 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / March 2007New JAMA Article re Atkins
Anyone notice the new findings published in JAMA about the Akins diet, as compared with other popular diets? Here is a link to a couple of articles about the the article.... Interesting reading.... JAMA does allow free registration for content, but posting a direct link to the article was a hassle.... http://tinyurl.com/26akuk http://www.nypost.com/seven/03072007/news/nationalnews/atkins_is_best_weigh_nati onalnews_david_k__li.htm Will, T2 > Anyone notice the new findings published in JAMA about the Akins diet, > as compared with other popular diets? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Will, T2 Hi Will, thanks for the link , very usefull Here is the JAMA abstract : http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/297/9/969 hth Gys >> Anyone notice the new findings published in JAMA about the Akins diet, >> as compared with other popular diets? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >hth >Gys Hi Gys, Thanks... Now, I can see it.... For some reason, a little while ago, my computer was blocking content from the JAMA site. I tried to post a link to the article, but could not get it to work., Now it seems to be working fine. Guess it could be some sort of securitiy program that I have installed.... Will, T2 >> Anyone notice the new findings published in JAMA about the Akins diet, >> as compared with other popular diets? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >hth >Gys Thanks Gys - been waiting for that. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus The famous Atkins diet..... Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for his diet. > Anyone notice the new findings published in JAMA about the Akins diet, > as compared with other popular diets? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Will, T2 > Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for > his diet. I really do not think that is an accurate of fair portrayal of how he died..... In the interest of fairness and accuracy, here is a link to an obituary that is still to be found in the CNN archives. http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/04/17/obit.atkins/index.html As I recall, Dr. Atkins was a rather fit man, but on his deathbed, he was comatose for an extended period of time and had a problem with fluid retention in his final days. He died nine days after a severe fall that caused a blood clot in his brain. The clot was removed in surgery the next day, but Dr. Atkins never recovered. As the article about his death discusses, he did at one time have a weight problem, and the impetus to develop his diet came from his own efforts to grapple with his weight problem. Yes, there was and is some controversy about his diet.... Will, T2 > The famous Atkins diet..... > Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for > his diet. That's an urban myth initially put about by another doctor and seller of diet books which Atkins attacked. Nearly every health or diet guru who dies very quickly acquires urban myths about their death which "proves" what a lot of people love to hear, that their death proved the nonsense of their advice.  SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > The famous Atkins diet..... > Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for > his diet. He died as a result of a fall on the ice on a NYC sidewalk and was nowhere near obese until treatment for the effects of the fall caused massive edema. Priscilla That is just nonsense. He did have a fat wallet though, and nothing wrong with that either. Cheri Glenn wrote in message ... >The famous Atkins diet..... >Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for >his diet. > The famous Atkins diet..... > Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for his > diet. Both remarks above are absolutely incorrect. But for the prejudiced, truth doesn't much matter. Evelyn > > The famous Atkins diet..... > > Atkins died of a massive coronary and was morbidly obese. So much for his [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Evelyn Same thing happens with remarks about the ADA. It's what happens when people have an agenda. Kurt >Same thing happens with remarks about the ADA. It's what happens when >people have an agenda. > >Kurt Hi Kurt, I have come to feel that we all need to let go of agendas and honestly engage in a truth seeking process, wherever it may lead... I agree... For many, the ADA is a godsend, and no one can deny that they sponsor hugely valuable research. Sometimes, they may seem off the mark to some, but I think that any errors and mistakes in their recommendations will be corrected in the course of time, when more becomes known... If given a choice of living in a world without the ADA, or living in a world where the interests of diabetics are advocated by the ADA, I would choose the latter. What happens is that a lot of people expect the ADA and other similar organizations to adjust and change their information with the changing winds of each and every project. It has lately occurred to me that the ADA is simply a large and broadly representative entity, and they do not want to overreact to individual studies with often contradictory findings and conclusions, until things are very clearly established. So, it is not a "good" and "bad" dichotomy at work here... It is simply human beings trying to sort out what should be recommended as a matter of sound scientific methodology. Just a few thoughts upon the wind... Will, T2 >What happens is that a lot of people expect the ADA and other similar >organizations to adjust and change their information with the changing >winds of each and every project. It has lately occurred to me that the >ADA is simply a large and broadly representative entity, and they do >not want to overreact to individual studies with often contradictory >findings and conclusions, until things are very clearly established. In other words, a dinosaur. Nicky. T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid D&E, 100ug thyroxine Last A1c 5.5% BMI 25 >In other words, a dinosaur. Well, Nicky, that would be another way of putting it, although that term seems to be loaded with pejorative meaning that might not be quite fair. I would agree that they appear to be slow to respond to new findings, though. Still, I think they do a lot of good, on the whole. Will, T2 >>In other words, a dinosaur. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Will, T2 Will, I have heard it argued that diabetes is a cash cow.... a profitable illness. There is little inclination therefore, to cure it. Don't know how true that is, or exactly how connected the drug industry is with the ADA. Seeing that life is often full of these little 'connections' that don't make sense on the surface, yet following the money seems to lead to certain conclusions. It isn't surprising to me that the ADA is not all that liked in diabetes newsgroups, for example. I am not saying they are totally in the thrall of the drug companies, but their literature, for example, does not seem to make sense to me in the light of some of the better diabetes books out there. Whatever the cause may be, is not in the range of my ability to solve, but I have to tell you they are NOT where I go for information. I have heard it said here, that they are 'killing diabetics' but they still refuse to reconsider their position on a so-called "balanced" diet very high in carbohydrates. I have a niece who is a dietician, who follows their reasoning which she was taught in school. We have disagreed. I don't any longer follow a true low-carb diet, but I certainly limit my carbs. I am doing OK, my A1c is 6. (YMMV of course). I have no doubt that if I followed the ADA's recommendations it might not be so good. Best Regards, Evelyn >Whatever the cause may be, is not in the range of my ability to solve, but I >have to tell you they are NOT where I go for information. