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
Diabetes Discussions
Which reference says that antidiabetic drugs do not reduce mortality and morbidity?
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: 2277679" data-attributes="member: 365308"><p>Jason Fung provides a referenced top level discussion of the diabetes drugs (The Good, The Bad, THe Ugly) in his book The Diabetes Code. He is biased towards low carb/fasting as a better option because as a nephrologist he has seen how ineffective many drugs are for type 2.</p><p>The bar for these drugs being allowed onto the market is low e.g. they must show only a tiny reduction in HBA1c to prove efficacy.</p><p>Prior to the discovery of a way to get insulin extracted from dogs' pancreases in 1922, diabetics were given low carb diets. Insulin saved lives of type 1s but doctors noticed that both types of diabetics still died early of kidney and heart disease or other co morbidities so it has been known that insulin alone tends to inrease the root cause of type 2 - insulin resistance whilst simultaneously treating the symptom - high blood sugar. The same applies to the drugs which help the pancreas produce yet more insulin. This was shown in various trials about 10 years ago when they monitored the effects of very tight control using drugs compared to normal monitoring (Accord study). Those taking plenty of drugs and getting very tight control of their blood sugars did not better than patients who had an hba1c of 10+ yet doctors still focus on blood sugars as the marker of success in treating type 2s.</p><p>The newer classes of drugs have better outomes with regards to the diabetic complications because they work on the basis of eliminating glucose from the body via the kidneys nut as has been pointed out surely the better way to achieve the same result is not to eat the glucose in the first place.</p><p>Fung's analogy is that if your house is flooding (your cells are overflowing with glucose) you turn off the ta ( (cut carbs or fast). You don't tinker with widening the drain (taking drugs)! Yes I know there are better drugs such as metformin and the sglt2 inhibitors but these surely have to be taken as an adjunct to diet.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NicoleC1971, post: 2277679, member: 365308"] Jason Fung provides a referenced top level discussion of the diabetes drugs (The Good, The Bad, THe Ugly) in his book The Diabetes Code. He is biased towards low carb/fasting as a better option because as a nephrologist he has seen how ineffective many drugs are for type 2. The bar for these drugs being allowed onto the market is low e.g. they must show only a tiny reduction in HBA1c to prove efficacy. Prior to the discovery of a way to get insulin extracted from dogs' pancreases in 1922, diabetics were given low carb diets. Insulin saved lives of type 1s but doctors noticed that both types of diabetics still died early of kidney and heart disease or other co morbidities so it has been known that insulin alone tends to inrease the root cause of type 2 - insulin resistance whilst simultaneously treating the symptom - high blood sugar. The same applies to the drugs which help the pancreas produce yet more insulin. This was shown in various trials about 10 years ago when they monitored the effects of very tight control using drugs compared to normal monitoring (Accord study). Those taking plenty of drugs and getting very tight control of their blood sugars did not better than patients who had an hba1c of 10+ yet doctors still focus on blood sugars as the marker of success in treating type 2s. The newer classes of drugs have better outomes with regards to the diabetic complications because they work on the basis of eliminating glucose from the body via the kidneys nut as has been pointed out surely the better way to achieve the same result is not to eat the glucose in the first place. Fung's analogy is that if your house is flooding (your cells are overflowing with glucose) you turn off the ta ( (cut carbs or fast). You don't tinker with widening the drain (taking drugs)! Yes I know there are better drugs such as metformin and the sglt2 inhibitors but these surely have to be taken as an adjunct to diet. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Diabetes Discussions
Which reference says that antidiabetic drugs do not reduce mortality and morbidity?
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.…