• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Diabetes Among The Non Overweight

Tipetoo said:
I can browse there without any problems, using Chrome browser.
Click to expand...
Yea I knew that Tipetoo but it was the Springer link when I started this thread I really wanted to get the full text and it seems to be behind a pay wall.
I will try the science hub.
D.
 
Being overweight is just one symptom.. one you get when you eat too many carbs and fat at the same time as the body switches to burn the sugar and store the fat..

Anyone eating too many carbs is at risk of being T2 diabetic whether overweight or not! Sugar on its own will not make you fat!
 
Genetics and age. That's my answer. Same as with overweight T2s. I think the weight is a red herring since not all T2s are overweight and not all overweight people are T2. Some T2s have insulin resistance for many years before diagnosis, that's why they are overweight. Some are diagnosed before the insulin resistance has got a hold, probably because of genetics again, that's why they are not overweight.
 
It is my understanding that we can have two quite different problems, insulin resistance and insulin insufficiency, one or the other, or even both at the same time. Resistance tends to make people gain fat weight, insufficiency makes us lose it. Unfortunately for us skinny people, it is possible to reduce insulin resistance but probably not to increase insulin production, though it may be possible to maintain what insulin production remains by keeping bg low and thus sparing our few remaining beta cells. But not if our beta cells are actually being attacked by something other than elevated bg.
 
Mr_Pot said:
I am sure for many Type 2's like myself the main risk factor is age. We don't search for a cause for deteriorating eyesight or hearing, we don't expect older people to compete with the young at sports. The human body wears out with age and while we try to do the best we can to offset the effects, the failing ability to control blood glucose maybe, for some of us, just something we have to accept.
Click to expand...
I had type2 at 6yrs old so your theory for me doesn't work, for me. However I'm morbidly obese. I've fought my weight, all my life. I did have a diabetic burn out a few years ago and I weighed more as my bgs were out of control. However, not much more thou than uncontrolled diabetes even with insulin. Mixed insulin got me losing weight when using high volumes. Separate insulin isn't as stable, for me.
Body size and bg control are NOT related. I can control my bgs whatever size I am.
Ok I need more insulin the more fat I carry. So yes, more insulin resistant but no more than that.
I can trick my body into behaving better but it's a very heavy intense management. Eating a certain way but not calorie deficient reliant.
Diabetes is about the whole of your body not just pancreas! And definitely not fat.
 
ickihun said:
I had type2 at 6yrs old so your theory for me doesn't work, for me. However I'm morbidly obese. I've fought my weight, all my life. I did have a diabetic burn out a few years ago and I weighed more as my bgs were out of control. However, not much more thou than uncontrolled diabetes even with insulin. Mixed insulin got me losing weight when using high volumes. Separate insulin isn't as stable, for me.
Body size and bg control are NOT related. I can control my bgs whatever size I am.
Ok I need more insulin the more fat I carry. So yes, more insulin resistant but no more than that.
I can trick my body into behaving better but it's a very heavy intense management. Eating a certain way but not calorie deficient reliant.
Diabetes is about the whole of your body not just pancreas! And definitely not fat.
Click to expand...

Ickihun - As I understand it, you believe you had T2 at 6 years old. You weren't diagnosed were you?
 
lindisfel said:
Had a quick scan but will take some digesting but I didn't like the fact that a low BMI T2 diabetic had got a less good life expectancy prognosis than the obese diabetic.
D.
Click to expand...

Why didn't you like this? I thought it was well accepted that being underweight was often less healthy than being overweight? What did they define as a low BMI?
 
zand said:
Why didn't you like this? I thought it was well accepted that being underweight was often less healthy than being overweight? What did they define as a low BMI?
Click to expand...