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I am doing OK, my A1c is 6. (YMMV of course). I have no doubt that if I >followed the ADA's recommendations it might not be so good. I know what you mean, and I simply don't know the ultimate key to the riddle of why the ADA is the way that it is, either... I do not eat a lot of carbs, either.... It may be as I have suggested before that it is just a big organization with many of the characteristics of a bureaucracy, some parts of which are working at cross purposes. Will, T2 If the PTB ever do declare that low-carb is the official way to go, I will instantly & permanently become "non-compliant" -- not because my test results are bad but because I don't low-carb. bj >If the PTB ever do declare that low-carb is the official way to go, I will >instantly & permanently become "non-compliant" -- not because my test >results are bad but because I don't low-carb. >bj PTB?? Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus Powers that be. Cheri Alan S wrote in message ... >>If the PTB ever do declare that low-carb is the official way to go, I will >>instantly & permanently become "non-compliant" -- not because my test [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ >latest: Epidaurus > PTB?? Powers that be. Susan >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Susan Thx Cheri and Susan. I've never taken much notice of PTB since I left the military:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus In alt.support.diabetes on Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:40:08 GMT in Msg.# <e3o3v29kchi801cc5qnng6ootdcr29sil4@4ax.com>, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote: > >x-no-archive: yes > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Thx Cheri and Susan. I've never taken much notice of PTB > since I left the military:-) Well, all soap fans are uber-aware of that acronym PTB or TPTB. But, it goes past just soap fan knowledge, at least it does here in the US. SignatureDonnaB 06-07-06 Diagnosis T2 hbA1C 8.1, D&E & Metformin 500mg. ..................09-11-06 hbA1C 5.0 ..................12-20-06 hbA1C 5.2 "There is a crack in everything, That's how the light gets in." - Leonard Cohen, Anthem I never knew what it was until I found a soap newsgroup. :-) Cheri DonnaB shallotpeel wrote in message ... >In alt.support.diabetes on Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:40:08 GMT in Msg.# >Well, all soap fans are uber-aware of that acronym PTB or TPTB. But, it goes >past just soap fan knowledge, at least it does here in the US. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >"There is a crack in everything, That's how the light gets in." - Leonard >Cohen, Anthem In alt.support.diabetes on Fri, 9 Mar 2007 15:16:52 -0800 in Msg.# <kL6dnWR5vLD4d2zYnZ2dnUVZ_tWhnZ2d@inreach.com>, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote: > I never knew what it was until I found a soap newsgroup. :-) Hmm, okay, all soap fans who are in on things!! <G> Just think how many things you have learned since you found a soap NG. Heh heh. SignatureDonnaB 06-07-06 Diagnosis T2 hbA1C 8.1, D&E & Metformin 500mg. ..................09-11-06 hbA1C 5.0 ..................12-20-06 hbA1C 5.2 "Ardanowski?" - Jax, "Yes, Mr. Jax?" - V, "Pack up the animals. We're going back to Port Charles." - Jax, GH, 9/97 You got that right!!! :-) Cheri DonnaB shallotpeel wrote in message ... >Hmm, okay, all soap fans who are in on things!! <G> Just think how many >things you have learned since you found a soap NG. Heh heh. > Well, all soap fans are uber-aware of that acronym PTB or TPTB. But, it goes > past just soap fan knowledge, at least it does here in the US. I dun watch no steenkin' soaps! ;-) I just sussed it out. Susan In alt.support.diabetes on Fri, 09 Mar 2007 20:22:49 -0500 in Msg.# > I dun watch no steenkin' soaps! ;-) > > I just sussed it out. Okay, okay, you've just got that kind of mind then!! Acronym friendly! SignatureDonnaB 06-07-06 Diagnosis T2 hbA1C 8.1, D&E & Metformin 500mg. ..................09-11-06 hbA1C 5.0 ..................12-20-06 hbA1C 5.2 "Appearing for the defense, ... the victim, ... Katherine Bell." - Helena GH 8/98 >If the PTB ever do declare that low-carb is the official way to go, I will >instantly & permanently become "non-compliant" -- not because my test >results are bad but because I don't low-carb. >bj That the idea... We are individuals, and we have our own individual responses and preferences. I low carb, because it works for me, but I am the first to acknowledge that it is not for everyone... Also, there are kidney and liver conditions that some people have which make low carbing a possibly bad idea. Will, T2 >>If the PTB ever do declare that low-carb is the official way to go, I will >>instantly & permanently become "non-compliant" -- not because my test [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Will, T2 Oh, low-carb would probably *work* for me, but I'd feel like I was in an institution or something. I'm not a big veggie eater. I don't think my psyche is up for yet another massive shift on "food". bj > >What happens is that a lot of people expect the ADA and other similar > >organizations to adjust and change their information with the changing [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > In other words, a dinosaur. People in here consider them a dinosaur because they continue to misrepresent their general recommendations and fail to include their specific advice that one has to work with a doctor and nutritionist to fiscover what works best for them. And also that the levels they suggest (i.e. A1c) are maximum and that each one of us need to aim for as close to normal levels as possible. Dinosuars are extinct, the misrepresentation in here to suit the prevailing amateur agenda just plain stinks. Kurt >> >What happens is that a lot of people expect the ADA and other similar >> >organizations to adjust and change their information with the changing [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> In other words, a dinosaur. > People in here consider them a dinosaur because they continue to > misrepresent their general recommendations and fail to include their > specific advice that one has to work with a doctor and nutritionist to > fiscover what works best for them. Because we have evidence that that same kind of misrepresentation happens quite innocently to well-intentioned doctors who read the ADA web pages to update themselves. The problem is that the ADA's web pages are too easily misconstrued in that way, so the ADA therefore ought to redesign their pages to make it harder for such mistakes to be made. The fact that they don't, despite often having had it brought to their attention. does lead some to the not unreasonable suspicion that someone in the ADA might be finding it convenient that their web pages are liable to this kind of misconstrual. > And also that the levels they > suggest (i.e. A1c) are maximum and that each one of us need to aim for > as close to normal levels as possible. Same comment. While what you say is perfectly true, it's too easy for an innocent reader not to place appropriate emphasis on the fine print and end up with the impression that you're ok if you're under the mentioned A1C level. Once again there is evidence that this not only happens to medically naive readers, it also happens to doctors who check the ADA's pages for the guidelines they should be using in treatment and diagnosis. > Dinosuars are extinct, the misrepresentation in here to suit the > prevailing amateur agenda just plain stinks. Representations are relative to purpose. For your purposes the ADA is a good source. For mine it isn't. If you would stop treating the disagreement as a gang war and start viewing it as a disagreement about purpose-relevant matters of fact it might be possible to have a productive dialogue with you about the ADA, and you might find it possible to agree to disagree with someone of a different opinion rather than playing gang wars in a support newsgroup. