Intensive treatment to lower Blood Sugars.

[borofergie]

I'd be happy with that. I guess everyone would have to agree to their info being released, so a general circular from a mod.

Most of us choose to put that information in the public domain, by including it on their profiles.
For example I know that you are a 61 y/o T2 on Diet Only from this:
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=31362

 

[IanD]

I've never had a hypo in 11 years.

 

[Unbeliever]

Malc (Grazer),

That's my impressi

I'd be happy with that. I guess everyone would have to agree to their info being released, so a general circular from a mod. would be needed. On a similar vein, the article seemed to suggest that all T2's should be on Metformin. Is their an advantage to Metformin other than the obvious for people on Diet only currently? My BG seems O.k, (last A1c 5.9), and I cetainly don't want to lose weight (6ft 1in and 12.5 stone) so are their reasons why I'd benefit from Metformin? That's a real question, not a rhetorical one!

We are always told that it gives a certain amount of cardiovascular protection, Certainly that is what I was old when diagnosed. I didn't need to lose weight and experience proved it did nothing for my bg levels but there was a family history of heart disease and strke so I was immediately prescribed statins and aspirin oo.

I know many feel that I hey benefit from it but I always think of it as a cheap drug looking for a disease! Originally it was used for heart conditions I understand.

I would have no objection to my profile info being released but I am not sure offhand how much I bothered to complete it. Probably like other T2s my medication etc has completely changed since then so it may be as well to ask people to update their profiles before beginning any such exercise.

 

[John Barnes]

This is the kind of a Smart Article:

Intensified glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes: time for a reappraisal
J. S. Yudkin & B. Richter & E. A. M. Gale.
Diabetologia (2010) 53:2079–2085
DOI 10.1007/s00125-010-1864-z

This is a piece where the Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT) is used:

"In other words, this analysis suggests that it would be necessary to treat 119, 272 and
627 diabetic patients for 5 years for each person who benefits in terms of cardiovascular, eye or renal complications, respectively, using a treatment perceived to diminish quality of life by one-third.
Conclusions:Hyperglycaemia is a substantially weaker risk factor for
Cardiovascular Disease than cholesterol or blood pressure, and glucose lowering
interventions are correspondingly less effective.

 

[Unbeliever]

Thank you John Barnes. This is an ineresting subject to me. My eye clinic chant the manra of the magic no 7 constantly. That's fine . My HbA1C is 6;5 and this appears to throw them completely.
In vain do I point out that my macular oedema was caused by bringing my BG down too quickly. As it as and has been down for some time they can only stress the importance of keeping it down. An "upstart " recently started to question me aggressively about cholesterol triglycersides etc. She could not believe that I had low readings and tthe condition had not sabilised.What does she think everyone has been doing for the last 4 years?

I have read that good control for 3 years at least , is necessary before improvemebnt can be seen in retinopathy. I have also read that oo aggressive treatment to reduce BS in certain classes of patient eg the elderly can be counter productive. None of the people in the hospital seem aware of any of this.

It is interesting o know how these things are worked out. I am sure I could reduce my levels even more but I have twice sufffered massive bleeds by having my bg reduced and I feel quite well at my present level.