I think there are a few different things at work here. Firstly there is the general confusion between T1 and T2, which I think everyone agrees is worsened by both lazy journalists and a poor level of general awareness. Added to this is the ‘popular’ view that T2s have brought it on themselves, are lazy slobs etc. Thirdly there is the fact that this condition will cause serious complications if not kept in check (and sometimes even if this is done) and lastly there is the debate whether shock tactics work or not (and who they might work on).
With all that, this debate seems nearly as heated as the low carb / non low carb one! For what it’s worth, here’s my $0.02.
I’ve seen enough comments on here about the fact that some HCPs are recommending BG levels that will be dangerous long term (i.e. ‘just try to keep it under ten’ etc.). This advert is merely another part of that debate. You can’t have a debate about the wisdom of keeping levels well controlled without knowing / discussing the alternatives. Now, that works both ways and any campaign attempting to show people the possible consequences should also show the positives that well controlled diabetes won’t mean you’ll die, footless, at the age of 35.
To anyone saying that shock tactics cause people to bury their head in the sand and avoid treating their diabetes right, well I don't think anyone can prove this. It could be argued that those people were always going to behave that. That’s what’s called a strawman argument and I could easily construct the opposite by saying that anyone who was worried about diabetes would be motivated to get it checked out by seeing something shocking like this. Now I equally don’t believe that that to be 100% reliable. Clearly some people will be pushed one way or the other by hard information campaigns – that’s why they need to be matched to support and encouragement but I strongly feel that they have their place. Like it or not, treating your condition well is a choice, even though having the condition itself isn’t. People have complex reasons why they choose not to ‘do the right thing’ and they are not always easily resolved. Granted also, some people try really hard and are not able to manage their condition well. Those people should have our sympathy, but I would believe that they are in the minority.
I said before, if people say that this would have put them off dealing with their diabetes, then I respect how it makes them feel. However, I feel the opposite, as do others. There will always be someone who disagrees with something like this. The trick is to know where the majority line is. If more people are encouraged / guilted into dealing with their diabetes than are put off, then there is a strong utilitarian argument that it is worthwhile. If more people are put off, then clearly it isn’t. Again as I've said, I don't think anyone would believe this is suitable for children. Children cannot be held responsible for their actions and choices in the same way adults should and need different support. I'm 'lucky' in that I came to T1 late in life as a rational adult. I have the utmost sympathy for children and young people with diabetes and their families. Bluntly I'm glad I didn't get it younger as I don't know how I'd have coped, and I think children and young people deserve maximum support on an individual basis to meet their needs.
However I doubt there is any scientifically valid evidence that proves the benefits or not for adults for this campaign. Without wishing to be rude, none of us know 'most people with diabetes' and internet forums are notoriously unreliable as indicators of mass community view.
It's easy to confuse visceral dislike of something, with the impact that it has. I didn't like the Sir Terry Pratchett documentary, but it was powerful, moving television.
