Conspiracy Theories

[StephenM]

I am not a great believer in conspiracy theories like Roswell and the deaths of Marilyn Munroe and Lady Di. Although I only clearly remember the latter event I imagine they will run until parallel lines meet! And we the way politics and big business behave I imagine the list will just grow longer.

Anyway what has this to do with diabetes you may ask? One of the biggest money spinners in the world are drugs, both legal and illegal. If there were not such vast profits in legal drugs people would not go to such vast lengths to manufacturer fake drugs and the associated packaging. Much of this is for sale on the internet but has also found its way into the supply chain. My conspiracy theory is about drug companies. Although I take a statin as this may help with the circulation problems in my legs it seems to have become a “cradle to grave drug” with (as discussed previously) potential/actual side effects virtually ignored to the benefit of the drug companies. However my recent thoughts have been about insulin. An increasing number of people are going towards “low carb’ing” as there may be benefits with better control and potentially reduced complications. I myself have reduced my carb intake by around 40% so far. The usual method of treatment is a background insulin that would not be much reduced by this (I stand to be corrected on this) and fast acting insulin for meals that would potentially be reduced pro-rata. Many professionals do not yet seem over keen on low carb’ing and I wonder why. Could it be that the drug companies have a too big influence and do not want insulin sales to go down! Hence my conspiracy theory.

 

[Cinderella]

Sounds very plausible to me. The NHS certainly don't encourage low carbing. The dietician I saw last week told me carbs aren't the baddies only sugar. That may be true for non-diabetics but not for those who are.

Cinders

 

[Sid Bonkers]

No its just because most people wont or dont want to stick to any restrictive diet for the rest of their lives, which is why I am not a lover of very low carb diets, and as I have excellent control at present with only the minimum of medication why would I want to low carb?

Low carb diets have been shown to work well in the short term, but do not work for most people in the long term as they are too restrictive for most people to stick with. Diabetes is of course for life, and very few people want to life their lives on any very restrictive diet, be it low carb or anything else.

 

[hanadr]

Certainly, the medical professions would rather we use more medication and not low carb.I'm sure the majority of these people genuinely think it's better for us. However, I've recently met a couple of dieticians who are all for low carb blood sugar control and my own practice nurse agrees it works, her colleague goes as far as to say she doesn't like her patients eating too much carb.
Hana

 

[janeecee]

In the UK we have the NHS and their first line of attack appears to be 'lifestyle changes'. In the US they are very quick to medicate everything, including non life-threatening conditions which would never be treated with drugs over here. Health is big business in the US. Just look at the opposition to so-called 'ObamaCare' and their disparaging term 'socialised medicine' "Have you seem the state of British teeth?" said one opponent. So, yes, there are vested interested in diabetes medication, in that health care in the US is a lucrative market, but the only thing I can say to that is "Have you seen the size of American asses?" Don't get me started on the junk food industry! People often don't make the right choices re lifestyle and you can't blame the drugs companies for that. In America it's called 'freedom'. At least the NHS advises the general population on how to eat healthily—not specifically diabetics—but then you get people complaining about 'being told what to do' and that ugly phrase 'the nanny state'.

Some people won't change their diets, or not for long. I'm a lifelong whole foodie with a skinny build, I've never eaten junk food or had a sugar habit, no family history, bla bla. Maybe I'll need medication sooner rather than later because the 'lifestyle' advice won't do much. Low carbing is fine but for people with my build there is a risk of being unhealthily underweight through not getting enough calories.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

 

[equipoise]

Conspiracy theories are a lazy and frequently foolish way of avoiding the effort of trying to understand why things happen. The trouble is that sweeping accusations of conspiracies in NHS, NICE etc can distract attention from the scandalous and well-documented systemic flaws in the way that the drugs industry works (for which see Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma -- a shocking but necessary read for anyone with a chronic condition which requires use of medication).

 

[StephenM]

Conspiracy theories are a lazy and frequently foolish way of avoiding the effort of trying to understand why things happen. The trouble is that sweeping accusations of conspiracies in NHS, NICE etc can distract attention from the scandalous and well-documented systemic flaws in the way that the drugs industry works (for which see Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma -- a shocking but necessary read for anyone with a chronic condition which requires use of medication).

Sorry I think the first sentence was petty and somewhat unnecessary. However I agree there are flaws in the drug industry and I sometimes think they prefer to treat symptoms rather than cure!

