• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Forum questions: additional forums?

Enclave said:
Sorry but vegetarian and vegan are not in any way connected with gluten-free .. Vegetarian & Vegan is NOT a diet restriction .. its a life style choice not to eat or accept the killing of animals for eating.
Click to expand...

Well said Enclave, Vegetarian is a life choice and one that a person is often passionate about............... I am Coeliac, so not a choice.
 
TorqPenderloin said:
It wasn't my intention to offend, but just as you worded it, they're both situations where you cannot or chose "not to eat" something. I would also say my allergic reaction to peanuts is connected as well. They pose similar challenges and most "Conventional" dietary approaches do not consider common lifestyle choices and/or allergies. In that sense, they are connected.
Click to expand...
I think we will just have to disagree on this subject ... with your reasoning then every forum connected with food is going to be in the same heading. Just like it already is only we have sub headings now.
 
I don't think of it as a choice. I am so dyed-in-the-wool vegetarian, I would need a brain transplant now to make any other choice. Just saying.

Back on topic: One little thing that niggles me is that when I select "recent posts" sometimes a thread title catches my eye then I notice it is actually in the joke section. I would prefer that the jokey threads did not rise to the top, but that is not a big deal, just a personal gripe.
 
TBH I didn't relalise there was a gluten free section and I still haven't looked at it................yet. Talking about Coeliac on a Vegetarian section is
Enclave said:
My point completely ... you have no choice .. where as I do, so they are very different
Click to expand...

I used to be a vegetarian many years ago, for 2 1/2 years, still love Veggie foods ( especially raw veg and dips) and hot meals too. My son is vegetarian, never thought he ever would, but he has for a few years now and has lost weight too, which he is very happy about.
 
Whilst respecting your opinion @TorqPenderloin , I have to disagree with your reasoning "2.) Type 3c (Pancreatic Diabetes)- I understand it's a completely separate type and people didn't want to feel left out, but creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent....9 threads, the majority of which are about people asking what type 3c is."
On November 24th when the 3c sub-forum started there were only two active type 3c posters on this forum. Today, 42 days later (including two holiday periods where I believe the forum generally had less posters) there are now 11 members who are acknowledging they are type 3C, and three other who are exploring the possibility via their medical practitioner. Yes there have been people asking what type 3C is - as a rare but increase form of diabetes that was one if the main reasons for creating the subsection, not as you seem to think because 'people didn't want to feel left out'. I also do not understand your comment that 'creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent' I think a five fold identification of people with a specific rare form of diabetes in 5weeks is an achievement not a failure!! I also believe that a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive not discriminatory or are we just sideways sliding back towards the type 1/type 2 separation argument again??

By the way @Administrator , type 3c has had 97 posts in 42 days, but pre-diabetes has had 107, only 10 more - why us there no discussion about that subsection??
 
Avocado Sevenfold said:
I don't think of it as a choice. I am so dyed-in-the-wool vegetarian, I would need a brain transplant now to make any other choice. Just saying.

Back on topic: One little thing that niggles me is that when I select "recent posts" sometimes a thread title catches my eye then I notice it is actually in the joke section. I would prefer that the jokey threads did not rise to the top, but that is not a big deal, just a personal gripe.
Click to expand...
I agree .. but it was a life style choice .. I don't see animals or fish as food .. but others do
 
I am ashamed to say that, until recently, type 3c had flown under my radar. The addition of the new sub-forum has been a revelation to me and no doubt to others too. That can only be a good thing.
 
mrspuddleduck said:
Whilst respecting your opinion @TorqPenderloin , I have to disagree with your reasoning "2.) Type 3c (Pancreatic Diabetes)- I understand it's a completely separate type and people didn't want to feel left out, but creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent....9 threads, the majority of which are about people asking what type 3c is."
On November 24th when the 3c sub-forum started there were only two active type 3c posters on this forum. Today, 42 days later (including two holiday periods where I believe the forum generally had less posters) there are now 11 members who are acknowledging they are type 3C, and three other who are exploring the possibility via their medical practitioner. Yes there have been people asking what type 3C is - as a rare but increase form of diabetes that was one if the main reasons for creating the subsection, not as you seem to think because 'people didn't want to feel left out'. I also do not understand your comment that 'creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent' I think a five fold identification of people with a specific rare form of diabetes in 5weeks is an achievement not a failure!! I also believe that a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive not discriminatory or are we just sideways sliding back towards the type 1/type 2 separation argument again??

By the way @Administrator , type 3c has had 97 posts in 42 days, but pre-diabetes has had 107, only 10 more - why us there no discussion about that subsection??
Click to expand...

