• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Young, not long a diabetic, still lost half of foot

Interestingly whilst there was a strong correlation with complications and hba1c s in type 1s in type 1 diabetes trials done in early 2000s, This did not prove true for type 2s (Accord trial 2008 and Advance) if the method used to bring down blood sugars was insulin or sulphonyureas. In other words our clinicians and we are concerned with blood sugars because that is what is easily measured but insulin in excess is toxic too and in the ACCORD trial showed increased mortality when more insulin was used to lower HBA1c (type 2) e.g. heart attacks and strokes. We probably should all try to keep insulin as low as possible by use of diet/exercise and as a type 1 I don't want to get insulin resistant by over using insulin to keep my bgs low.
As type 1 my only experience of complications since 1980 was retinal bleeds in 2003/4 which left me blind until I had a vitrectomy in both eyes which left me with a useful leve of sight though I can't drive anything other than a pedal bike! I had averagely good control but had roller coaster blood sugars following my 1st pregnancy (tight control to lax control with a new baby).
I am glad to have flash monitoring (fsl) because I think 'time in range' might be a better indicator of risk than the mean average of the HBA1c.
Totally agree that we need to know more about who is vulnerable to complications whether macro aor micro vascular and why because it is clearly not just high bgs.
 
According to Jason Fung, keeping blood glucose in control isn’t enough if it’s being achieved by hypoglycaemics that simply move the glucose somewhere else. They treat the immediate symptoms but not the disease, and have little or no impact on the prevention of long term complications. In fact they make the disease worse. The real treatment is to stop ingesting glucose and purge it out of the body with fasting, not put more in and use pharmaceuticals to sweep it under the carpet.

This is the view of Jason Fung, not my own personal research, but I think he’s right. Others are free to disagree
 
You are assuming that everyone has enough insulin in the first place. Clearly Type1's don't and some Type 2's might not have.
 
Mr_Pot said:
You are assuming that everyone has enough insulin in the first place. Clearly Type1's don't and some Type 2's might not have.
Click to expand...

You’re right. Sorry, I was commenting more on type 2. I should really get out of that habit. Thanks for the correction!

Although regarding type 2 and exogenous insulin, that really is a slippery slope if the patient is using it to force ingested glucose out of the blood. One could even level this argument toward some type 1s, as they can also become insulin resistant if ingesting too much glucose.
 
Mr_Pot said:
You are assuming that everyone has enough insulin in the first place. Clearly Type1's don't and some Type 2's might not have.
Click to expand...
Type 1s CAN become insulin resistant (double D) and type 2s who are extremely resistant can recover beta cell function. It just seems that focus on blood sugars leads doctors to opt for insulin as a final resort to get bgs down but according tot he afore mentioned Fung, this increases the underlying problem thus may not actually help. It would be great if there was a reliable way to check insulin levels as reliably as we check bgs!
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…