My doctor has told me that apparently the usual way of measuring blood sugar is out! Now he uses a different method which I knew nothing about - let alone actually understanding what it all means (no leaflet or web link to help was given).
When I had my last blood sugar test it proved to be high; although I was being treated for an infection and was post prandial, having eaten my breakfast three hours before the blood was taken; facts he refused to consider. Confusing!
Fine: no one has the right to demand information from any member which is how it came across. I would never demand the identity of the person who gave me any information. You may have a tight clique here but it is no use to me.No she doesn't. @catapillar is always very helpful with her advice.
I do not wish to disclose anything that is presumably on demand. Confidentiality is important and giving out names and more detail on demand is out of order. I rest my case.They're pretty good questions. And they're coming from someone who really knows her stuff.
I am a little confused as to what exactly you did want from us?Fine: no one has the right to demand information from any member which is how it came across. I would never demand the identity of the person who gave me any information. You may have a tight clique here but it is no use to me.
I really don't need anything since you fail to appreciate confidentiality issues. As a keen human rights activist I am acutely aware of the issue of confidentiality and not being asked for the identity of someone who told me something. Why ask? Makes no sense whatsoever.I am a little confused as to what exactly you did want from us?
Who has asked you to disclose anything? I can't find anything on this thread that could have caused you to think this.I do not wish to disclose anything that is presumably on demand. Confidentiality is important and giving out names and more detail on demand is out of order. I rest my case.
Thank you for a helpful reply! I appreciate it. Best wishes.I’d say several things: get a read out of your results or on line access, get a blood glucose monitor so you can see for yourself what’s going on and lastly you don’t have to take anything your Dr prescribes but if you’re not happy with their treatment, then change Dr.
I was specifically asked who had told me (I had already said it was my doc), which implies a pen identity request; I refuse that kind of thing in a forum like this. That is all.Who has asked you to disclose anything? I can't find anything on this thread that could have caused you to think this.
Exactly! Thanks for your helpful advice.From Wikipedia
"Pioglitazone is a prescription drug of the thiazolidinedione class with hypoglycemic action to treat diabetes. While pioglitazone does decrease blood sugar levels, studies on the main cardiovascular outcomes have not yielded statistically significant results."
So why take it?
Thanks.if you don't want it you don't take it no need to have an argument. re doctor-very weird.
Thank you for your post!The standard western medical treatment for type 2 diabetes is:
1. Follow the government recommended low fat high carb diet.
2. Metformin.
3. A statin.
4. A blood pressure reducing med.
As the patient’s blood glucose levels rise, prescribe stronger diabetes meds until finally they need to be on insulin.
I may stick with it; presumably I will soon be on insulin, as is one of our cats whom I jab every day.I would find another doctor if it were me.
Thank you for this; as there is no literature or proper explanation given at my surgery, it is good to know.1. The way of measuring blood sugar (the HbA1c test) was changed. Your doctor is quite right. The test is the same but the way it is measured changed. It was previously expressed as a percentage, and is now measured in mmol/mol so just the units changed, not the test itself.
2. The HbA1c measures the average glucose over the previous 2 to 3 months so what you have just eaten will have no effect whatsoever. There is no need to fast beforehand.
I think that @catapillar mean was it a GP, a diabetes specialist doctor or a diabetes nurse not the specific name of your doctor.I was specifically asked who had told me (I had already said it was my doc), which implies a pen identity request; I refuse that kind of thing in a forum like this. That is all.
OK, so then that is fine; we just need to be more specific to avoid assumptions/misunderstandings. Thanks for you helpful input.I think that @catapillar mean was it a GP, a diabetes specialist doctor or a diabetes nurse not the specific name of your doctor.
"doc" doesn't tell us much.
Having worked as a journalist for many years, I totally understand protection of sources. You were not asked to identify an individual.I really don't need anything since you fail to appreciate confidentiality issues. As a keen human rights activist I am acutely aware of the issue of confidentiality and not being asked for the identity of someone who told me something. Why ask? Makes no sense whatsoever.
Actually, I don't think your comment is helpful. I am leaving this forum, right now.Having worked as a journalist for many years, I totally understand protection of sources. You were not asked to identify an individual.
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?