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > Because we have evidence that that same kind of misrepresentation > happens quite innocently to well-intentioned doctors who read the ADA > web pages to update themselves. The problem is that the ADA's web > pages are too easily misconstrued in that way, so the ADA therefore > ought to redesign their pages to make it harder for such mistakes to be > made. A friend I work with recently told me she's a type 2 and her doctor set her a target Hba1c of 7.0 and said it was what the ADA said was best. I suggested that might have long term negative repercussions and she'd be better off trying to achieve lower numbers. But she's happy to do as the T & K show promote and leave everything to her doctor to decide. I hope I won't have to visit her in hospital any time soon <sigh>. SignaturePeter G. (bigbird) I have found that for myself that when eating right, loseing wieght and doing real exercise that I couldnt even meet the ADA guildlines. in a very short time my numbers were much lower then they suggested. aiming for certain blood sugar levels are good but once a body has become healthy and eats healthy I think many will show what happened to me. i couldnt possibly get the numbers the ADA suggests if i follow and work with the adive my doctor and dietitian gave me on nutrition and exercise. my numbers were much lower in only 6 months. SignatureTom www.TomsDiabeticDiary.com Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web Site. http://community.diabetes.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=index&webtag=amdiabetesz&redi rCnt=1 Information You Can "Trust" From Your American Diabetes Association www.diabetes.org Information on Specific Types of Fat. http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp On Mar 10, 8:41?am, "Peter G. \(Bigbird\)" <unknown at whoknows dot us> wrote: > > Because we have evidence that that same kind of misrepresentation > > happens quite innocently to well-intentioned doctors who read the ADA [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > K show promote and leave everything to her doctor to decide. I hope I won't > have to visit her in hospital any time soon <sigh>. Typical response in here from yet another know-it-all. It's really sad that a few in here get the condescending "I'm better than the other diabetics and they're going to get sick because they don't listen to me" attitude. The ADA doesn't say that an A1c target of 7.0 is best. And the T & K show don't promote leaving everything to a doctor. But what I personally don't promote is basing one's diabetes care on amateur hearsay in a newsgroup. Your friend deserves better than your smug holier than thou attitude, Peter. Kurt >On Mar 10, 8:41?am, "Peter G. \(Bigbird\)" <unknown at whoknows dot >us> wrote: >> A friend I work with recently told me she's a type 2 and her doctor set her >> a target Hba1c of 7.0 and said it was what the ADA said was best. I >Typical response in here from yet another know-it-all. Look at what Peter actually said, Kurt-the-knee-jerk - his friend was reporting the DOCTOR'S ADVICE, which he believes is the ADA's position. Nicky. > >On Mar 10, 8:41?am, "Peter G. \(Bigbird\)" <unknown at whoknows dot > >us> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > reporting theDOCTOR'SADVICE, which he believes is the ADA's > position. I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. The doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. Peter should have shown her what the ADA's actual position is and suggested that she either inform her doctor or get a new one, preferably an endo who specializes in diabetes. Just a hunch, but I think Peter really doesn't know what the ADA position is and is basing it on what he reads in here. In case he cares to know, or anyone else reading, this is what their actual position is: "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." Kurt >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. The >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. Peter should have shown >her what the ADA's actual position is and suggested that she either >inform her doctor or get a new one, preferably an endo who specializes >in diabetes. Sorry about the delayed response. I'm just getting over the shock here. So, you're saying that Peter's friend should listen to Peter's excellent non-professional advice to educate or change her doctor because the advice that her doctor is giving her is incorrect? You're telling Peter to tell a patient to disregard their Doctor? Wow. You're also saying that doctors should be getting their correct information on the ADA position from their patients who have more time to sift through the contradictory and often indirect web-site? Just getting it straight for Peter's friend. Would you like to state clearly and unambiguously on the ADA's behalf, as an English major, the exact position of the ADA as you understand it, with url support? You may use this as a template, adjusting as appropriate: A1c type target: 7% PP 2hr: 180mg/dl(10mmol/l) Source:http://www.diabetes.org/type-2-diabetes/tight-control.jsp "By the Numbers Good control means getting as close to a normal (nondiabetic) blood glucose level as you safely can. Ideally, this means levels between 90 and 130 mg/dl before meals, and less than 180 two hours after starting a meal, with a glycated hemoglobin level less than 7 percent." Dietary advice on whole grains: "The message today: Eat more whole grains! Whole grains and starches are good for you because they have very little fat, saturated fat, or cholesterol. They are packed with vitamins, minerals, and fiber. Yes, foods with carbohydrate -- starches, vegetables, fruits, and dairy products -- will raise your blood glucose more quickly than meats and fats, but they are the healthiest foods for you. Your doctor may need to adjust your medications when you eat more carbohydrates. You may need to increase your activity level or try spacing carbohydrates throughout the day. On average Americans eat around 40-45% of our calories as carbohydrate. This is a moderate amount of carbohydrate, not high." Source http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/starches.jsp Diet, general: Too much to repeat - with contradictory pages. The worst, apart from the "eat more whole grains" is: Using the Diabetes Food Pyramid http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodpyramid.jsp and the best, although not great, is: Making Healthy Food Choices http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/healthyfoodchoices.jsp There's more, but that should keep you busy for a little while. Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus answering a post by Kurt <<snip>> > So, you're saying that Peter's friend should listen to > Peter's excellent non-professional advice to educate or > change her doctor because the advice that her doctor is > giving her is incorrect? You're telling Peter to tell a > patient to disregard their Doctor? Wow. <<big snip>> Wow, that was a surprise to me too. That I'm a know-it-all and that I would tell my friend her doctor is wrong. I'm trained in electrical systems, not physical ones. I'd never presume to countermand a doctor. At the most I may advise someone to get another opinion. I did talk with her mentioning the large drop in statistical incidence of diabetic complications below an HbA1c of 6.0. And argued that she had nothing to loose and everything to gain by trying to do better than her doctors target. She was quite unconcerned.... so I quit trying. It's her choice to make. SignaturePeter G. (bigbird) On Mar 11, 10:25?am, "Peter G. \(Bigbird\)" <unknown at whoknows dot us> wrote: > answering a post by Kurt > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > <<big snip>> To begin with, Alan was just playing net-nanny again and felt the need to jump on something I said. In this case it was because the other Peter (Peter C.) just exposed him in another thread and out of embarrassment he ran to this one to take a shot at me. Happens a lot. > Wow, that was a surprise to me too. That I'm a know-it-all and that I would > tell my friend her doctor is wrong. Okay, maybe the know-it-all comment was wrong and I apologize. From what I remember reading in here you don't really fall into that category. But your comment about hoping not to have to visit her in the hospital soon is much like some of the other comments I read in here when someone is gloating about how their self-dcotoring is better than someone else who might disagree with them (i.e. hope the ADA pays for your funeral kind of comments.) If you know anything about me it is that I have the highest regard for doctors and think they are unduly bashed in this newsgroup. Your friend's doctor is wrong if he truly does believe that the ADA recommends an A1C of 7. They don't. For many people just reaching a 7.0 is a major struggle and it is the best number they personally might be able to reach. If your friend could do better than she should try. If that means finding an endo who feels she can achieve lower than 7 then she should find that person. >I'm trained in electrical systems, not > physical ones. I'd never presume to countermand a doctor. At the most I may > advise someone to get another opinion. Yes, explain that the ADA's position is less than 7 and as near as normal as possible and suggest that she find an endo that specializes in diabetes. > I did talk with her mentioning the large drop in statistical incidence of > diabetic complications below an HbA1c of 6.0. And argued that she had > nothing to loose and everything to gain by trying to do better than her > doctors target. She was quite unconcerned.... so I quit trying. It's her > choice to make. Unfortunately that has been the case for several of my friends who seem to plce less importance on their having diabetes than they would the common cold. Preaching doesn't do much good, so I have stopped doing so but am there for them should they ever want to become more proactive. It is their choice to make but it does hurt me, as I'm sure it does you, to know that it would behoove them to understand that diabetes is a serious disease. I contend that patient apathy and non-compliance is the thing that should be attacked here and by the medical profession. It has become yet another terrible complication of diabetes. Again, sorry for the negative comments about you, Peter. You seem like a good person to me and I was wrong to lump you in with the few armchair doctors that I battle with in this newsgroup. Kurt > If you know anything about me it is that I have the highest regard for > doctors and think they are unduly bashed in this newsgroup. Your > friend's doctor is wrong if he truly does believe that the ADA > recommends an A1C of 7. They don't. For many people just reaching a > 7.0 is a major struggle and it is the best number they personally > might be able to reach. its also important to point out that the numbers on the page are just general recommendations. that is why it says so many times to work with doctors and not just view this page. I also feel that if anyone was to follow their doctors advice for healthy eating and healthy activity levels that A1C's will follow. Personally I have never talked to a diabetic that I feel couldnt be healthier. if you dont play sports or have a really physical job real exercise is very important to become as healthy as you can. >If your friend could do better than she > should try. If that means finding an endo who feels she can achieve > lower than 7 then she should find that person. its also important not to push some people to hard. In the long run some people might be better off shooting for a easier 7 than to shoot for a 5%. but still cant help but feel if you do the exercise and eat right and become as healthy as you can - 5% become very easy and I couldnt get a 7% if I wanted. I would have to really be doing wrong to get a 7%. Also my doctors get updates mailed to them and dont use the ADA web site like I do. their information is for treating patients not for someone just looking for general information. Tom > Your >friend's doctor is wrong if he truly does believe that the ADA >recommends an A1C of 7. They don't. And that's your only answer to the section snipped where I gave the reference where they do exactly that? Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. The >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. Yes, indeed. The major diabetes organisation in the US is doing such a crap education job that Dr J Bloggs has got it wrong. In the UK, the average doc has an IQ north of 125 and does 7 years' medical training before being let loose on the public; assuming a similar level of training and intelligence in the US, I'd say the ADA is failing. Wouldn't you? (That's a rhetorical question, Kurt.) Nicky. T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid D&E, 100ug thyroxine Last A1c 5.5% BMI 25 > >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. The > >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > training and intelligence in the US, I'd say the ADA is failing. > Wouldn't you? (That's a rhetorical question, Kurt.) You should get together with Chris Malcolm and see if he can induct you into ABC (his America Bashing Club)...they seem to have meetings several times a week. I have a number of British friends who paint a much less sunny review of UK doctors than you do. 7 years? Is that all? And that's not a rhetorical question. Kurt >> >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. he >> >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >much less sunny review of UK doctors than you do. 7 years? Is that >all? And that's not a rhetorical question. I have several IRL American friends and British friends living in America, and have visited the US on many occasions - sadly we won't again whilst the HSA insist on criminalising my children. I'm not interested in bashing America in any way, and I really doubt Chris is either. As to my picture of UK doctors - I said they were brighter than average and studied a lot, which is factual. The question I was asking, which you failed to answer, was that (assuming US doctors are at least on a par with their UK colleagues) how it is that the ADA are failing their education brief so thoroughly? Nicky. T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid D&E, 100ug thyroxine Last A1c 5.5% BMI 25 > sadly we won't >again whilst the HSA insist on criminalising my children Hi Nicky, I know I must be missing something... What is the HSA? And, what do you mean criminalising your children? Will, T2 >> sadly we won't >>again whilst the HSA insist on criminalising my children [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I know I must be missing something... What is the HSA? And, what do >you mean criminalising your children? Homeland Security Agency - the people who insist that my children are dangerous criminals who must have their fingerprints taken before entering the country. Knowing my 12yo's hacking tendencies, I'd probably support such a move once she's adult - but not right now : ) For long-distance holidays we're alternating between Canada and Australia these days - or we will once hubby's mobile again, he's suffering from a prolapsed disc atm. Nicky. T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid D&E, 100ug thyroxine