. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] ::: says that most can't. Most may not, but it's likely not because ::: they can't. >:: On 14 Jun 2006 11:47:05 GMT, Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> >:: wrote: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >low 5's, but some can. I'd like to see data that says that most can't. Most >may not, but it's likely not because they can't. You are a unique person with no complications after 24 years of this misery. Another unique person is the poster who uses about 300u insulin each day without any cardio complications. I think his name is Evans or something like that. Two unique people. :: On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:41:28 -0400, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] :: insulin each day without any cardio complications. I think his name :: is Evans or something like that. Two unique people. Perhaps I am lucky, but I don't think I'm really unique as far as diabetes goes. I'm certainly lucky that I found out about low carb eating though, for with it I can control my BG even without exercise, as long as I don't let my weight get out of hand. I'm aware that such is not (or would not be) the case for everyone, but I'd guess that there are many for whom such is (or would be) the case. >>>>Exactly. This can be paraphrased as "don't take action until it's over 7. >>>>Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter is, 'normal' is [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>learned the ropes it's easy staying there (touching all available >>wooden surfaces with crossed fingers :-) > When your were diagnosed, didn't you have a few beta cells left? I > think Mack called it a T1's honeymoon. Your pancreas just does not > drop dead. It dies over some period of time. The pancreas for a T2 > dies over many years whereas the pancreas of a T1 may die over a > period of months. Wait a minute, aren't we discussing the difficulty of a T2 maintaining low 5s? I must have some of my beta cells left, since I'm a T2 who is controlling BGs just with diet and exercise. > What is your present day A1c? I don't know, but since it was 5.6 at diagnosis when I was often spiking post-prandially over 200, I'm sure that now I rarely spike over 140 ut must have gone down at least a little bit :-) SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] The meter have limits. The blood sugar varies in different areas of the body. There are variations in the normal value of individuals. A lot of us here, were fight diabetes long before the meters. I had a hell of a time reading the color on common strips. Before me some report they had to boil solutions. The current concern reminds me of the talking about motor vehicle speed. It is not that accurate Varies with tire pressure, tire temperature even with a perfect manufactured speedometer. They are not that good inherently. Still we hear " you were doing 66 miles per hour. Independent test run on a very accurate course shows the major errors. We need to understand our meters and their limits Do not be impressed by the use of the Lab instrument. It has errors and limits. The problem I see is the misuse of our numbers. I do question the motives for this. I cannot watch TV for a hour with some diabetic ads. My original post here was to emphasize the use of common sense. The overdone things just divert us from the issues of value. One good example-- I was finding very high blood sugars that lasted for hours with no good reason. . I got all kinds of excuses and blame for what was happening. I had to do some heavy work and testing to identify it as" loss of basal". Even after that ne doc was accusing me of making excuses. Strange thing is that knowing this and dealing with it was the turning point I do scream control. I do think it is best to identify the factors in your case. Some will want to skip this. It does ramble. We are so concerned with the meter is not accurate and that is beyond reason. For most people that find they have diabetes is careful; control of food input. We do eat more than good health requires. Skewed diet on some fad or attempts to escape the restrictions and indulge yourself Some should have been hungry and not a dime. That happened in the 1930s here when the money grubbers wrecked the economy Those selling want us in a panic so we will fork over the bucks. Settle down and live. But do learn all you can. The craze that seem to say we keep the body alive forever. I can say the quality of life is more important. I have lost so many long term friends.The unavoidable problems will come in time. A good reason to settle down and try to be a decent human. We all waste so much of our life on trivia and point the finger at others. Sorry so long. I needed to have outlet. > One good example-- I was finding very high blood > sugars that lasted for hours with no good reason. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > it as" loss of basal". Even after that ne doc > was accusing me of making excuses. After researching the Symogi effect and liver stuff after much discussion here the last month or two, I found this simple statement in a review article: "The most common cause of morning hyperglycemia is hypoinsulinemia." This is a fundamental truth and the world is full of people (doctors, patients, random bystanders, and MANY vocal people on this newsgroup INCLUDING non-diabetics) who understand this basic principle yet choose to ignore it and look for something more complicated to blame. Tim. >> One good example-- I was finding very high blood >> sugars that lasted for hours with no good reason. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Tim. I used to use many exact terms. I worked in that type of environment. But I noted that so often I was talking to the wall. No one wants to admit they are snowed I do use the term "lover dump" now. You know it has worked so much better. I do know the lack of knowledge about the glucose control system led to much harm to me. Even in the technical area I was required to define any special term in the first use in any report. Today the medical use terms serve no purpose Many are foreign to the public. It may be out of habit or to impress. The important thing is that we communicate Your statement is exact but does not cover the many side issues and related items. The use of an obsolete lan gauge and the doc substituting terms for a real definition led to great arm to me. I had to come to MHD to finally understand the glucose control system. Then I had to run my tests to ID the real problem. I have had a few "runins" with docs about this problem. I was told I had osteomylitis. Osteo