Diabetic Complications Poll

[Ali H]

My post has already vanished, no explanation or mod email.

Shrug. Clueless as to why.

Ali

 

[GraceK]

I understand where you are coming from Gracek. As adults we can make that choice based on knowing ourselves and what we want to know, but that can be the opposite for minors. It is not a case of burying things in the sand but of allowing people to make an informed choice given the knowledge that some articles posted may be more blunt than on the general forum, upon knowing that people can choose if they want to read that or not, therefore adults are given the choice. I still think an over 18 or some kind of area would be welcome by most.

Best wishes

Simon aka Cobra3164

Gawd ... a lot gets lost in translation when using text in forums ... that's why I'm using emoticons like :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: and a lot.

Soooooooooooo ... here we go ... I'm not against an over 18 or under 18 or any other section, I'm not against ANYONE having their say or their discussions on ANY topic relating to diabetes and health and complications and diet etc ... but I AM against newbies be they MINORS or ADULTS stumbling across explicit content regarding complications as they enter the forum. I think it's all about SECTIONS and about correctly TITLING certain SECTIONS so that ANYONE would immediately know by looking at the title - what the threads in that section are going to contain.

That's why I suggested a SECTION entitled - 'SENSITIVE ISSUES - MAY CONTAIN UPSETTING OR EMBARRASING MATERIAL' ... that way ANYONE can make an instant decision as to whether they want to go there or not and nobody can be accused of unnecessarily shocking people

For example, I myself have responded to posts from female members experiencing menopause difficulties, not thinking that this would come up in the NEW POSTS section automatically for anyone to read. I'm not embarrassed by posting menopause related stuff but it may not be everyone's cup of tea to read.

So not only are SECTION TITLES important, but so are THREAD TITLES equally important in that they should give some idea to the reader of the content of the thread. Perhaps poor titling of threads is the reason why some threads get derailed, there's no clear indication in the titles as to what the thread is supposed to be about.

Just for good measure - :lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup: :wave: :wave: :wave: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[Pneu]

I am worried and frightened about taking part in your poll, in case i get banned.

You won't get banned! We welcome opinions from users on ways we can improve the forum experience :thumbup:

So is that an endorsement that you will act on the popular feeling?

Perhaps then you would also un-ban those members and rescind the warnings that were given yesterday to those who expressed openly what 95% of the voters in this poll have shown their support for?

 

[Patch]

Perhaps then you would also un-ban those members and rescind the warnings that were given yesterday to those who expressed openly what 95% of the voters in this poll have shown their support for?

I'll give that a big 'ol +1.

 

[phoenix]

Unbeliever,
I don't believe that there has ever been any censorship of your many posts discussing retinopathy nor those of any other people discussing complications . Indeed those discussions have shown how people can support each other.
As far as I can see the original problem was nothing to do with such discussion, more to do with almost throw away comments which were perceived to be (and I agree) scaremongering.

That's my only comment here or on any of the other similar threads that have appeared this morning.
I haven't voted either since I don't think the ability to discuss complications has ever been in question( and unless things have changed since my test on AM Brennan's poll any results meaningless)

 

[Unbeliever]

Unbeliever,
I don't believe that there has ever been any censorship of your many posts discussing retinopathy nor those of any other people discussing complications . Indeed those discussions have shown how people can support each other.
As far as I can see the original problem was nothing to do with such discussion, more to do with almost throw away comments which were perceived to be (and I agree) scaremongering.

That's my only comment here or on any of the other similar threads that have appeared this morning.
I haven't voted either since I don't think the ability to discuss complications has ever been in question( and unless things have changed since my test on AM Brennan's poll any results meaningless)[/quote
I think removing an entire thread on which I posted might be considered censorship. You may well be right Phoenix but as we don't know the details -it was removed without warning - we won't know.
From comments mde by moderators and admin since then It has become apparent that discussion of complications is frowned upon.
I do wonder Phoenix , how you could know if any of my posts have been censored or not, but I m not aware that they have {although I possibly might not hve been able to see if that had been the case]
I agree that people have been able to support each other. My fear now is tht with changes to the policy of moderation then
such matttters are going to have to be sanitised and played down - when most people want the truth

I have no personal ae to grind except that I am tired of seeing threads deleted or discussions stopped for no good reason.
I have alwys admired your posts as well as those of others - and I have learnt a great deal from them aand from your discussions with others. It is not necessary for people to agree to make the discusssions useful to others.

