Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
controversial views insulin
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="phoenix" data-source="post: 132409" data-attributes="member: 12578"><p>1) LADA is defined in by Cochrane and the WHO as a slowly developing type 1 diabetes which presents as non-insulin dependent diabetes and progresses to insulin dependence ie People who have LADA will eventually become <strong>insulin dependent </strong></p><p></p><p>Once you have become <strong>insulin dependent</strong> there is only one treatment ... <strong>insulin</strong>!</p><p>The Cochrane metaanalysis reviews treatment modes prior to dependence. If you are able to keep your glucose levels down with diet and exercise then fine . If drugs other than insulin work for a while, then again fine do what it takes.</p><p>2) To state that there is no evidence tthat high blood glucose levels and complications such as DKA , nephropathy , retinopathy and neuropathy are not related is sheer Alice in Wonderland.</p><p>The DCCT and Epic type 1 studies and the UKPDS in type 2 show quite clearly the long term consequences of high blood glucose levels and the benefits of good control.They followed enough patients for long enough to be able to calculate the odds of developing complications . Imagine you are a 43 year old diagnosed with diabetes. These are the ages you have a 50: 50 probability of sight problems through Retinopathy .</p><p>HbA1c Age</p><p>12%......48</p><p>11%......49</p><p>10%.....52</p><p>9%......58</p><p>8%......71</p><p>7%......95</p><p>6%.......151</p><p>Personally I prefer the odds at lower glucose levels, without insulin I'd be at the higher risk level instead of the lower odds.</p><p> Here's an account of a man who hadn't been forewarned, he didn't know about LADA and ignored his symtoms. Anectodal yes, but none the less true. If I knew that I had the condition and had the choice I'd rather not risk these consequences ( and incidently my own story is quite similar including the ending up with breathing difficulties and DKA.. I was lucky to get away with some mild background retinopathy and slightly reduced kidney function. )</p><p><a href="http://www.malehealth.co.uk/node/19602" target="_blank">http://www.malehealth.co.uk/node/19602</a></p><p></p><p>Why do I write this when I think that its a bit like banging my head on a brick wall, well</p><p>hopefully, any other people in a similar position who read this will realise that a cynical view may have serious consequences.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="phoenix, post: 132409, member: 12578"] 1) LADA is defined in by Cochrane and the WHO as a slowly developing type 1 diabetes which presents as non-insulin dependent diabetes and progresses to insulin dependence ie People who have LADA will eventually become [b]insulin dependent [/b] Once you have become [b]insulin dependent[/b] there is only one treatment ... [b]insulin[/b]! The Cochrane metaanalysis reviews treatment modes prior to dependence. If you are able to keep your glucose levels down with diet and exercise then fine . If drugs other than insulin work for a while, then again fine do what it takes. 2) To state that there is no evidence tthat high blood glucose levels and complications such as DKA , nephropathy , retinopathy and neuropathy are not related is sheer Alice in Wonderland. The DCCT and Epic type 1 studies and the UKPDS in type 2 show quite clearly the long term consequences of high blood glucose levels and the benefits of good control.They followed enough patients for long enough to be able to calculate the odds of developing complications . Imagine you are a 43 year old diagnosed with diabetes. These are the ages you have a 50: 50 probability of sight problems through Retinopathy . HbA1c Age 12%......48 11%......49 10%.....52 9%......58 8%......71 7%......95 6%.......151 Personally I prefer the odds at lower glucose levels, without insulin I'd be at the higher risk level instead of the lower odds. Here's an account of a man who hadn't been forewarned, he didn't know about LADA and ignored his symtoms. Anectodal yes, but none the less true. If I knew that I had the condition and had the choice I'd rather not risk these consequences ( and incidently my own story is quite similar including the ending up with breathing difficulties and DKA.. I was lucky to get away with some mild background retinopathy and slightly reduced kidney function. ) [url]http://www.malehealth.co.uk/node/19602[/url] Why do I write this when I think that its a bit like banging my head on a brick wall, well hopefully, any other people in a similar position who read this will realise that a cynical view may have serious consequences. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
controversial views insulin
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…