• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

suggested to rename type 2 diabetes to lipodiabetes

waleed

waleed

Well-Known Member
Messages
61
Location
Jordan
Type of diabetes
Treatment type
Diet only
The current differentiation between type 1 and type 2 diabetes makes them look similar in scope to the patient. And misguide him to thinking that type 2 is
only a blood glucose problem, downplaying the fact that it is a manifestation of an excessive fat origin.
Renaming it to Lipodiabetes brings the patient to a better understanding of his condition.
 
Me neither. In many cases the excess fat is because of insulin resistance (ie pre diabetes causes obesity).

Edit: and surely someone who is fat realises they are fat? There's usually plenty of people willing to inform me of that fact. Not so many can tell me what to do about it though.
 
Nobody. You might as well just call it <insert personal opinion>diabetes.

Type 2 Diabetes is easily differentiated from Type 1, and the friendly helpful media is very clear in blaming Fat People for bankrupting the economy.
 
How about FLAS diabetes? (Fat, lazy and stupid) ?

I am a fat T2, so if that's what people mean when they see me, they may as well say it. I know the truth and if anyone had walked in my shoes they would too. (yep and the shoes are well worn, from when I occasionally get up from the couch).
 
Judging by waleed's previous posts, I'm assuming he means fat as in visceral fat rather than subcutaneous fat, but it still seems like a completely pointless distinction to me. What's the point? According to the experts type 2 is a spectrum disorder anyway. I think @phoenix posted a video by a diabetes specialist who had another (and far less open to judgemental finger pointing) term that he wanted used instead. Unfortunately I can't remember what it was, DOH!
 
Indy51 said:
Judging by waleed's previous posts, I'm assuming he means fat as in visceral fat rather than subcutaneous fat, but it still seems like a completely pointless distinction to me. What's the point? According to the experts type 2 is a spectrum disorder anyway. I think @phoenix posted a video by a diabetes specialist who had another (and far less open to judgemental finger pointing) term that he wanted used instead. Unfortunately I can't remember what it was, DOH!
Click to expand...

Lol. It must have been a very memorable name then. :)
 
It's already been done and progressed from.
In the 19th century French doctors used Le Diabète Maigre et le Diabète Gras.
In 1951 RD Lawrence wrote
"Human diabetics are divided clinically into two main types:
(l) those who probably are not insulin-deficient,and (2) those who certainly are. The former type, again, is divided into two, depending on the absence or excess of fat stores, and the new words lipoatrophic and lipoplethoric diabetes have been coined to describe them. "http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2068395/pdf/brmedj03534-0003.pdf
(the word lipoatrophic is still used for those who have an absence of fat cells which leads to fat deposited in the wrong place and insulin resistance This guy who has 'type 2' in one sense in that he is insulin resistant yet is stick thin (so not really T2 since there is a definite genetic cause. ) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...le-paracyclist-store-fat-type-2-diabetes.html)


There is now a realisation that things are much more complex This is perhaps the video and paper that Indy mentions (unfortunately the paper is now behind a pay wall but the video is still available) . Professor Gale describes T2 as a 'ragbag' a definition of exclusion and if you look at the official definition that's definitely the case
The name he suggests is 'idiopathic hyperglycaemia ' It's better if you watch the short video to understand why(rather than me trying to summarise)
http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(12)62207-7.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have often said I think T2 should be renamed Doris, for all the difference it'll make.

Until the health care professionals begin to properly understand the condition, and the advice those diagnosed is given, it wouldn't make a difference.

Fundamentally, what is really required, in my view, is education, not a multimillion dollar rebrand, resulting in zero.

Yes, I am a cynic. :)
 
AndBreathe said:
I have often said I think T2 should be renamed Doris, for all the difference it'll make.

Until the health care professionals begin to properly understand the condition, and the advice those diagnosed is given, it wouldn't make a difference.

Fundamentally, what is really required, in my view, is education, not a multimillion dollar rebrand, resulting in zero.

Yes, I am a cynic. :)
Click to expand...
Yeh, but what if your name was actually Doris? Oh the shame of it........but at least I would have someone to blame. ;)
 
There are plenty of us Non Fat T2's, Diabetes is diabetes regardless of type or name we are all pancreaticly challenged.
Isn't it enough we get mauled by the papers and those who do not understand, without our fellow sufferers giving us grief as well.
 
I don't think renaming will help understanding it addressing the awful misconceptions there are.
But to help I think type 1s should be renamed sparkly and type 2s unicorns? Hope that has helped to clarify any misconceptions.
 
"The wheels on the bus go round and round........" - sorry but it popped into my head
 
zand said:
Yeh, but what if your name was actually Doris? Oh the shame of it........but at least I would have someone to blame. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not called Doris, and I'm a predictably selfish person. :D
 
We have divided diabetes into two main categories (and others) so I was thinking what ties us together and it is because we all get diagnosed with the same thing. Sugar in the blood. So the diagnosis groups us together.

I looked up the etymology of diabetes to see if that helped and it doesn't really but it is amusing. Here is a link.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=diabetes
 
Back
Top