I m sure none of you highly intelligent people whom I much admire would bother o post on a bland , PC forum - as we are hreatened with his becoming.

 

[Unbeliever]

Unbeliever,
I don't believe that there has ever been any censorship of your many posts discussing retinopathy nor those of any other people discussing complications . Indeed those discussions have shown how people can support each other.
As far as I can see the original problem was nothing to do with such discussion, more to do with almost throw away comments which were perceived to be (and I agree) scaremongering.

That's my only comment here or on any of the other similar threads that have appeared this morning.
I haven't voted either since I don't think the ability to discuss complications has ever been in question( and unless things have changed since my test on AM Brennan's poll any results meaningless)[/quote
I think removing an entire thread on which I posted might be considered censorship. You may well be right Phoenix but as we don't know the details -it was removed without warning - we won't know.
From comments mde by moderators and admin since then It has become apparent that discussion of complications is frowned upon.
I do wonder Phoenix , how you could know if any of my posts have been censored or not, but I m not aware that they have {although I possibly might not hve been able to see if that had been the case]
I agree that people have been able to support each other. My fear now is tht with changes to the policy of moderation then
such matttters are going to have to be sanitised and played down - when most people want the truth

I have no personal ae to grind except that I am tired of seeing threads deleted or discussions stopped for no good reason.
I have alwys admired your posts as well as those of others - and I have learnt a great deal from them aand from your discussions with others. It is not necessary for people to agree to make the discusssions useful to others.

I m sure none of you highly intelligent people whom I much admire would bother o post on a bland , PC forum - as we are hreatened with this becoming.

 

[Unbeliever]

Unbeliever,
I don't believe that there has ever been any censorship of your many posts discussing retinopathy nor those of any other people discussing complications . Indeed those discussions have shown how people can support each other.
As far as I can see the original problem was nothing to do with such discussion, more to do with almost throw away comments which were perceived to be (and I agree) scaremongering.

That's my only comment here or on any of the other similar threads that have appeared this morning.
I haven't voted either since I don't think the ability to discuss complications has ever been in question( and unless things have changed since my test on AM Brennan's poll any results meaningless)[/quote
I think removing an entire thread on which I posted might be considered censorship. You may well be right Phoenix but as we don't know the details -it was removed without warning - we won't know.
From comments mde by moderators and admin since then It has become apparent that discussion of complications is frowned upon.
I do wonder Phoenix , how you could know if any of my posts have been censored or not, but I m not aware that they have {although I possibly might not hve been able to see if that had been the case]
I agree that people have been able to support each other. My fear now is tht with changes to the policy of moderation then
such matttters are going to have to be sanitised and played down - when most people want the truth

I have no personal ae to grind except that I am tired of seeing threads deleted or discussions stopped for no good reason.
I have alwys admired your posts as well as those of others - and I have learnt a great deal from them aand from your discussions with others. It is not necessary for people to agree to make the discusssions useful to others.

I m sure none of you highly intelligent people whom I much admire would bother o post on a bland , PC forum - as we are hreatened with this becoming.

 

[phoenix]

I do wonder Phoenix , how you could know if any of my posts have been censored or not, but I m not aware that they have {although I possibly might not hve been able to see if that had been the case

To clarify: as far as I know that hasn't been any but I have no insider knowledge . (I have in my memory only ever had 4 private communications with admin/mods in the time I've been here)
edit increased 3 to 4 I just remembered one with Dan many moons ago.

 

[whelk]

I don't see why there's a problem with reporting and discussing complications. They all over the media when diabetes/obesity is raised. The NHS presents them as the "natural progression" of the illness, something to deal with when it occurs. So I have background retinopathy, gastroparesis, neuropathy, intense muscle pains and B12 deficiency, which are all part of the diabetes or the treatment of it. The DN just ticks each off when it occurs.

I recently saw gastroparesis listed as one of the causes on a death certificate. B*gg*r.

The current state of misinformation has people obsessively counting their toes when they are first diagnosed, because "you know it will happen one day."

Discussion is about restoring sanity.

 

[Paul_c]

Type2 WHY? because the majority of us are/where FAT and did not look after ourselves and did not take note of all the scaremongering/advice about healthy diets..