 

[equipoise]

Conspiracy theories are a lazy and frequently foolish way of avoiding the effort of trying to understand why things happen. The trouble is that sweeping accusations of conspiracies in NHS, NICE etc can distract attention from the scandalous and well-documented systemic flaws in the way that the drugs industry works (for which see Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma -- a shocking but necessary read for anyone with a chronic condition which requires use of medication).

Sorry I think the first sentence was petty and somewhat unnecessary. However I agree there are flaws in the drug industry and I sometimes think they prefer to treat symptoms rather than cure!

Sorry StephenH -- re-reading I can see that the first sentence might have looked like it was criticizing you, which certainly wasn't my intention at all.

 

[Geocacher]

In the UK we have the NHS and their first line of attack appears to be 'lifestyle changes'. In the US they are very quick to medicate everything, including non life-threatening conditions which would never be treated with drugs over here. Health is big business in the US. Just look at the opposition to so-called 'ObamaCare' and their disparaging term 'socialised medicine' "Have you seem the state of British teeth?" said one opponent. So, yes, there are vested interested in diabetes medication, in that health care in the US is a lucrative market, but the only thing I can say to that is "Have you seen the size of American asses?" Don't get me started on the junk food industry! People often don't make the right choices re lifestyle and you can't blame the drugs companies for that. In America it's called 'freedom'. At least the NHS advises the general population on how to eat healthily—not specifically diabetics—but then you get people complaining about 'being told what to do' and that ugly phrase 'the nanny state'.

Some people won't change their diets, or not for long. I'm a lifelong whole foodie with a skinny build, I've never eaten junk food or had a sugar habit, no family history, bla bla. Maybe I'll need medication sooner rather than later because the 'lifestyle' advice won't do much. Low carbing is fine but for people with my build there is a risk of being unhealthily underweight through not getting enough calories.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

You seem to have a lot of odd opinions about Americans and their health care system.

Have you ever lived in America?

 

[janeecee]

IThe topic here is whether or not people believe in 'conspiracy theories' re medicating diabetes in preference to following a diet which is not generally proved by the NHS.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

 

[Geocacher]

IThe topic here is whether or not people believe in 'conspiracy theories' re medicating diabetes in preference to following a diet which is not generally proved by the NHS.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App

Then why express a number of inaccurate assumptions about the American health care system?

I lived the first 30 years of my life in America, and I can assure you that no medical insurance provider would cover any unnecessary treatment or medication. End of story. My Father was T2 and frequently had to pay out of his own pocket if a test or treatment wasn't approved by his insurer and often had to ask for pre-authorisation for treatment so that he didn't end up paying afterwards without knowing it wasn't covered beforehand.

Only those who pay for their own healthcare tend to be offered every new drug and every experimental treatment. With a day in hospital costing in excess of $1500, without any medications or treatments counted in, few people pay their own way. Once you add in the cost of every single disposable item used in their treatment, scans, x-rays, oxygen, food, needles, bedpans, tubing, etc. and it quickly becomes very expensive. And with the excess on prescriptions being over $25 few people are going to waste their money on unnecessary medications. With the excess for a GP visit being over $200 few go to the doctor as often as people do in the UK. Americans either pay for their own insurance, join a group plan if their employer has one, or take a chance that nothing will happen to them. Every day you hear of families losing their homes because they chose not to have health insurance or because of redundancy were dropped from their employer's group insurance and something happened. A single incident resulting in a hospital stay is enough to bankrupt a family.

It's not the 'medicate everyone' situation you describe, it never has been. But then it's easy to make assumptions about another culture, isn't it?

It may also come as a surprise to you that everyone is different and lifestyle changes aren't always enough. Medications, used when needed, have saved countless lives. Is it a conspiracy that someone with pneumonia survives because they were given antibiotics? Or that someone with cancer survives because of chemotherapy? Or that someone given metformin has a longer and healthier life than someone who opted out or wasn't offered the treatment? No, that's medical care used exacty as it should be, to help people.

Mistakes are sometimes made, some of us remember thalidomide and diethylstilbestrol, but fortunately lessons were learned and the risk of such things happening again is lower. It's not a perfect world, and sometimes bad things happen even when the idea is to do good. What would you rather do, assume that 'big pharma' is out to get everyone and is the root of all evil or understand that the medical profession, fallible as is any human undertaking, exists to try to help people?

