-
Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »
Diagnosis reversal
- Thread starter Pat_Ann
- Start Date
kentish maid
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 109
- Location
- Dover Kent
- Type of diabetes
- Treatment type
- Diet only
- Dislikes
- people who tell me I don't need to test my blood
Yes I have been told that my hba1c has been in normal limits for the last 2years
Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
TorqPenderloin
Well-Known Member
That's different from the original question which was about having your diagnosis changed from diabetic to non-diabetic. Having a good a1c means you're well controlled. Just because I have a pre-diabetic a1c doesn't mean I'm a "Pre-Diabetic Type 1."
As far as having your diagnosis reversed....I suppose it's technically possible. There is such a thing as steroid-induced diabetes where people have insulin deficiency issues because of the drugs they're taking. In theory, your diagnosis could be reversed if you stopped taking those drugs and you no longer had an insulin deficiency.
Unfortunately, simply being well-controlled does not make you any less of a diabetic.
- Messages
- 3,176
- Type of diabetes
- I reversed my Type 2
- Treatment type
- I do not have diabetes
I had a chat with my DN recently. They seem to have 2 choices: mark as in remission or no longer diabetic. They prefer to use remission as it means you still get monitored (annual HbA1c, eye test, etc) and I think they still get the extra cash.
Thanks for the responses. I went from 9.2 to 5.5 in 3 months with diet and exercise. Lost 30 pounds in 3 months. Would really like the diagnosis to be changed for insurance purposes. I emailed Dr. Jason Fung and he said he has changed this diagnosis on patients. My reasoning is: I went from overweight to normal weight, so I am no longer classified as overweight, so if my A1C went from high to normal, why am I still classified as diabetic. My doctor says if I went back to eating the way I did my glucose would go up, and I say, exactly, but so would my weight.
Mep
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,461
- Type of diabetes
- Treatment type
- Insulin
My understanding is that you're classed as diabetic when you have abnormal sugar range. If you are able to get good control of your diabetes by losing weight and staying within normal range I wouldn't think that would be that you are no longer diabetic. I think they could say you're no longer diabetic if you ate anything you wanted and your sugar stayed in normal range no matter what you ate or what you weighed. That would probably be classed as non diabetic. But from what I've read most people who say they're in remission or no longer have diabetes say that because they've learnt how to control it. If they were to change the way they eat, etc they'd probably find their sugar levels not in normal range again. It is a disease and lifestyle is only one risk factor to it.
kokhongw
Well-Known Member
I believe that is very much dependent on the criteria of diagnosis used for determining your T2D.
So if clinically you were diagnosed only with HbA1c AND Fasting glucose reading...then if you should subsequently pass those same criteria without medication, then arguably by those same criteria you are no longer clinically diabetic.
However few seems to have been able to past the full OGTT, even after achieving normal HbA1c throught low carbing. Although that is may not always be used for T2D diagnosis to initiate medication...it is still considered an important clinical parameter.
Also as we may have learnt since our diagnosis that our condition goes quite a bit beyond the narrow clinical criteria commonly used. That often the underlying hyperinsulinemia and impaired insulin response remains a constant threat/trigger for other chronic/serious conditions...this may be more critical then remove the label of the diagnosis...
uart
Well-Known Member
It's an interesting question Pat_Ann, and one that does come up from time to time here.
I think it's fairly obviously if someone is maintaining non-diabetic BGL (and HbA1C), but only by way of insulin or other medications, then they should be consider a well managed diabetic rather than a cured or "reversed".
The more tricky question arises when a diabetic manages to get their BG levels into the normal (or even pre-diabetic) range by diet and exercise alone. This is where it seems to get a bit more controversial. Personally I think that if you can pass an oral glucose tolerance test at non diabetic levels then it would be perfectly reasonable to have the diagnosis reversed. If your levels are only being maintain by way of a highly carb restricted diet however, then the OGTT might be difficult.
It's interesting that some members here have had the exact opposite situation to yours, where their doctor has wanted to reverse their diabetic status, but the patient has not wanted it (presumably for fear of losing access to certain testing and services).
BTW Pat_Ann, in what country do you live?