BZZZTTT Wrong!!!

http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/14046739.php

When I was told I was pre-diabetic 3 years ago, I was given dietary advice and I followed it to the letter... It did not stop me from becoming full blown T2... in fact, I got fatter on the NHS "supposedly" healthy diet and exercise regime I was following...

Getting hold of Dr. Briffa's book "Escape The Diet Trap" turned me round and my blood sugar's are now excellent both fasting, pre and post meal and I'm loosing weight. I've yet to have my second formal HBa1C blood test and am expecting the nurse to congratulate me for supposedly following their diet... In fact, I'll tell them I completely ignored their diet and lowered my carb intake right down and increased my fat and protein intakes as recommended by Dr. Briffa.

 

[Defren]

I think being able to tell another member that diabetic complications are real and happen and why they occur is very important even if it worries or frightens another person.

I couldn't agree more! Complications DO happen, it is simply not prudent or wise to ignore this fact. By discussing a topic such as this, there is always the thought just one person will be able to avoid any complications. How can saving even just one person the pain and heartache of complications be wrong?

It is a delicate subject, but to us ALL OF US it's something very real, lets not forget that.

 

[halfpint]

I am just going to add my ten-penneth. Talking to my brov a little while ago, he said to me that all his friends have diabetes, but unlike him, most are very badly controlled - (I said most, not ALL) and out of those friends about half have died and the other half are either blind or have bits missing. For me this is a huge incentive to try to avoid full blown diabetes or at least delay its onset. I have a number of friends who are in the early stages of diabetes and all are following the advice of their doctor who has said continue to eat as normal, your medication will increase to compensate so don't worry. Surely this is head in the sand. If they are happy with that then fine, I can only hope that if they wish to learn more then they are pro-active in looking for it. But many people will simply go along with their Drs advice, blindly.

Its difficult - many people really don't want to know what the possible outcome will be. Today, a friend popped in, I offered some coffee, 'yes please half a cup and two sugars'. We talked about D, and her response was 'Oh I can't be a**ed with all that, don't want to know'. So I can only assume people that don't want to know don't go looking to find out.

 

[GraceK]

Yes, complications DO happen. I don't think anyone is disputing that. I don't think anyone has advocated ignoring the fact either. I agree with the discussion of complications on the forum and I'm not advocating keeping anyone in the dark about anything.

But what I do disagree with is the assumption that all newbies will want to know IMMEDIATELY everything there is to know about diabetic complications. We have no right to assume what kind of information anyone is looking for when they walk through the door of a forum any more than we would know if they walked through a physical door of a meeting room. We also don't know what emotional or mental state they're really in or whether they can yet COPE with knowing.

If we were physically all in a meeting room would we all rush to the newcomer with stories of amputations, blindness etc and give them the impression this WILL happen to them IF they don't do this, that or the other? No, I don't think we would. I think we'd welcome the newcomer and allow them the time and space to ask questions IN THEIR OWN TIME. In a physical space a person can very quickly scan the environment and choose what and who to approach or avoid but cyberspace is different. We can sometimes move far too fast for our own good in cyberspace and we can also make far too many assumptions about what WE think others SHOULD know or SHOULD WANT TO KNOW.

When I joined the forum, I can honestly say that I wasn't scared and I wanted to STAY that way. Because if I had become bogged down with the complications side of things whilst in the early days I wouldn't have concentrated on the HERE AND NOW and got to grips with the basics of diet, testing etc before going on to the deeper aspects.

 

[Defren]

Yes, complications DO happen. I don't think anyone is disputing that. I don't think anyone has advocated ignoring the fact either. I agree with the discussion of complications on the forum and I'm not advocating keeping anyone in the dark about anything.

But what I do disagree with is the assumption that all newbies will want to know IMMEDIATELY everything there is to know about diabetic complications. We have no right to assume what kind of information anyone is looking for when they walk through the door of a forum any more than we would know if they walked through a physical door of a meeting room. We also don't know what emotional or mental state they're really in or whether they can yet COPE with knowing.

If we were physically all in a meeting room would we all rush to the newcomer with stories of amputations, blindness etc and give them the impression this WILL happen to them IF they don't do this, that or the other? No, I don't think we would. I think we'd welcome the newcomer and allow them the time and space to ask questions IN THEIR OWN TIME. In a physical space a person can very quickly scan the environment and choose what and who to approach or avoid but cyberspace is different. We can sometimes move far too fast for our own good in cyberspace and we can also make far too many assumptions about what WE think others SHOULD know or SHOULD WANT TO KNOW.

