• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Type 1 not allowed circuit training

Please guys... Calm.

I'm just really annoyed as hubby says I would be the fittest there.... And Type 1, not my fitness ir health personal to myself is being taken in to account. That is why I am so annoyed.

I understand Mike's info.. "Cover ass" and just classify all type 1's as too dangerous is quite discrimatory about me as a person with a long term critical illness but is fitter than " normal" persons.
 
donnellysdogs said:
Please guys... Calm.

I'm just really annoyed as hubby says I would be the fittest there.... And Type 1, not my fitness ir health personal to myself is being taken in to account. That is why I am so annoyed.

I understand Mike's info.. "Cover ass" and just classify all type 1's as too dangerous is quite discrimatory about me as a person with a long term critical illness but is fitter than " normal" persons.
Click to expand...
I understand your anger but I'm just saying you can't demand participation. I apologise for myself and Douglas for detracting from your original post.
 
No, show me your case law that you can exclude any recognised disability on a pure whim.
You know you can't, so simply admit you are wrong, and the op can take the professional opinion from the doctor as the necessary proof they can be allowed on the course.
Stop messing the op about here.
 
Micky25 said:
I understand your anger but I'm just saying you can't demand participation. I apologise for myself and Douglas for detracting from your original post.
Click to expand...
Don't apologise for me, you are talking nonsense, and playing down the effect it has on all of us, by accepting T1's and T2's should be treated differently, in spite of medical approval, and that really gets to me.
We are not second class!!
 
Douglas, you are so tiresome. You claim to have "trumped me" by quoting an Act but nothing in it. You accused me of having a "rant" with no reply. I have made my response earlier informing you that it is the responsibility of the fitness centre for all members of the public who train there. If they deem a particular class unsuitable, they can prevent ANYONE from taking part. There are more than one rule that allows this. They can prevent people on certain meds or with certain conditions. That does not mean a diabetic can't use a gym, just certain classes. That's my last word as you clearly get a kick out of arguing as per a lot of threads you appear to be involved in.
 
Micky25 said:
Douglas, you are so tiresome. You claim to have "trumped me" by quoting an Act but nothing in it. You accused me of having a "rant" with no reply. I have made my response earlier informing you that it is the responsibility of the fitness centre for all members of the public who train there. If they deem a particular class unsuitable, they can prevent ANYONE from taking part. There are more than one rule that allows this. They can prevent people on certain meds or with certain conditions. That does not mean a diabetic can't use a gym, just certain classes. That's my last word as you clearly get a kick out of arguing as per a lot of threads you appear to be involved in.
Click to expand...

So, bad advice, and completely ignoring any legislation, and no case to show any precedent?
Utter rubbish, and I hope the op sorts out a fair resolution.

Nothing allows discrimination, after a medical opinion allowing the actions.
I will call you out.
NAME the rules that you claim exist.
I have stated the ones that state they don't exist..
 
Micky25 said:
Douglas, you are so tiresome. You claim to have "trumped me" by quoting an Act but nothing in it. You accused me of having a "rant" with no reply. I have made my response earlier informing you that it is the responsibility of the fitness centre for all members of the public who train there. If they deem a particular class unsuitable, they can prevent ANYONE from taking part. There are more than one rule that allows this. They can prevent people on certain meds or with certain conditions. That does not mean a diabetic can't use a gym, just certain classes. That's my last word as you clearly get a kick out of arguing as per a lot of threads you appear to be involved in.
Click to expand...

I understand the exclusion as such, but can it be a blanket ban? I would prefer to be assessed as an individual. They have not even seen me. Just talked to my hubby and they didn't even know what an insulin pump was!! Just banned me without even assessing me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
douglas99 said:
Don't apologise for me, you are talking nonsense, and playing down the effect it has on all of us, by accepting T1's and T2's should be treated differently, in spite of medical approval, and that really gets to me.
We are not second class!!
Click to expand...
Are you getting me mixed up with someone else ? Did I call anyone a second class citizen and where did I say T1's or T2's are treated differently ? Strange.
 
Micky25 said:
Are you getting me mixed up with someone else ? Did I call anyone a second class citizen and where did I say T1's or T2's are treated differently ? Strange.
Click to expand...
donnellysdogs said:
I understand the exclusion as such, but can it be a blanket ban? I would prefer to be assessed as an individual. They gave not even seen me. Just talked to my hubby and they didn't even know what an insulin pump was!! Just banned me without even assessing me.
Click to expand...

No I'm not mixing you up.
Answer?
 
But you haven't answered anything yourself ? Do you really think by ignoring everything I ask then responding with a ? is a valid post ?
 
