Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1.5/LADA Diabetes
Pleased to see this new topic area
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Daibell" data-source="post: 341071" data-attributes="member: 21149"><p>Hi. It's good to see this diabetes classification added. I guess I'm one of quite a few classed by my GP as T2 (well, you're not a T1 are you?) to quote the GP. I've never been overweight, I lost a lot of weight shortly before diagnosis and tablets have not managed me well. I had my own GAD and c-peptide tests done recently as my GP wasn't interested. The former was negative and the c-peptide showed I had little of my own insulin (what a surprise). The interesting thing is the negative GAD. Now there are several other antibodies which most labs can't/don't test for and of course many other causes of pancreatic destruction such as viruses. I suspect in my case it may have been a virus. What concerns me is that of the 20% so-called T2s that are not overweight there must be quite a high proportion who are not insulin resistant and who in fact have a defective pancreas thru one of these unknown causes. Until the medical profession recognises that this very crude T1/T2 classification is hiding a mid-group of diabetics who have a range of more unusual causes we won't get nearer to the right research to separate out the causes. At least T1.5/LADA is becoming more clearly recognised thru positive GAD tests and some IA2; we just need more data and research where there aren't the right tests available. Anyone any views on the subject or more knowledge to bring to bear?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Daibell, post: 341071, member: 21149"] Hi. It's good to see this diabetes classification added. I guess I'm one of quite a few classed by my GP as T2 (well, you're not a T1 are you?) to quote the GP. I've never been overweight, I lost a lot of weight shortly before diagnosis and tablets have not managed me well. I had my own GAD and c-peptide tests done recently as my GP wasn't interested. The former was negative and the c-peptide showed I had little of my own insulin (what a surprise). The interesting thing is the negative GAD. Now there are several other antibodies which most labs can't/don't test for and of course many other causes of pancreatic destruction such as viruses. I suspect in my case it may have been a virus. What concerns me is that of the 20% so-called T2s that are not overweight there must be quite a high proportion who are not insulin resistant and who in fact have a defective pancreas thru one of these unknown causes. Until the medical profession recognises that this very crude T1/T2 classification is hiding a mid-group of diabetics who have a range of more unusual causes we won't get nearer to the right research to separate out the causes. At least T1.5/LADA is becoming more clearly recognised thru positive GAD tests and some IA2; we just need more data and research where there aren't the right tests available. Anyone any views on the subject or more knowledge to bring to bear? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1.5/LADA Diabetes
Pleased to see this new topic area
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…