I am going to disagree and leave it there. Sometimes I can't cope with dogmatic insistence that I am wrong because I can't quote papers on the subject. I know my family's lived experience, and that of others.The potential, yes, the trigger -no. We inherit a possible weakness that something uses to activate the diabetes condition. They have not identified any common gene mutation that would explain T2D. Most of my antecedants died of feebleness or gout or heart failure, and diabetes only surfaces in my mother who was T1D. There is more madnesss in my line than diabetes (which has been known about since the middle ages)
I am going to disagree and leave it there. Sometimes I can't cope with dogmatic insistence that I am wrong because I can't quote papers on the subject. I know my family's lived experience, and that of others.
You can't say there is no genetic trigger as the research hasn't proved anything. Claiming that diabetes has been around since the middle ages is nothing to do with type 2 in younger people.
Testing is a recent thing. We simply don't know how many type 2 diabetics existed but were not recognised or diagnosed in their middle years or younger.
Not identifying a trigger doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is so much we don't know. Anecdata is important and should be respected.
I doubt that the incidence of diabetes was much less. My grandfather's sister died at the age of 17 "from no one knows what, there was not even a temperature," but according to the description of the symptoms, it looks like diabetes. It's just that earlier people did not survive with such a diagnosis and could not leave offspring. The very fact that we can have children multiplies the number of cases of diabetes in the population. With diabetes in the mother, the pancreas of the child tries to work for two during pregnancy and immediately after birth, such children often fell into a hypoglycemic coma and did not have time to save them, and now this is an ordinary problem that practically does not lead to infant mortality. But even if our children do not inherit diabetes, the risk of this disease greatly increases in our descendants, because we pass them a genome with such a severe breakdown. Even if you take the risk of inheritance at 1%, it seems like a small number, but imagine that every hundredth person is diabetic, that's a lot, isn't it? And the next generations of people will have diabetes even more often, unfortunately, because of usSo diabetes was a rare condition
"If you are a woman with type 1 diabetes and your child was born before you were 25, your child's risk is 1 in 25; if your child was born after you turned 25, your child's risk is 1 in 100."The history of diabetes started in approximately 1550BC. An Egyptian papyrus mentions a rare disease that causes the patient to lose weight rapidly and urinate frequently.
The history of diabetes started in approximately 1550BC. An Egyptian papyrus mentions a rare disease that causes the patient to lose weight rapidly and urinate frequently.www.diabetes.co.uk
Also from the ADA
Genetics of Diabetes | American Diabetes Association
Get valuable insights into the genetic factors behind diabetes and find answers to your questions. Explore more resources on diabetes genetics.diabetes.org
Although it is logical that I was told this not because of the risk to the child, but because of the risk of complications for meI have to give birth before 25...
Type 2, which accounts for about 90% of diabetes was significantly less. Dr David Unwin reports an eightfold increase in three decades in his GP practice: https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/2020/11/02/bmjnph-2020-000072I doubt that the incidence of diabetes was much less.
You appear to be describing Type 1 events here, and as far as i am aware, the incidence of Type 1 is increasing at a natural rate. It is T2D that is expanding exponentially, at an unnatural rate that is not explained by genetics or inheritance.I doubt that the incidence of diabetes was much less. My grandfather's sister died at the age of 17 "from no one knows what, there was not even a temperature," but according to the description of the symptoms, it looks like diabetes. It's just that earlier people did not survive with such a diagnosis and could not leave offspring. The very fact that we can have children multiplies the number of cases of diabetes in the population. With diabetes in the mother, the pancreas of the child tries to work for two during pregnancy and immediately after birth, such children often fell into a hypoglycemic coma and did not have time to save them, and now this is an ordinary problem that practically does not lead to infant mortality. But even if our children do not inherit diabetes, the risk of this disease greatly increases in our descendants, because we pass them a genome with such a severe breakdown. Even if you take the risk of inheritance at 1%, it seems like a small number, but imagine that every hundredth person is diabetic, that's a lot, isn't it? And the next generations of people will have diabetes even more often, unfortunately, because of us
I’m the same as my maternal grandfather, mother and younger brother are/were T2 diabetics. In fact when I was diagnosed my GP told me it was no surprise due to the family connectionmy paternal grandmother, my father, myself and my brother are/were all type 2 diabetics. All got it around the age of 48-50 years old. Its not lifestyle, I barely knew my father and didnt know my paternal grandmother at all. I know several people who got type 2 in family clusters, around similar ages. I believe the potential to trigger type 2 can have a genetic component.
Hi @njaynemarie , welcome to the forum.How do you manage the pain at the bottom of my foot
My youngest sister was weaned on baby milk and was really fat for a baby and when she sees her photos can’t believe itBaby weaning food needs looking at, too. Stuffed with dodgy ingredients.
Way back in the day, GPs told mothers with new babies that human breast milk wasn't good enough for babies (!!!!!) and to use a certain brand of milk powder specially designed for them instead. This brand was full of powdered wheat. I do wonder if so many wheat allergies stem from those days, and also if a tendency to gain too much weight in adults could sometimes be traced to that. I have no idea if this is still the case with powdered milk.
Unsurprisingly, there was a financial incentive in those times for GPs to persuade mothers to change from breastfeeding to powdered milk formula. Nothing new under the sun.
Find a nutritionist?I find what you say very interesting. I was overweight and grew up in the 60s and 70s when fat was thought to be the bad thing. I guess I consumed a lot of terrible highly processed foods without knowing it, although we did cook our own meals and don't use much processed foods now. I have always eaten fresh fruit and vegetables but was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in 2014. I lost 3 stone and managed to keep my blood sugars down for a while. I have also been diagnosed with Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in 2016 so am not sure which came first as that was harder to diagnose. I take enzymes with every meal to help me digest fats and do have tummy problems. I have an iffy pancreas and have been told to try to eat less carbs (which I am trying to do) and have been eating a predominantly mediterranean style diet for a few years now. I have the threat of taking insulin to reduce my blood sugars and am worried about that, and putting on more weight etc. Any suggestions greatly received. I am happy to try eating less carbs but can't eat too much fat to compensate so don't want to feel hungry all the time. I am complicated!!! Help!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?