Last A1c 5.5% BMI 25 > >> >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. he > >> >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > than average and studied a lot, which is factual. The question I was > asking, which you failed to answer Failed to answer? You said it was a rhetorical question and it was obvious you already had your answer. >was that (assuming US doctors are > at least on a par with their UK colleagues) >From what I know about the UK's doctors and medical system, it differs from the U.S. so that carries over to the "parness" of the doctors when trying to compare them. >how it is that the ADA are > failing their education brief so thoroughly? Why narrow it to the U.S. and England? The entire world's diabetes problem is out of control. The ADA is getting the word out, to doctors and they in turn are, for the most part, getting the word out to their patients. I place the bulk of the blame not on the message, but on those who receive it. Non compliance by the public is the #1 problem with diabetes. I liken it to smoking. For many years now the dangers of smoking have been preached by everyone from the Government, to doctors, to your average Joe and Josephine on the street. But people are still smoking. Unhealthy fast food, obesity, and lack of exercise are several other messages that have been shouted from rooftops by health care professionals for years as well and yet a great percentage of the general public turns a deaf ear towards them. It may be convenient to blame the ADA for the lack of compliance, or doctors for not knowing enough, but the simple truth is that even given the warnings, people will not change their lifestyle. Hopefully as the disease continues to grow, so will the efforts by everyone to work harder to find solutions to the problem. But apathy is pretty hard to fix. Kurt >Failed to answer? You said it was a rhetorical question and it was >obvious you already had your answer. OK, mea culpa! >>how it is that the ADA are >> failing their education brief so thoroughly? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >doctors and they in turn are, for the most part, getting the word out >to their patients. Hmmm. I wonder how true that is. Maybe Peter's friend's doc is the rule, not the exception. > I place the bulk of the blame not on the message, >but on those who receive it. Non compliance by the public is the #1 >problem with diabetes. Well, I must admit I'm completely non-compliant with the crap advice handed out by my doc. >Hopefully as the disease continues to grow, so will the efforts by >everyone to work harder to find solutions to the problem. But apathy >is pretty hard to fix. I don't really see apathy - I don't see anyone with a root cause yet. I think there's some very basic questions to answer before we can really tackle the issues. FWIW, I think the ADA, and Diabetes UK, are doing some great research along those lines. I'm happy to fund raise for DUK, but quite unhappy with the way the ADA chooses to present its research. Nicky. Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins > Non compliance by the public is the #1 problem with diabetes. > Kurt, Type 1 You left out "type 2" before "diabetes." Non-compliance by a type 1 generally leads to fairly immediate consequences. I helped by adding the sig you omitted. Now we have the real attitude. So it has nothing to do with poor advice and guidelines - non-compliance is the real problem! What you're implying is that it doesn't really matter what is advised - it won't be followed anyway. So it's the patient's fault. I don't comply with the ADA/Diabetes Australia guidelines either. Nor do some of the other posters here. In fact, I directly contradict their guidelines on diet and testing. Odd, that. It's also odd that back when I dropped in on the local support group people asked the CDE questions like "I'm taking the pills the doctor told me to and I lost a lot of weight and my numbers are still too high - Why? What should I do?" After the CDE had responded I would ask just two questions: "What did you eat for breakfast?" "How often and when do you test?" The answers were invariably a version of "Oh, I eat my healthy three "carbs" of cereal, skim milk, toast, just like the Diabetes Australia dietician told me" and "before breakfast and before dinner, just like the doctor told me". Well, like the doctor used to; it seems the local one is suggesting some extra testing these days. Blame the patient. How often have we heard that before? Does it never occur to those with the responsibility of advising on public health that, if the advice is not producing the right results, the problem may be the quality of the advice and not the level of compliance? Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus >I don't comply with the ADA/Diabetes Australia guidelines >either. Nor do some of the other posters here. In fact, I >directly contradict their guidelines on diet and testing I stick with Will's "pretty good rules"... They work fine for me... :-) Guidelines are simply a starting point for those who do not know, or who have not taken the trouble to learn, the ins and outs of diabetes... There is no substitute for education and study. In the end, it is results that count, and we have to formulate our own guidelines, according to what works for us, individually, according to our meters. I cannot eat a diet that has many carbs... For those T2s out there who like their carbs, I say go for it... as long as your own testing results give you positive indicators. Also, I would recommend that everyone pay attention to their triglycerides, as they are known to be affected by carb intake.... That goes for T1s and T2s... Will, T2 >>I don't comply with the ADA/Diabetes Australia guidelines >>either. Nor do some of the other posters here. In fact, I [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Will, T2 Speaking of guidelines, I've been copying my medical records for a planned visit to a new doctor. Here's what it says on my lab reports from three different clinical medical labs: "The American Diabetes Association recommends that the goal of therapy should be a hemoglobin A1c of <7% and that physicians should reevaluate the treatment regimen in patients with hemoglobin A1c values consistently >8%" Susan >"The American Diabetes Association recommends that the goal of therapy >should be a hemoglobin A1c of <7% and that physicians should reevaluate >the treatment regimen in patients with hemoglobin A1c values >consistently >8%" Hi Susan, I do not mean to throw rocks at the ADA... I just think that what they say should be taken with a grain of salt and a bit of caution. I hesitate to suggest what would be right for everyone, but speaking for myself only, I would be freaking out if I were anything over 6.0 for an a1c. I have been maintaining at around 5.6 for about 2 years now, and it seems to be a comfort zone for me.... No more perceptible damage, and some noticeable improvement of the neuropathy. I do not want to get into any more flame wars about this or that as to the ADA... I recognize that their recommendations are simply irrelevant to my situation. I have compiled "Will's Pretty Good Rules", and they work for me. By the way, you probably already have a good idea of what "Will's Pretty Good Rules" would suggest for just about any situation. ;-) Will, T2 : >"The American Diabetes Association recommends that the goal of therapy : >should be a hemoglobin A1c of <7% and that physicians should reevaluate [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] : : Will, T2 Evening Will, I like your "Will's Pretty Good Rules" btw.. :) I had to chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you had anything over 6.0 for an a1c. While I realize the differences in T1's and T2's.. there is no difference in how excessive glucose in the