"participants with a BMI between 22 and 25 kg/m2 had
significantly higher mortality than those with a baseline BMI
30– < 35 kg/m2"
 
DCUKMod said:
Ickihun - As I understand it, you believe you had T2 at 6 years old. You weren't diagnosed were you?
Click to expand...
No children in the 1970s was diagnosed with type2 diabetes by a GP. Unheard of and my Dr diagnosed thrush and weight loss management with anticeptic cream at night as he believed it was hygiene related even thou I bathed every night and then used a bidet once it was installed.
I know by my symptoms now of uncontrolled diabetes that I had it at 6yrs old too. I've fought my weight and thrush all my life and as a result I've had burst appendix, bell's palsy, underactive thyroid and eventually tested for diabetes without metformin for PCOS in 2002. Metformin and severe weight losses may have disguised my diabetes. I was first tested for it in 2002 which scared the nurse booking me into my new GP. It was just after Xmas's luxuries too. I had to see nurse on Saturday morning surgery on a promise. I had such a busy working life and fitting in any gp appointment was hugely inconvenient. I worked up to 72hrs a week.
 
Last edited:
zand said:
Why didn't you like this? I thought it was well accepted that being underweight was often less healthy than being overweight? What did they define as a low BMI?
Click to expand...
Well I think they quoted 30 bmi as better! I am lower than that and lower than 23!
No hope for me at 79 :) ;)
 
lindisfel said:
Well I think they quoted 30 bmi as better! I am lower than that!:)
Click to expand...
Hmmm that is interesting. lol I'm not but would like to be.

There must be other factors involved? I was thinking you were talking about low BMI, not normal- overweight BMI. Well maybe the guidelines are simply wrong then? You would think that on the whole those with a BMI of 30 or less would be adopting a healthier lifestyle too. (don't shoot me, I know many of us do everything we can to be/stay healthy and have a BMI of over 30 - I am thinking more of the population as a whole and merely thinking out loud rather than judging anyone)
 
In my opinion BMI is a totally rubbish calculator and at its best should only be used as a very rough guide.
The figure of 30 to indicate obesity? Where did that figure come from? According to Kendrick they plucked that number out of thin air just as they did the figures for TC and for Five A Day.
 
Guzzler said:
In my opinion BMI is a totally rubbish calculator and at its best should only be used as a very rough guide.
The figure of 30 to indicate obesity? Where did that figure come from? According to Kendrick they plucked that number out of thin air just as they did the figures for TC and for Five A Day.
Click to expand...
Hmmm Maybe there should be a new BMI figure for obesity then.....38 sounds good to me ;):woot:
 
Guzzler said:
In my opinion BMI is a totally rubbish calculator and at its best should only be used as a very rough guide.
The figure of 30 to indicate obesity? Where did that figure come from? According to Kendrick they plucked that number out of thin air just as they did the figures for TC and for Five A Day.
Click to expand...
I read an article some time ago about USA becoming overweight overnight...because 'they' had changed the guidelines.
 
There's a belief among some medics that being slightly overweight as we age is healthier, because you will have more energy reserves if you become ill. Having seen my very slim neighbour after a week of being unable to eat and surgery for a bowel blockage, I can kind of understand it. I could see every feature of his skull because he had so little adipose tissue left in his face.
 
zand said:
I read an article some time ago about USA becoming overweight overnight...because 'they' had changed the guidelines.
Click to expand...
Bit like them all having hypertension suddenly because they changed what was meant by "high" . I think it meant something like an extra 40% of the US population now has hypertension whereas they didn't before..crazy.. more drugs for little to no benefit..
 
Its like drawing your pension, they have to draw a line somewhere.
Perhaps shortest distance around navel divided into height is better.
D.

lindisfel said:
Well I think they quoted 30 bmi as better! I am lower than that!:)
Click to expand...
Guzzler said:
In my opinion BMI is a totally rubbish calculator and at its best should only be used as a very rough guide.
The figure of 30 to indicate obesity? Where did that figure come from? According to Kendrick they plucked that number out of thin air just as they did the figures for TC and for Five A Day.
Click to expand...
 
lindisfel said:
Its like drawing your pension, they have to draw a line somewhere.
Perhaps shortest distance around navel divided into height is better.
D.
Click to expand...

The thing about pension age is not comparable, time is linear for us all, there is no variance. There's a helluva lot of variants in BMI.
 
Back
Top