Dark Horse
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,840
In the UK, the guidance from the NHS Diabetic Eye Screening Programme is that people who have been diagnosed with diabetes should NOT be removed from the screening database of diabetics even if they go into remission:-
- patients should be screened annually for life if there has ever been a definite diagnosis of diabetes, excluding gestational diabetes
- patients in remission – for example due to an intervention such as bariatric surgery – should be classified ‘Diabetes in remission’, not ‘Diabetes resolved’. This ensures they will still be invited for screening
- patients will not be invited for screening if they have a read code of ‘Diabetes resolved’. This code should not be used for patients whose diabetes is in remission due to an intervention
Bluetit1802
Legend
At my last review with my DN she said I could come off the diabetic register because my HbA1c has been stable without meds for 18 months, albeit still in the lower end of the pre-diabetic range. The criteria is "stable without meds for 18 months". I would be put on their At Risk list and monitored annually as opposed to six monthly, and would still have my eye screening. I declined because I want six monthly monitoring for motivation purposes.
USA. We can't be denied insurance (although you pay an outrageous amount, and our deductible is high), but payment for services can be denied because of pre-existing conditions.
What do you mean by "invited for screenings"?
TorqPenderloin
Well-Known Member
Ah, didn't realize you're in the US like I am.....the chances of you getting your diagnoses changed are slim to none here.
In the UK, there is a dual incentive to change someone's diagnosis as it removes a financial burden from the system.
Here in the US, there's every incentive NOT to change your diagnosis.
Either way, you may get a better response on a website like DiabletesDaily or TuDiabetes where there's a higher concentration of members that live in the US.
In the UK, there is a dual incentive to change someone's diagnosis as it removes a financial burden from the system.
Here in the US, there's every incentive NOT to change your diagnosis.
Either way, you may get a better response on a website like DiabletesDaily or TuDiabetes where there's a higher concentration of members that live in the US.
my DBN is adamant that diabetes is for life whatever I do .. however good my blood sugars .. nothing could persuade otherwise. So I will never be officially taken off the register 
Thanks, the only U.S. Forum I have found so far, had questions from four years ago. Will check these two out. I am new at this. Late Oct. 2015 diagnosis. No symptoms at all, I was shocked, as my blood glucose levels in the previous years had been, 72, 84 & 92. Dr. tried to put me on drugs immediately, but I refused. The healthcare system in my area is not much help. Went online and did some research, and am watching my carbs.
uart
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info Pat_Ann, 72, 84 and 92 were (previous years) fasting BG levels right. Were you diagnosed purely from fasting BG levels or did they run other tests as well (eg HbA1c)?
Anyway, congratulations on managing your levels so well with just low carbs. There is a low carb forum on this site with lots of diet information and recipes etc shared. Many of us here are on low carb (and LCHF) diets.
We were changing insurances because of Obamacare, and as long as we had good insurance, I thought I should get a complete bloodwork done. My blood glucose was at 195. So the doctor recommended I have an A1C test. My A1C test was 9.2 and that sealed my fate, nevermind that in the previous years my blood glucose was within range for normal. My doctor had never suggested an A1C test before. He also couldn't answer why my blood glucose was so high after being within normal range. If I had it to do all over again, I would never have had the A1C test, just do what I did to lower my blood glucose. Then I would have gone and had the test.Thanks for the info Pat_Ann, 72, 84 and 92 were (previous years) fasting BG levels right. Were you diagnosed purely from fasting BG levels or did they run other tests as well (eg HbA1c)?
Anyway, congratulations on managing your levels so well with just low carbs. There is a low carb forum on this site with lots of diet information and recipes etc shared. Many of us here are on low carb (and LCHF) diets.
TorqPenderloin
Well-Known Member
That's one way to look at it, but there's a huge difference between a single 195 reading and an a1c of 9.2...that basically equates to a 3-month average in the low-mid 200s.
While I comment you for dropping your a1c that significantly, I highly doubt you're going to find a doctor willing to put his or her name on a diagnosis reversal for someone that had an a1c in the 9s. That would be borderline unethical.
Dark Horse
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,840
In the UK, there is a national Diabetic Eye Screening Programme. Each local programme holds a database of everyone in their area who has diabetes. The Programme sends out letters (invitations) to all eligible people on the database every year offering them an appointment to have their retinas photographed. The photos are then examined for diabetic retinopathy by qualified and accredited graders using specialist software. If someone appears to have sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy they are " screen positive" and are referred for further tests and possible treatment by an ophthalmologist. If no retinopathy or only background retinopathy is detected, the person is "screen negative" and will be invited back the following year for more photographs.