 

[carty]

I also am skinny but I manage to lower my carb intake and eat lots of calories
CAROL

 

[sheepareevil]

I am not a great believer in conspiracy theories like Roswell and the deaths of Marilyn Munroe and Lady Di. Although I only clearly remember the latter event I imagine they will run until parallel lines meet! And we the way politics and big business behave I imagine the list will just grow longer.

Anyway what has this to do with diabetes you may ask? One of the biggest money spinners in the world are drugs, both legal and illegal. If there were not such vast profits in legal drugs people would not go to such vast lengths to manufacturer fake drugs and the associated packaging. Much of this is for sale on the internet but has also found its way into the supply chain. My conspiracy theory is about drug companies. Although I take a statin as this may help with the circulation problems in my legs it seems to have become a “cradle to grave drug” with (as discussed previously) potential/actual side effects virtually ignored to the benefit of the drug companies. However my recent thoughts have been about insulin. An increasing number of people are going towards “low carb’ing” as there may be benefits with better control and potentially reduced complications. I myself have reduced my carb intake by around 40% so far. The usual method of treatment is a background insulin that would not be much reduced by this (I stand to be corrected on this) and fast acting insulin for meals that would potentially be reduced pro-rata. Many professionals do not yet seem over keen on low carb’ing and I wonder why. Could it be that the drug companies have a too big influence and do not want insulin sales to go down! Hence my conspiracy theory.

My understanding is that you are encouraged to watch your carbs (at least my dietitian suggested thatt although I should eat some with each meal I should monitor the amount). I guess people will get close to 'no-carb' diets, and thus lead to ketoacidosis. I guess it's the same reason they don't recomend anyone does no-carb diets whether diabetic or not?

 

[phoenix]

I came across a chart from a recent paper by a US university comparing guidelines from various English language guidelines for medication in T2 diabetes. They looked at agreement with evidence based conclusions,rigor of development and editorial independence.
YO
You may be surprised by the results (see chart at bottom of page)
http://www.diabetes.ca/get-involved/new ... s-are-com/

Ben Goldacre, mentioned earlier is a great believer in evidence based medicine though preaches caution on interpreting the evidence. He often recommends a book that is available freely online. 'Testing Treatments' In the introduction he says

Sometimes evidence can be distorted for other reasons. It would be wrong to fall into shallow conspiracy theories about the pharmaceutical industry: they have brought huge, lifesaving advances. But there is a lot of money at stake in some research, and for reasons you will see in this book, 90% of trials are conducted by industry. This can be a problem, when studies funded by industry are four times more likely to have a positive result for the sponsor’s drug than independently funded trials. It costs up to $800m to bring a new drug to market: most of that is spent before the drug comes to market, and if the drug turns out to be no good, the money is already spent. Where the stakes are so high, sometimes the ideals of a fair test can fail. [1]

Equally, the way that evidence is communicated can be distorted, and misleading. Sometimes this can be in the presentation of facts and figures, telling only part of the story, glossing over flaws, and ‘cherry picking’ the scientific evidence which shows one treatment in a particular light. But in popular culture, there can be more interesting processes at play. We have an understandable desire for miracle cures, even though research is frequently about modest improvements, shavings of risk, and close judgement calls.......
Sometimes, though, in promoting their own treatments, and challenging the evidence against them, zealots and their friends in the media can do even greater damage, by actively undermining the public’s very understanding of how we know if something is good for us, or bad for us.....

The whole foreward and the book are well worth reading:
http://www.testingtreatments.org/tt-mai ... /foreword/

 

[smidge]

Hey sheepareevil!

I am not a great believer in conspiracy theories like Roswell and the deaths of Marilyn Munroe and Lady Di. Although I only clearly remember the latter event I imagine they will run until parallel lines meet! And we the way politics and big business behave I imagine the list will just grow longer.

Anyway what has this to do with diabetes you may ask? One of the biggest money spinners in the world are drugs, both legal and illegal. If there were not such vast profits in legal drugs people would not go to such vast lengths to manufacturer fake drugs and the associated packaging. Much of this is for sale on the internet but has also found its way into the supply chain. My conspiracy theory is about drug companies. Although I take a statin as this may help with the circulation problems in my legs it seems to have become a “cradle to grave drug” with (as discussed previously) potential/actual side effects virtually ignored to the benefit of the drug companies. However my recent thoughts have been about insulin. An increasing number of people are going towards “low carb’ing” as there may be benefits with better control and potentially reduced complications. I myself have reduced my carb intake by around 40% so far. The usual method of treatment is a background insulin that would not be much reduced by this (I stand to be corrected on this) and fast acting insulin for meals that would potentially be reduced pro-rata. Many professionals do not yet seem over keen on low carb’ing and I wonder why. Could it be that the drug companies have a too big influence and do not want insulin sales to go down! Hence my conspiracy theory.

