It seems reasonable to assume that as a formerly diagnosed T2, non-medicated - for anything, without any form of condition (thankfully) to qualify me for an exemption certificate, I will have a differing viewpoint to those with T1 or serious co-morbidities, but it strikes me that a bit of expanded thinking could be useful in certain instances.
Having never knowingly had a hypo, and certainly never a serious one, I cannot know what it feels like to do so, however surely if an individual is experiencing very frequent hypos that needs to be addressed by other means than drinking sugary drinks? I don't necessarily mean during the hypo itself, but a review of the preventative steps the individual could employ, whether that be diet, medication, testing or any other relevant factors.
Where I have greatest issue is where individuals are looking for support for their preferred way of managing their blood sugars during regular exercise and the like. I find it much harder to oooooooze much empathy there. That an individual chooses to exercise is clearly good, but again, if hypos, or near hypos, are being induced by the exercise, could there be an alternative to necessarily a fizzy drink - whether by exploring earlier feeding or drinking non-taxable fluids?
Sadly, the NHS is financially very strapped. I don't believe it is financially stable enough to support lifestyle choices which could be incredibly open to abuse. How many bottles of Lucozade are appropriate to prescribe a month, or is it "as required"?
I read somewhere (but can't find the time or inclination this morning to dig back through and find where) that the estimated cost of the levy would be about 8p. Would an extra 8p for a bottle of Lucozade really prevent anyone going to the gym, or having a run, when those activities involve other costs too, such as subscriptions and decent footware?
can I just say to him "mind your own *€$%#>¥ business"