I had never heard of Type 3C diabetes, until I found out about it on this forum and even if I was the only one, that's surely a benefit, isn't it ?
 
mrspuddleduck said:
Whilst respecting your opinion @TorqPenderloin , I have to disagree with your reasoning "2.) Type 3c (Pancreatic Diabetes)- I understand it's a completely separate type and people didn't want to feel left out, but creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent....9 threads, the majority of which are about people asking what type 3c is."
On November 24th when the 3c sub-forum started there were only two active type 3c posters on this forum. Today, 42 days later (including two holiday periods where I believe the forum generally had less posters) there are now 11 members who are acknowledging they are type 3C, and three other who are exploring the possibility via their medical practitioner. Yes there have been people asking what type 3C is - as a rare but increase form of diabetes that was one if the main reasons for creating the subsection, not as you seem to think because 'people didn't want to feel left out'. I also do not understand your comment that 'creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent' I think a five fold identification of people with a specific rare form of diabetes in 5weeks is an achievement not a failure!! I also believe that a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive not discriminatory or are we just sideways sliding back towards the type 1/type 2 separation argument again??

By the way @Administrator , type 3c has had 97 posts in 42 days, but pre-diabetes has had 107, only 10 more - why us there no discussion about that subsection??
Click to expand...

Torq raised a few valid points - we're just discussing them at the moment. Agreed, prediabetes hasn't had much more.
 
Administrator said:
Torq raised a few valid points - we're just discussing them at the moment. Agreed, prediabetes hasn't had much more.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to throw a few ideas out for discussion. I appreciate the responses, and my intention was never to prioritize certain topics.

I went down the list of forum subsections and picked out those that had low(er) traffic. I did my best to try to be unbiased, and again, one of the topics I mentioned affects me personally.
 
AndBreathe said:
In my view Gestational Diabetes and Pregnancy should not be merged. Gestational Diabetes is a condition. Pregnancy can happen to all types of diabetics, although it'd be a miracle in my case! As I understand it, diabetics who would like to become pregnant are advised to achieve and maintain excellent control and their pregnancies can have a few additional challenges. My grasp of gestational diabetes is that it occurs during pregnancy for some women and often resolves post-partum.

i have no vested interest in this, but just feel they're some way distant to one another.
Click to expand...

Ah, interesting! Looking at the forums, it looks like there is an overlap to some degree - but having read a number of posts some are certainly mutually exclusive. All the feedback is fantastic :)
 
mrspuddleduck said:
Whilst respecting your opinion @TorqPenderloin , I have to disagree with your reasoning "2.) Type 3c (Pancreatic Diabetes)- I understand it's a completely separate type and people didn't want to feel left out, but creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent....9 threads, the majority of which are about people asking what type 3c is."
On November 24th when the 3c sub-forum started there were only two active type 3c posters on this forum. Today, 42 days later (including two holiday periods where I believe the forum generally had less posters) there are now 11 members who are acknowledging they are type 3C, and three other who are exploring the possibility via their medical practitioner. Yes there have been people asking what type 3C is - as a rare but increase form of diabetes that was one if the main reasons for creating the subsection, not as you seem to think because 'people didn't want to feel left out'. I also do not understand your comment that 'creating this subsection has had the opposite effect from its intent' I think a five fold identification of people with a specific rare form of diabetes in 5weeks is an achievement not a failure!! I also believe that a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive not discriminatory or are we just sideways sliding back towards the type 1/type 2 separation argument again??

By the way @Administrator , type 3c has had 97 posts in 42 days, but pre-diabetes has had 107, only 10 more - why us there no discussion about that subsection??
Click to expand...
Administrator said:
Torq raised a few valid points - we're just discussing them at the moment. Agreed, prediabetes hasn't had much more.
Click to expand...

@Administrator Interesting that you have quoted my response and replied that Torq raised a few valid points that you and he were discussing. I can only take that to mean that you felt my points were not valid. I stand by what I said in my reply - ' a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive....'
 
mrspuddleduck said:
@Administrator Interesting that you have quoted my response and replied that Torq raised a few valid points that you and he were discussing. I can only take that to mean that you felt my points were not valid. I stand by what I said in my reply - ' a forum that claims to be specifically for diabetes should be inclusive....'
Click to expand...
Especially a forum that is as big as this one. There are other smaller forums where you can get help with T1 and T2, but surely a forum such as this one should cater for everyone, even if there aren't many posts in that section? Where else can the minority groups get help? I don't understand why we need to reduce the number of forums having recently increased them?
 
When this thread was first started the request was for suggestions for new sub forums. There was NO indication that they would have to cater for a minimum amount if people or produce a specified amount of posts in a given time. In fact when I muted the 3C forum I specifically indicated that it may only cater for a few people (post #3). The goalposts now appear to have changed somewhat......

Edited to add. Can I just add that whilst I'm obviously focussing on the 3C part of this debate I feel just as strongly about the potential culling/down grading of the others mentioned.
 
Last edited:
TorqPenderloin said:
I went down the list of forum subsections and picked out those that had low(er) traffic. I did my best to try to be unbiased, and again, one of the topics I mentioned affects me personally.
Click to expand...

With respect @TorqPenderloin but less traffic to a sub-forum doesn't mean that they are less important to those who partake in them, now that these forums have been created it would wrong (on so many levels) to remove them and it would only cause upset.
 
noblehead said:
With respect @TorqPenderlion but less traffic to a sub-forum doesn't mean that they are less important to those who partake in them, now that these forums have been created it would wrong (on so many levels) to remove them and it would only cause upset.
Click to expand...
And the traffic will grow once others realise they have their own sub section here.
 
Back
Top