More Media Attention For T2

[Guzzler]

I now fully understand why more tnan half of the NDers gave up on this diet. The shakes looked absolutely disgusting. I will be brutally honest and say I would have walked away, too.

 

[AdamJames]

I think I'm about to give up with these programs. The first few minutes looked promising, with clips of people getting things jabbed into them, and the place being touted as some kind of ultimate lab for monitoring what's going on inside diabetic people.

So I was optimistically hoping for something like an insulin and glucose plot during an OGTT taken before the weight loss and then afterwards. You know ... to see what had actually changed in... their. ability. to. safely. handle. carbohydrates. because. that's. what. diabetes. is. all. about.

Again, they didn't bother. They just mentioned 'glucose levels' for the participants, with no description of that that meant. And they didn't even show glucose levels for all participants.

That's 3 out of 3 TV programs recently which seem to lack basic curiosity in this regard. Even someone at home can spend say £25 on some Rapilose, a glucose meter and some test strips, and find out what happens to their blood glucose over 2 hours when their metabolism is seriously challenged by an intake of carbohydrates. Apparently this is beyond the budgets, or curiosity, of TV producers and the medical experts the employ.

 

[Guzzler]

Although they warned about insulin they mentioned no drug treatments, this was unwise imo.

 

[Bluetit1802]

The post mortem thing reminded me of one time at Weight Watchers back in the 80s. The instructor brought in a cow's udder and weighed it. It weighed exactly 1lb . It was a huge slab of pure fat. That image has remained with me ever since, thinking just how much fat there must be if that amount only weighed a pound.

 

[Guzzler]

I thought the autopsy was a stick too far.

 

[Mr_Pot]

I did like the way they said that the doctor was going to cut into the body with a "very sharp scalpel" not an ordinary blunt scalpel then! It was all reality show pretend drama with no substance. The Truth About Carbs showed how it can be educational but not boring.

 

[EllieM]

Apparently this is beyond the budgets, or curiosity, of TV producers and the medical experts the employ.

But remember, the official NHS line is that T2s shouldn't do blood tests, because it's unnecessary, or it might worry them, or it might cost the NHS money or maybe, because the DNs and GPs don't have the time or the ability to go through the results with people. (Insert sarcasm emoticon here.)

And as regards this interesting table about diabetes costs, I just wonder how the inpatient figures are calculated. Are they for specific diabetes complications or just for time spent by diabetics in hospital? Both my parents in law died in the last 18 months (85 and 91 so not too bad). Both had T2 and spent significant time in hospital as well as a nursing home. My FIL was in hospital because of terminal dementia, my MIL was there because she got very frail and broke a hip. Her death certificate listed T2 and dementia: we're pretty sure any dementia was caused by the chemicals from undiagnosed cancer (the test would have been too invasive and hard for her and given there was no treatment available there was no point in doing it), and we're all sure the actual reason was the cancer. But presumably she'll contribute to the inpatient stats for diabetes???
My father has T2, but his health issues relate to a very long standing back issue (caused by genetics plus a disagreement with a lorry when he was on a motorbike aged 20) and heart issues (maybe exacerbated by T2 but there before the T2 diagnosis and he was diagnosed early). By the time folk get to be in their 80s and 90s, diabetes tends to be one of many health issues, and not necessarily the most significant one.

 

[Guzzler]

But remember, the official NHS line is that T2s shouldn't do blood tests, because it's unnecessary, or it might worry them, or it might cost the NHS money or maybe, because the DNs and GPs don't have the time or the ability to go through the results with people. (Insert sarcasm emoticon here.)



And as regards this interesting table about diabetes costs, I just wonder how the inpatient figures are calculated. Are they for specific diabetes complications or just for time spent by diabetics in hospital? Both my parents in law died in the last 18 months (85 and 91 so not too bad). Both had T2 and spent significant time in hospital as well as a nursing home. My FIL was in hospital because of terminal dementia, my MIL was there because she got very frail and broke a hip. Her death certificate listed T2 and dementia: we're pretty sure any dementia was caused by the chemicals from undiagnosed cancer (the test would have been too invasive and hard for her and given there was no treatment available there was no point in doing it), and we're all sure the actual reason was the cancer. But presumably she'll contribute to the inpatient stats for diabetes???
My father has T2, but his health issues relate to a very long standing back issue (caused by genetics plus a disagreement with a lorry when he was on a motorbike aged 20) and heart issues (maybe exacerbated by T2 but there before the T2 diagnosis and he was diagnosed early). By the time folk get to be in their 80s and 90s, diabetes tends to be one of many health issues, and not necessarily the most significant one.

I 'liked' your comment but wanted to 'hug' you too. My condolences on your losses.

 

[DavidGrahamJones]

And as regards this interesting table about diabetes costs, I just wonder how the inpatient figures are calculated.

You're right to question where statistics come from, I'm a great believer that you can make them say anything. That small table comes from a slightly bigger report.

https://www.slideshare.net/mikezisi...n-of-disease-and-management-in-5-eu-countries

It's 123 pages is the sort of thing I might read if I wanted to go to sleep. I'm concerned about the perception non diabetics have, I don't know if you saw "The Fast Fix: Diabetes" last night, I wonder why they didn't start with some slimmer type IIs? I expect there a thread where this will be discussed.

 

[ringi]

Nearly all the increase in type2 diabetes is due to increased BMI, on a personal level BMI dose not predict someone risk of type2 very well, but on a population level, BMI is a good predictor of type2. For example if you look at UK post codes, the areas with the highest increase in adverage BMI have had the most increase in type2.

If the NHS could sort out everyone with a high BMI who has type2, then the saving would be very large, even if nothing was done for people who have type2 with a low BMI. I saw a calculation of the saving if the NHS could just stop BMI increasing of people who already have type2, and it was impressive.

Clearly waist measure is a better predictor then BMI, but it has not been recorded for everyone, and hence the data sets don't have it.

 

[beano1000]

Posted elsewhere also....
I too was confused by the message this programme was trying to send. If it is saying that averagely overweight, genetically predisposed, middle aged people like me, with relatively well controlled Type 2, and relatively good diet/no meds/un-symptomatic (unless my heart disease was caused by it -who knows)....... diagnosed within last 10 years can reverse my type 2, I will sign up.
Do I have to spend a month fasting on around 800 calories a day? At the end of this can I revert to my current diet? Will I be cured thereafter? ??? Confused....