means bone in English,nd mylitis mens inflammation or infection. I had a potentially fatal infection Earlier in life I have been accused with talking over peoples heads. It was true and a waste. Guy I adhere to the KISS Principle . :: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:58:28 -0700, Kurt wrote: :: [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] :: over 7. Shoot for a goal of 6, which is normal. Fact of the matter :: is, 'normal' is more like 4.2-4.5 As has been pointed out, normal depends on the range used by the testing lab. - that should be the ultimate :: goal. Folks in the sixes should at least be looking at diet :: modifications and exercise regimes if not medication. IMHO in the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] ::: Best, ::: Kurt I do not believe Robertson or Bernstien for the same reason. The are in a business. I do use the NIH site for much info. They are not selling. So much in health issues are poorly standardized. I have worked using Testing Labs. I am sorry to tell you that they are overrated. Once again we see here --- numbers that are not that exact. Health is more than one thing. We need to ease up and look at the broader picture. Guy : I do not believe Robertson or Bernstien for the same reason. : The are in a business. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] : picture. : Guy You are about the MOST sensible person I've seen posting here. A huge thank you! :: ray wrote: ::: IMHO - a lot of unrest is being generated by ADA guidelines that ::: are far too progressive. :: :: Too progressive? LOL Never heard that charge in here before. Me either. ::: If you haven't yet read it, I'd suggest you have a look ::: at Richard Bernstein's "Diabetes Solution". I think there is a lot ::: to what he says. :: :: It's surely worth a look, but not definitive. Nothing is definitive, and definitive doesn't imply correct. ::: Diabetics have a 'right' to normal BG readings with adequate ::: treatment. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] :: are undisciplined, unmotivated, and unaccepting of their :: responsibility to their own health. I agree. ::: If A1C is nearing 7, which is the ADA guideline for treatment, :: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] :: The closer your A1C is to the normal range (less than 6 percent), :: the lower your chances of complications." I think this means that the *ultimate* goal is to *achieve* normal numbers. ::: you are probably looking at long term issues. I think there is an ::: 'awakening' about to happen. :: :: Let's hope everyone wakes up. They won't. :: Best, :: Kurt > Is there a real diabetes epidemic or is it much overdone > and may be a case of economics involved? [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Guy. No Guy, There is NO "epidemic" A number of factors account for the increase. 1) People didn't get tested unless they were at the very symptomatic stage. Now testing is becoming common 2) The definition of "diabetic" was "heavy spilling in the urine for three successive tests" The tests were at LEAST 6 months apart, and often more. One test was low, and they started the sequence over again. Now it is ONE FBG of 126!! To spill more than trace in your urine, you need to be 200-250. 3) The average age of the population is increasing substantially, and the incidence of T2 diabetes is age related. 4) T2 Diabetics are being treated earlier and better, and we are living a lot longer. Physicians, including statistical epidemiologists, never learn elementary population math. :: guy wrote: ::: Is there a real diabetes epidemic or is it much overdone [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] :: Physicians, including statistical epidemiologists, never learn :: elementary population math. I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more and more obese kids walking around today than were around when I was a kid. > I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more and more > obese kids walking around today than were around when I was a kid. I sure don't see any here! Mostly I see skinny, scrawny kids. Occasionally I'll see one who is overweight, but not very often. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm ::: I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more ::: and more obese kids walking around today than were around when I ::: was a kid. :: :: I sure don't see any here! Mostly I see skinny, scrawny kids. :: Occasionally I'll see one who is overweight, but not very often. Where are you? >::: I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more >::: and more obese kids walking around today than were around when I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Where are you? Not where I am, that's for sure. Skinny, scrawny kids are definitely in the minority where I live. I live close to an elementary school and a high school, and a whole lot of the students are "packing it on." Much more so than in the past.:-) Cheri > >::: I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more > >::: and more obese kids walking around today than were around when I [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > high school, and a whole lot of the students are "packing it on." Much > more so than in the past.:-) Interesting. I live within a block of an elementary school and catch the bus in front of a housing project where a lot of kids hang out. I don't know that I've seen more than 1 or 2 fat kids. On public transit I've noticed some fat teenage girls, but not kids. Priscilla >> >::: I'd almost agree with you were it not for the fact that I see more >> >::: and more obese kids walking around today than were around when I [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> high school, and a whole lot of the students are "packing it on." Much >> more so than in the past.:-) > Interesting. I live within a block of an elementary school and catch > the bus in front of a housing project where a lot of kids hang out. I > don't know that I've seen more than 1 or 2 fat kids. On public transit > I've noticed some fat teenage girls, but not kids. It may depend on what we mean by "fat". I wouldn't call most of the schoolkids I see wandering around Edinburgh fat at all, but if I compare them to photographs of similar schoolkids in the 1950s I'm very struck by how much chubbier they are. It's quite a shock to look at those old photos and see how lean the kids were. By today's standards they look skinny and starved. By today's standards they were also formidably fit in terms of how far many of them could easily walk, run, climb, cycle. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message