Diagnosed T2 10 years. No complications yet. No medication for over a year.I receive the "Type 2 and you" newsletter from The Independent Diabetes Trust. Today, the September, issue 24, landed on my doormat. Having just read it, I am distressed & disturbed by what has been written. And I quote: "On average, people with Type 2 diabetes will need to start taking insulin seven years after diagnosis." I had NO idea that this is my future with this **** disease. It's frightening.
The article on Diabetic Retinopathy States "After 20 years of Diabetes, nearly all patients with Type 1 diabetes and >60% of patients with Type 2 diabetes will have some degree of retinopathy." Again, this frightens & saddens me. Of course, I know about diabetic complications. I made it my business to educate & inform myself, via this forum and other resources, when I was diagnosed earlier this year. Am I really so naive not to be aware of this prognosis. I'm angry! Rightly or wrongly so.
The Independent Diabetes Trust is a competent, trustworthy & reliable organisation with a good reputation, who educate and support those with this disease. I've no reason not to believe their statistics. I'm gutted to be honest.
All advice, views, personal experience & opinions will be gratefully received. Oh, and here's a link to the newsletter.
http://iddt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Type2andYou-Sep2015.pdf
Dunno about you, but I don't consider myself "average", and I have no intention of willingly becoming one of their averages.
All those predictions are based on diabetics who have followed NHS guidelines.
I was told I would be diabetic in 2 years, in my 20s.
Ended up by holding out til my mid 40s - by low carbing.
Now I AM T2, and very low carbing, plus fat, I reckon even if things do progress, they are going to be much much slower than the NHS predictions suggest.
Diabetic complications develop at different speeds in different people, but there is a heck of a lot we can do to help ourselves, and for T2s that is mainly down to diet and blood glucose control. Some exercise. Some meds.
Have a read of www.bloodsugar101.com and you will see analysis of studies showing that if blood glucose is lowered to normal levels (non-D levels) the incidence of complications plummets - to that of a normal person. For that reason I have a goal to never let my BG rise above 7. Doesn't always happen, but it is a FINE goal!
I don't believe anything is inevitable.
We must have the opportunity to change the outcome, to some degree at least.
We are all empowered by what we read, the support and experiences of others on a similar road to ourselves. I'm going to fight to make sure I do everything I can to take control of this disease, as will you and many others.
The only thing that is inevitable, is the outcome if you do nothing to change it.
Hi @Brunneria. Thank you for sharing your experiences. It's reassuring, you being an "old timer." (In the nicest possible way.)May I ask...isn't it "normal" for non-diabetics to have blood glucose rise above 7 following a meal? I sometimes test my hubby's BG after a big meal. (Purely out of interest.) Often it is above 7.0, obviously depending on what he's eaten. Quickly drops back down. But BG went above 10 recently following a Costa Lemon Iced Tea. (Uses flavoured syrups to make the iced teas.)
The thing about predicting the future is it isn't certain, and although the past may offer us valuable indicators, when it comes to medical matters, like diabetes, it must be considered that knowledge, insights, prevention, treatments and management are all advancing, which over time, gives the motivated diabetic a chance to put themselves at the better end of the spectrum, as far as outcomes go,notwithstanding any personal or familial risks they run.
Having looked the National Diabetes Audit for various years (I believe 2013 is the most recent published - http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14970), some of the statistics published, are depressingly sobering. It would appear that an enormous number of diabetics (T1 & T2) are not reaching their diabetes targets, which, for them, sadly must be increasing their chances of suffering complications, somewhere along their lifetime adventure.
I would suggest that by comparison, the contributors to this forum are in the minority, in terms of how we approach and manage our conditions, today. What we do today will influence what we do tomorrow, but it doesn't set it into stone. How many people do we see who lose their way over time?
For myself, my aim is to remain as fit and healthy as I am today, for as long as I possibly can, so I take my condition seriously. But, who knows what life will throw my way, in terms of life events and health curved balls, but I can only do my best.
I aim to remain confident in confident of my future, as becoming crest-fallen, in the light of this sort of statistical prediction encourages a self-fulfilling prophecy I want no part of.
I think 'normal' people have widely varying bg levels, and that non-diabetics often have quite high readings! The difference is that many of them drop back down to the 4s and sometimes the 3s the rest of the time, while we diabetics stick higher for MUCH longer - which is what causes a lot of the problem.
The reason I have arbitrarily chosen 7 as my goalpost is based entirely on the 101 website.
The studies examined there show some general trends - basically, if you keep your blood glucose levels to what used to be 5.9% or below (they call it the 5% club), which we would now call below 42, then those diabetic complications become MUCH less likely.
But of course, the HbA1c is an average reading, and 42 eqates to an approx average of 7 mmol/l
So I just go for 7 as a nice round ceiling, and hope that if I keep under 7 as much as possible, the end result will be living inside the 5% club. I may be erring on the side of caution, but I would much rather do that than push the envelope and discover that I pay the price, in complications, in 10 or 20 years time.
This is a looooong game (I keep saying that, but only because it is true)
Sorry if that explanation was confusing, but this diagram may help.
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?