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 Diabetes
What's in a name?
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="NicoleC1971" data-source="post: 2348130" data-attributes="member: 365308"><p>Hi Mustaffa and I hope you are getting to grips with your diagnosis?</p><p>I have had type 1 for 40 plus years now and used to resent the nomenclature because to me type 2 implied a failure of willpower whereas my own diagnosis was not avoidable.</p><p>I have now got more familiar with the causes of type 2 which turn out not to be greed or laziness and nor does it happen exclusively to inactive and overweight middle aged people.</p><p>Having looked at the history it is clear that the first symptom noticed in ancient times was one diabetics share in common - hyperglycemia detected in the urine - and that as recently as the 1920s the medical world imagined that both types of diabetics lacked insulin whereas it was realised by the 1950s and 60s with hormonal assys now possible that type 2s suffer from hyprinsulemia and type 1s suffer from the opposite. Today doctors still treat the symptom that is easiest to measure i.e. the blood glucose and this may be appropriate for a type 1 or 1.5. In both types of diabetes the root cause seems poorly understood although the clinical success of low carb diets (Virta Health and other trials or low cal diets which also restrict carbs - Direct Study) suggests that we are closer in the case of type 2 to knowing what works to get the metabolism working normally. Type 1 seems to be more about getting better technology to mimic the action of the pancreas as far as realistic solutions go possibly because we don't seem to know what triggers the destruction of the beta cells).</p><p>The pharma model of type 2 treatment focuses on blood sugar lowering but there is no profit in treating the root cause of the problem so we carry on prescribing blood sugar lowering agents when the solutions would seem to be a lot simpler and cheaper! </p><p>As to your original request for a descriptor I think diabetes is so common and carries with it such sterotypes that you may need to spend a little time explaining about insulin which I believe is the key differentiator rather than the high blood sugar symptom that we share.</p><p>Now that \i am middle aged too though not overweight, I do have to challenge those ideas too!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NicoleC1971, post: 2348130, member: 365308"] Hi Mustaffa and I hope you are getting to grips with your diagnosis? I have had type 1 for 40 plus years now and used to resent the nomenclature because to me type 2 implied a failure of willpower whereas my own diagnosis was not avoidable. I have now got more familiar with the causes of type 2 which turn out not to be greed or laziness and nor does it happen exclusively to inactive and overweight middle aged people. Having looked at the history it is clear that the first symptom noticed in ancient times was one diabetics share in common - hyperglycemia detected in the urine - and that as recently as the 1920s the medical world imagined that both types of diabetics lacked insulin whereas it was realised by the 1950s and 60s with hormonal assys now possible that type 2s suffer from hyprinsulemia and type 1s suffer from the opposite. Today doctors still treat the symptom that is easiest to measure i.e. the blood glucose and this may be appropriate for a type 1 or 1.5. In both types of diabetes the root cause seems poorly understood although the clinical success of low carb diets (Virta Health and other trials or low cal diets which also restrict carbs - Direct Study) suggests that we are closer in the case of type 2 to knowing what works to get the metabolism working normally. Type 1 seems to be more about getting better technology to mimic the action of the pancreas as far as realistic solutions go possibly because we don't seem to know what triggers the destruction of the beta cells). The pharma model of type 2 treatment focuses on blood sugar lowering but there is no profit in treating the root cause of the problem so we carry on prescribing blood sugar lowering agents when the solutions would seem to be a lot simpler and cheaper! As to your original request for a descriptor I think diabetes is so common and carries with it such sterotypes that you may need to spend a little time explaining about insulin which I believe is the key differentiator rather than the high blood sugar symptom that we share. Now that \i am middle aged too though not overweight, I do have to challenge those ideas too! [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
What's in a name?
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.…