blood damages our bodies in the end. I don't know how many here realize that most of the T1's that do post (not lurkers) probably break a hefty sweat when going in for an a1c because we're damn lucky to get anything below a 7%, about 80% of the time. For the past year, mine have been 7.8%, 6.4%, 8.7%, 5.9% (2mon after surgery), 7.4% --- btw, the 5.9% is the lowest I've ever had in the past 7yrs of being dx'd. I also believe that Kurt is the only T1's posting on here that is below a 6.5%. (someone pls correct me if I'm wrong) Ever notice how Tim, me, Steph (who's not posted in over a yr), Vicki, Mack, Kate... ever post our A1C's? (not rhetorical) I know for myself, that even though as much as I struggle daily, I have other issues that cause me to struggle even still, with ALL the pressure often posted here to get less then a 6% a1c.. it certainly makes me feel like a utter failure. All I'm saying.. like you, I'm not going to get into a ADA bashing fest.. but felt the need to make my point as well. Have a good new week.. RK, t1 >Evening Will, I like your "Will's Pretty Good Rules" btw.. :) I had to >chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you had [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >RK, t1 Hi Reisa, So good to hear from you.... I think you and I have hit on a way through all the mess of misunderstanding. It is not about bashing the ADA, or anyone else... Rather, I think it is about each and every one of us intelligently taking control of our own lives to the greatest extent that we can, in light of what we know works, or does not work, for aiding our control. More than anything, I think we need to remember that we are all human, and thus, subject to temptations to eat and drink things that may not be good for us as diabetics. Thanks for making your point... I think T1s in many ways have a much more difficult task in controlling their BG..... All of you,especially those posting here, have my very great respect and admiration. I hope you have a really good week coming up! Will, T2 >>Evening Will, I like your "Will's Pretty Good Rules" btw.. :) I had to >>chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you had [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > >Will, T2 BTW, at one time, until I took control, my a1c was 13.... and I was dying. I do very much know what it feels like. Will, T2 : >>Evening Will, I like your "Will's Pretty Good Rules" btw.. :) I had to : >>chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you had [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] : : Will, T2 But how many times have you had a a1c over 6.5%? I'm really trying not to discount how any diabetic might have felt prior to diagnosis, but unless ones been through DKA or the type 2 simular... feeling like ones dying and actually moments to hours from deaths door is very different. Daily there are T1's either going hypo or hitting dka from whatever the reason... that are quite often to literally dying. I can't even describe the feeling of being in DKA.. because you honestly wish you would die just to get relief. RK, t1 - 4x in 7yrs I've been in DKA. > : I do not mean to throw rocks at the ADA... I just think that what they > : say should be taken with a grain of salt and a bit of caution. I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > : and it seems to be a comfort zone for me.... No more perceptible > : damage, and some noticeable improvement of the neuropathy. > : I do not want to get into any more flame wars about this or that as to > : the ADA... I recognize that their recommendations are simply [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > : By the way, you probably already have a good idea of what "Will's > : Pretty Good Rules" would suggest for just about any situation. ;-) > Evening Will, I like your "Will's Pretty Good Rules" btw.. :) I had to > chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you had > anything over 6.0 for an a1c. While I realize the differences in T1's > and T2's.. there is no difference in how excessive glucose in the blood > damages our bodies in the end. But generally speaking there *is* a difference in the BG levels that are damaging. T2s typically suffer diabetic damage at lower BGs than T1s. > I don't know how many here realize > that most of the T1's that do post (not lurkers) probably break a hefty [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > with ALL the pressure often posted here to get less then a 6% a1c.. it > certainly makes me feel like a utter failure. It shouldn't, not least because this is one of the T1/T2 differences. The other reason is that we're all at different stages of progression and have different comorbidities etc.. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] Diabetes in not one disease with one cause. That is oine reason there is no one answer. I think the originators of MHD realized and the group was to educate us so we could find our way. Learn the principles and how they apply to each of our cases/ You will not find a suitable answer with recipes of others rote ideas. Since there are many acceptable ways and you may be lucky go hit the mark. You make a few hits. try to use all sources and try to fit them into my case. I honestly believe I would be dead after a lot of misery wth the many inputs. My first few years were easy. But then it progressibly lost ground. Only after I receive an education from the early MHD people did I learn abuot basal, glucose releases for several reasons and te effect of exercise and the fact that both glucose and nsulin must be present to function well. So much more. To me, the minor trivia is much less imporant. Early n my diabetic chase I grabbed at straws and chased all of the crap published by vested interest. I was down to under 140 lbs before I went on insulin Since some crap artists said insulin caused the complicatrions. Still ar the normal time the complications came. Neuroarthy, leaky retinas and all of the rest. a nice scene. A chemicasl engineer from upper New York went to a lot of trouble to edcuate me and he had it right. Today at I 77 years am fsairly comfortabe. No worse than a normal peron of my age. I have seen a dozen of my peers in my area that are long gone after much sufferng. Most did nothing but listen to poorly inormed peolpe. and depended on rote doctors. I think treatment of diabetes as to be done with some efort and self control. I tiink dabetics need to look past commericil blurbs and self appointed experts. We use others to see their experinces and use what fits you. Tbat is a collective thing. Your answers will come years from now. Definitely do not listen to those like a the fellow that jumped off of the top of the Empire State Building sayng" i am OK" as he passes the fifteenth floor. He says "JUMP" because you see I made it. Added, I blocked posts to multiple groups. I see so little on MHD mow. That is a shame. Over the long run it provided most of the real progress we made in the understand of diabetes. The real answers may be 50 years away. Plenty of expensive band aids. >: >"The American Diabetes Association recommends that the goal of >: >therapy should be a hemoglobin A1c of <7% and that physicians >: >should reevaluate the treatment regimen in patients with hemoglobin >: >A1c values consistently >8%" >: >: Hi Susan, >: >: I do not mean to throw rocks at the ADA... I just think that what >: they say should be taken with a grain of salt and a bit of caution. I >: hesitate to suggest what would be right for everyone, but speaking >: for myself only, I would be freaking out if I were anything over 6.0 >: for an a1c. I have been maintaining at around 5.6 for about 2 years >: now, and it seems to be a comfort zone for me.... No more perceptible >: damage, and some noticeable improvement of the neuropathy. >: >: I do not want to get into any more flame wars about this or that as >: to the ADA... I recognize that their recommendations are simply >: irrelevant to my situation. I have compiled "Will's Pretty Good >: Rules", and they work for me. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] :) I had > to chuckle to myself when I read that you'd be "freaking" out if you > had anything over 6.0 for an a1c. While I realize the differences in > T1's > and T2's.. there is no difference in how excessive glucose in the > blood damages our bodies in the end. I don't know how many here > realize > that most of the T1's that do post (not lurkers) probably break a > hefty sweat when going in for an a1c because we're damn lucky to get > anything below a 7%, about 80% of the time. For the past year, mine > have been 7.8%, 6.4%, 8.7%, 5.9% (2mon after surgery), 7.4% --- > btw, the 5.9% is the lowest I've ever had in the past 7yrs of being > dx'd. I also believe that Kurt is the only T1's posting on here that > is below a > 6.5%. (someone pls correct me if I'm wrong) Ever notice how Tim, me, > Steph (who's not posted in over a yr), Vicki, Mack, Kate... ever post > our A1C's? (not rhetorical) I know for myself, that even though as > much as > I struggle daily, I have other issues that cause me to struggle even > still, with ALL the pressure often posted here to get less then a 6% > a1c.. it certainly makes me feel like a utter failure. I think the difference between higher A1c's in 1's and 2's is that the 2's have other factors that combined make a higher risk for complications - insulin resistance, lipid problems, high bp etc. Add those to higher than normal bg's and we are at high risk for complications. If a type 1 has higher than normal A1c they, for the most part, don't have the added "syndrome" components to contend with. And from what I see in here, type 1's who have very high bg's often don't have them for a long time. When type 2's A1c is up you usually find a lot of other things "up" as well. I had an A1c of just 6.4 once and all my diabetes related labs were up too, fasting, triglycerides, total cholesterol etc. My bp was up also and so was my weight (only about 3 k's). It wasn't a coincidence that I had also eaten more carbs than usual during that period (and calories). > Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > type 1 generally leads to fairly immediate consequences. I > helped by adding the sig you omitted. Since 90% of all diabetics are type 2, THEIR #1 problem is the #1 problem with diabetes. Furthermore, the fact that a type 1's non-compliance "generally leads to fairly immediate consequences" goes without saying for anyone acquainted with diabetes 101. What does not go without saying is idiotic implication behind your "logic" that non-compliance by type 2s generally DOES NOT lead to fairly immediate consequences. I'm fairly certain you are aware of fact most T2s (not just you!)aren't even aware that they have been hit with a debilitating metabolic disorder. For years. And years, in many cases. You've gotta learn how to put 2+2 together, Alan. > Now we have the real attitude. So it has nothing to do with > poor advice and guidelines - non-compliance is the real > problem! Quit putting word's in his mouth: he didn't write non-compliance is the "real" problem. He wrote it's the #1 problem. Big difference. What you're implying is that it doesn't really > matter what is advised - it won't be followed anyway. That is true. Most diabetics are unable to comply with the basics: proper D & E. And that regardless of the advise they get. The fact that all of the advise from organizations such as the ADA is not state of the art and tailored to individuals (which, when it comes to T2s is a MUST) is a relatively minor problem. So > it's the patient's fault. Yes, it is. Not exclusively, but in the main it's very much about faulty genes and/or non-compliance. But I realize that preaching personal responsibility won't get you as many brownie points with the asd crowd as whining about their condition being the fault of others, and we couldn't have that, could we now? > Blame the patient. How often have we heard that before? > > Does it never occur to those with the responsibility of > advising on public health that, if the advice is not > producing the right results, the problem may be the quality > of the advice and not the level of compliance? Quit whining. There is no advise that is producing the right results for everyone. And that includes yours. Especially yours. > Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. > d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg > Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. Can't stop lying, can ya? BoB --------------------------------------------------- Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom. --Thomas Jefferson >> Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >years, in many cases. >You've gotta learn how to put 2+2 together, Alan. Well, actually, you got 2+2=7. You've extended way beyond the intent or meaning of the comment. >> Now we have the real attitude. So it has nothing to do with >> poor advice and guidelines - non-compliance is the real >> problem! > >Quit putting word's in his mouth: he didn't write non-compliance is the >"real" problem. He wrote it's the #1 problem. Big difference. Oh? Explain and amplify. >What you're implying is that it doesn't really >> matter what is advised - it won't be followed anyway. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >many brownie points with the asd crowd as whining about their condition >being the fault of others, and we couldn't have that, could we now? Are you serious? Personal responsibility is exactly what I believe. As to preaching, form your own opinion; well, I see that you have. Far be it for me to change it. >> Blame the patient. How often have we heard that before? >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Quit whining. There is no advise that is producing the right results for >everyone. And that includes yours. Especially yours. Whining? What we have here is a failure to communicate. So, did you get sick of anothascreename? Alan, T2, Australia. > >> Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Well, actually,yougot2+2=7.You've extended way beyond > the intent or meaning of the comment. It just looks like that when you can't put 2+2 together. > >> Now we have the real attitude. So it has nothing to do with > >> poor advice and guidelines - non-compliance is the real [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Oh? Explain http://dictionary.reference.com/ and amplify. Dictionary.com does have a link that will pronounce the words you look up. Just turn up the volume :-) > >Whatyou're implying is that it doesn't really > >> matter what is advised - it won't be followed anyway. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Areyouserious? Personal responsibility is exactly what I > believe. Then it's okay to blame the patient after all? Make up your mind. As to preaching, form your own opinion; well, I see > thatyouhave. Redundant Al strikes again Far be it for me to change it. I know. Definitely not your style. > >> Blame the patient. How often have we heard that before? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Whining? Yes, you do that a lot. > What we have here is a failure to communicate. Try harder. > So, didyouget sick of anothascreename? No, but as the screen name implies - anothascreename is not the only scree name. > Alan, T2, Australia. Nice, short signature :-) > Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > type 1 generally leads to fairly immediate consequences. I > helped by adding the sig you omitted. You also changed the title of the thread, which you do a lot. Alan, you really should see a specialist about your control issues. I won't respond to the rest of your blathering because it is just that and has little to do with the opinion I put forth. But I will return the favor of "adding" something to what you wrote. > Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. Net-Nanny. Department of Control. >Intrusive Denmother of a.s.d. Kurt [Default] On 12 Mar 2007 10:24:51 -0700, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> Giggled into the madness of usenet: >> Was: New JAMA Article re Atkins >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Kurt Net-Nanny. Department of Control. >Intrusive Denmother of a.s.d. I see. >You left out "type 2" before "diabetes." Non-compliance by a >type 1 generally leads to fairly immediate consequences. I >helped by adding the sig you omitted. Well, yes and no. After more than 41 years as a Type 1 diabetic, I can tell you that "compliance" is not an either/or situation. There are degrees of compliance. You can live for a long time, without noticeable symptoms, with average BG's in the 200 range. In fact, back 40 years ago, when a single shot a day of NPH was the norm for treatment, and home BG testing was nonexistant, sugars in the 200's were probably typical. "Full compliance" for a Type 1, today, would involve either a pump or multiple daily injections, with testing at least 3 or 4 times a day. (Plus, of course, adhering to the diet and exercise recommendations.) Getting the A1c below 7 would have long-term benefits, sure, but a lot of people get by with A1c in the 8 or 9 range. Personally, I've never been able to get my A1c much below the high 7's. Maybe I could get it lower (if that's what you mean by "compliance"), but I'd have a lot more hypoglycemic episodes, and my quality of life in other respects would suffer. >>You left out "type 2" before "diabetes." Non-compliance by a >>type 1 generally leads to fairly immediate consequences. I [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >more hypoglycemic episodes, and my quality of life in other respects >would suffer. Fair enough. I stand corrected. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus On Mar 11, 2:20?am, Nicky <ukc802466...@btconnect.com> wrote: > On 10 Mar 2007 12:49:11 -0800, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > training and intelligence in the US, I'd say the ADA is failing. > Wouldn't you? (That's a rhetorical question, Kurt.) You should get together with Chris Malcolm and see if he can induct you into ABC (his America Bashing Club)...they seem to have meetings several times a week. I have a number of British friends who paint a much less sunny review of UK doctors than you do. 7 years? Is that all? And that's not a rhetorical question. Kurt LOL yeah, my eyeballs about fell out when I saw 7yrs.. no wonder the UK is YEARS BEHIND the USA in medical treatment(s). I know when I was having a convo with my GP, when she said that from our conversations I'd do very well if I went back to school and studied Medicine.. then I asked her how many more years is that.... she stated that she had 4yrs to get into med school which was another 4yrs, then another 4yrs for her residency and then depending on speciality another 2-6yrs. I'm very thankful I'm not in the UK now. SignatureReisa, T1 dx-5/00 asd-7/00 Animas IR1250 pumper Currently taking a pump vacation Daily CHO: 100-130gm TDD: 36-38u Last A1C: too damn high! > On Mar 11, 2:20?am, Nicky <ukc802466...@btconnect.com> wrote: >> On 10 Mar 2007 12:49:11 -0800, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. The >> >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. >> Yes, indeed. The major diabetes organisation in the US is doing such a >> crap education job that Dr J Bloggs has got it wrong. In the UK, the >> average doc has an IQ north of 125 and does 7 years' medical training >> before being let loose on the public; assuming a similar level of >> training and intelligence in the US, I'd say the ADA is failing. >> Wouldn't you? (That's a rhetorical question, Kurt.) > You should get together with Chris Malcolm and see if he can induct > you into ABC (his America Bashing Club)...they seem to have meetings > several times a week. The criteria for membership are very simple. As you can see you don't even have to say anything critical about America. All you have to do is to say something which can be construed by a patriot in a hurry as possibly being critical :-) SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] [Default] On 11 Mar 2007 10:55:50 -0700, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> Giggled into the madness of usenet: >> >I did look at what Peter actually said, Nicky-the-nit-picky. he >> >doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Kurt Americans bash American doctors and much more about America. It's not an exclusive club nor is it a crime, a sin, a treason, or another such nonsense. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.diabetic-talk.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org http://www.pandora.com enter "Jason & Demarco" "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ...Theodore Roosevelt (o ô) --ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------------- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve." ....Bilbo Baggins DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . [Default] On 10 Mar 2007 12:49:11 -0800, "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> Giggled into the madness of usenet: > The doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. >Kurt faint. > [Default] On 10 Mar 2007 12:49:11 -0800, "Kurt" > <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> Giggled into the madness of usenet: > > The doctor was wrong about the ADA's position. > >Kurt > > faint. <Priscilla waves a bottle of smelling salts under Mack's nose> >>[Default] On 10 Mar 2007 12:49:11 -0800, "Kurt" >><kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> Giggled into the madness of usenet: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > <Priscilla waves a bottle of smelling salts under Mack's nose> But here's what my most recent reports from three different labs say: "The American Diabetes Association recommends that the goal of therapy should be a hemoglobin A1c of <7% and that physicians should reevaluate the treatment regimen in patients with hemoglobin A1c values consistently >8%" Above that it also says: Reference range: non diabetics, <6% We know that 6% is closely correlated with greatly elevated risks of complications including atherosclerotic heart disease. I keep hearing people, including my MIL, tell me their doctors are using that 6% *average* which isn't accounting for spikes, to rule out DM. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Susan I think it was just the words, "The doctor was wrong..." which caused Mack to swoon. Priscilla > I think it was just the words, "The doctor was wrong..." which caused > Mack to swoon. > > Priscilla Yes, I know, and I understand. But the doctor was right about what the ADA promulgates as a standard. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > But the doctor was right about what the ADA promulgates as a standard. No, he wasn't. The doctor "set her a target Hba1c of 7.0 and said it was what the ADA said was best" which is not true at all. But then again, you never seem to let the truth get in the way of slamming the ADA why would anyone expect you to do that now. Kurt Kurt >> x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> But the doctor was right about what the ADA promulgates as a standard. > No, he wasn't. The doctor "set her a target Hba1c of 7.0 and said it > was what the ADA said was best" which is not true at all. But then > again, you never seem to let the truth get in the way of slamming the > ADA why would anyone expect you to do that now. But it's |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message