When I joined the forum, I can honestly say that I wasn't scared and I wanted to STAY that way. Because if I had become bogged down with the complications side of things whilst in the early days I wouldn't have concentrated on the HERE AND NOW and got to grips with the basics of diet, testing etc before going on to the deeper aspects.

Accepted this is how you feel, I was the opposite, so how do we as advice givers react? I don't recall newbies being hit with stories of blindness, amputations etc, these things are usually mentioned if the newby asks, or on general threads.

I know you are aware of all diabetes entails now, but it's not that long ago you were as clueless as I was at diagnosis. I HAD to know, for me that was the most important thing of all, would diabetes kill me. I asked and was told, and I am eternally grateful I was. It was an immediate kick up the rear to dry my tears and look at my life as it had become.

I will NEVER hide the fact that the complications DO result from erratic or bad BG control. Why do you think we give dietary advice? To help people keep their BG down, and why, so they don't have problems in the future, the two are inexorably linked. So if we hide the fact, or candy coat the issue, why bother giving dietary advice?

 

[GraceK]

Defren ... there's a vast difference and even a legal implication between the word 'advice' and 'information'. No-one on this forum to my knowledge is qualified to give anyone else advice. Even professionals are simply giving 'professional opinions'. The reason I'm advocating being careful in this situation is because I was a counsellor of abuse victims for many years and I know the harm that can occur from being over enthusiastic and assuming that people want to know what WE (who know) believe they will also want to know.

Because you needed a kick up the rear doesn't mean another person will need the same thing, that's why personal choice comes into the equation were sensitive information is concerned.

We agree on so many things Defren and I really value your input and the information you've put forward but on this particular issue, I can't agree ... and hope we can agree to differ. :wink:

 

[Defren]

Defren ... there's a vast difference and even a legal implication between the word 'advice' and 'information'. No-one on this forum to my knowledge is qualified to give anyone else advice. Even professionals are simply giving 'professional opinions'. The reason I'm advocating being careful in this situation is because I was a counsellor of abuse victims for many years and I know the harm that can occur from being over enthusiastic and assuming that people want to know what WE (who know) believe they will also want to know.

Because you needed a kick up the rear doesn't mean another person will need the same thing, that's why personal choice comes into the equation were sensitive information is concerned.

We agree on so many things Defren and I really value your input and the information you've put forward but on this particular issue, I can't agree ... and hope we can agree to differ. :wink:

Firstly, I have worked in law all my life, I am a highly skilled professional in my field and there is no legal implications in advice, good, bad or indifferent.

No, we are never going to agree on this, and other subject in the future I suspect, you have strong views as do I, certainly no hard feelings over the fact.

 

[BioHaZarD]

I can almost feel the love

 

[GraceK]

Defren ... there's a vast difference and even a legal implication between the word 'advice' and 'information'. No-one on this forum to my knowledge is qualified to give anyone else advice. Even professionals are simply giving 'professional opinions'. The reason I'm advocating being careful in this situation is because I was a counsellor of abuse victims for many years and I know the harm that can occur from being over enthusiastic and assuming that people want to know what WE (who know) believe they will also want to know.

Because you needed a kick up the rear doesn't mean another person will need the same thing, that's why personal choice comes into the equation were sensitive information is concerned.

We agree on so many things Defren and I really value your input and the information you've put forward but on this particular issue, I can't agree ... and hope we can agree to differ. :wink:

Firstly, I have worked in law all my life, I am a highly skilled professional in my field and there is no legal implications in advice, good, bad or indifferent.

No, we are never going to agree on this, and other subject in the future I suspect, you have strong views as do I, certainly no hard feelings over the fact.

I'm sure you are a highly skilled professional Defren ... but this forum isn't about professionals giving advice. It's about mutual respect not only for each other's viewpoints but also for each others sensitivities at times of vulnerability.

You seem to have made your mind up based on one instance of disagreement, that we're not going to agree on anything in future. That's a shame.

 

[Defren]

I can almost feel the love

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


[youtube]W9_nXlvY6Io[/youtube]