My understanding is that you are encouraged to watch your carbs (at least my dietitian suggested thatt although I should eat some with each meal I should monitor the amount). I guess people will get close to 'no-carb' diets, and thus lead to ketoacidosis. I guess it's the same reason they don't recomend anyone does no-carb diets whether diabetic or not?

Just to correct your comment in case anyone is misled by it, low or no carb diets do not lead to ketoacidosis, a lack of insulin leads to the very dangerous condition of ketoacidosis. It is usually seen in Type 1s either before diagnosis or when we are ill. Low r no carb diets put you in a metabolic state known as ketosis, which is where your body burns fat instead of glucose and it is not at all dangerous. The two things are entirely different and should not be confused.

Smidge

 

[sheepareevil]

My understanding was that no-carb diets could still lead to ketoacidosis, even in non-diabetics. that's why most no-carb diets recomend use for short periods. Keytones are produced by the breakdown of fat which is why people with eating disorders can develop it.
However, no-carb diets are virtually impossible (as most foods have some form of carb).
But I could be mistaken.

 

[StephenM]

Hi! It is not my intention to promote ultra low or zero carb diets. My comments were more aimed at the trend to still allow Type I diabetics an average of 200 – 250 gm CHO per day. Until recently I have been on 250 per day (since my teens) and am now on around 150. It does appear that 100 – 150 gm per day results in better control and a lower insulin dose. Some consultants/DSNs seem happy for patients to take large doses of insulin to cover 100+ gm CHO meals.

 

[sheepareevil]

Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like that. or that I was criticising

I simply suggested that concern over people taking low carb diets to the extreme might be a reason why doctors don't push low carb diets?
I would love to be able to stick to a low carb diet, and my dietician has mentioned it to me, however my diet is restrictive due to IBS and my control is good at the moment and as such we decided it's an option for the future.

 

[Sid Bonkers]

My understanding was that no-carb diets could still lead to ketoacidosis, even in non-diabetics. that's why most no-carb diets recomend use for short periods. Keytones are produced by the breakdown of fat which is why people with eating disorders can develop it.
However, no-carb diets are virtually impossible (as most foods have some form of carb).
But I could be mistaken.

You are not mistaken sheepareevil, there seems to be a lot of rubbish talked about 'no carb diets' as far as I am aware a 'no carb diet' would not sustain live, not perhaps because of the lack of carbs but due to everything other than pure protein containing carbs in one form or another and I dont think many people would want to live on a meat only diet by choice.

All vegetables contain carbs as far as I am aware and anyone who excludes vegetables from their diet totally is going to be extremely deficient in many vital vitamins and minerals. Carbs of course are also an excellent source of vitamins and minerals and anyone eating a very low carb diet will need to take supplements to ensure they are not deficient in these vital dietary components.

 

[smidge]

Hey all!

Right, let's clear up a couple of misunderstandings:

1. It would be impossible or nearly impossible to eat a no-carb diet. As Sid says, most things contain carb or break down into glucose in some way. Sid, even protein breaks down into glucose in the absence of ingested carb. Most people who very-low-carb still have around 30 - 50g carb per day. They tend to eat vegetables, salad etc, but no potato, rice, pasta, cereal, bread or, obviously, sucrose. They also restrict fruit (fructose) to tiny amounts.

2. Carb is not an essential nutrient because the body can derive the small amounts of glucose it needs from alternative sources (see point 1. above). You will not come to any harm from not eating carb - but it's still impossible to do!

3. A lack of carb in the diet will NOT cause ketoacidosis. It WILL cause ketones in the urine. Ketones in the urine are found in people suffering from diabetic ketoacidosis - a very danerous condition where the blood becomes too acidic, but they are also a harmless side-effect of a low-carb diet where the body is forced to use an alternative source of fuel i.e. fat. This is the principle of any ketogenic diet such as Atkins.

4. Ketones with sufficient effective insulin (either natural or injected) and normal blood sugar levels are NOT dangerous, they are perfectly natural. Ketones as a result of insufficient effective insulin and high blood sugars are a sign of diabetic ketoacidosis which is very dangerous and should be dealt with immediately.

Hopefully that has cleared things up.

Smidge