@Micky25

I just want a fair assessment of my health and fitness as to whether I am more of a risk as a lean, fit, muscular, good hba1c, than an obese undiagnosed, unchecked out "normal" person. I know my limitations. These "normal" unchecked out GP, circuit training public are to me, more of a risk than myself. So I feel that excluding me without correctly assessing me in person under a blanket ban is wrong and unfair.
 
I don't care for personal arguments please.

I just would appreciate being anle to get my head around their ban without seeing me, as I do think that does veer towards a general disrimination.
 
donnellysdogs said:
@Micky25

I just want a fair assessment of my health and fitness as to whether I am more of a risk as a lean, fit, muscular, good hba1c, than an obese undiagnosed, unchecked out "normal" person. I know my limitations. These "normal" unchecked out GP, circuit training public are to me, more of a risk than myself. So I feel that excluding me without correctly assessing me in person under a blanket ban is wrong and unfair.
Click to expand...
I totally agree and I think I'm getting a bit of a bashing for no reason really but no problem. Your best course of action would be to do exactly as you suggest and speak with manager and explain things. Discuss your control, the pump and your doctors letter.
My legal remarks earlier were only in response to a member who suggested you can claim discrimination etc but you can't. Any gym can prevent someone from a particular activity if they see fit after carrying out a risk assessment. If they deem you a hypo risk, they are covered. If it went to court, you would lose. I'm not saying I agree but that is how it is. Google type 1 diabetic gym ban in Kings Lynn for example. The Council upheld the gym's decision.
 
donnellysdogs said:
@Micky25

I just want a fair assessment of my health and fitness as to whether I am more of a risk as a lean, fit, muscular, good hba1c, than an obese undiagnosed, unchecked out "normal" person. I know my limitations. These "normal" unchecked out GP, circuit training public are to me, more of a risk than myself. So I feel that excluding me without correctly assessing me in person under a blanket ban is wrong and unfair.
Click to expand...

removed inflammatory remark - anna29
the equality Act 2010 is what should be quoted.
If you are signed off by a HCP as fit, they cannot discriminate against you, without a full assessment that disproves your medical assessment.
And I firmly believe it''s our duty to stand up and be counted, not to get involved in stupid petty bickering on this forum, and let personal vendettas belittle the rest of us.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm a T1 myself. Am I missing something ? Douglas, I guess I must have upset you in a past life. Don't go through life so bitter. So your suggestion to OP is to "quote the Equality Act 2010". Should this be done in full of just those words ? This act consists of 116 seperate pieces of law and many hundreds of pages full of grey areas. Good luck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Micky25 said:
I totally agree and I think I'm getting a bit of a bashing for no reason really but no problem. Your best course of action would be to do exactly as you suggest and speak with manager and explain things. Discuss your control, the pump and your doctors letter.
My legal remarks earlier were only in response to a member who suggested you can claim discrimination etc but you can't. Any gym can prevent someone from a particular activity if they see fit after carrying out a risk assessment. If they deem you a hypo risk, they are covered. If it went to court, you would lose. I'm not saying I agree but that is how it is. Google type 1 diabetic gym ban in Kings Lynn for example. The Council upheld the gym's decision.
Click to expand...


NO

'A diabetic has claimed she is being discriminated against after she was barred from using a Lynn gym.'

Absolutely no legal decision, and the same discrimination as this thread..
Why are you trashing our rights?
 
You make no sense. You continue to ignore my questions, you continue to make unsubstantiated claims. You have written a lot about nothing and you have read but not understood. You have bickered but not advised. So, are you suggesting OP can demand to participate in a gym activity ? If so, please explain why ? Don't just say Equality Act as that means nothing. Unless you can show otherwise.
The Kings Lynn case was upheld by Council.
 
@Micky25 I am so sorry about how you have been treated on this thread. It's hard when you are new to a forum and someone seems to have taken a dislike to you. Please don't be discouraged from posting because of one individual. I have read some of your other posts and have enjoyed them. I hope this experience hasn't put you off completely.

@donnellysdogs I feel the gym owners simply don't understand and are making an issue of the pump unnecessarily. I'm sure if you were allowed to go in for an induction you would allay their fears. I hope this gets sorted out for you.
 
Micky25 said:
You make no sense. You continue to ignore my questions, you continue to make unsubstantiated claims. You have written a lot about nothing and you have read but not understood. You have bickered but not advised. So, are you suggesting OP can demand to participate in a gym activity ? If so, please explain why ? Don't just say Equality Act as that means nothing. Unless you can show otherwise.
Click to expand...
Case law
Quote it
 
Back
Top