Diabetes Summit 2018
Options
cstehansen
Posts: 1,984 Member
For those interested:
http://thediabetessummit.com/?idev_id=1093&idev_username=drmowll&utm_source=1093
http://thediabetessummit.com/?idev_id=1093&idev_username=drmowll&utm_source=1093
1
Replies
-
Neat!
*FYI, as a Type 1, I keep suggesting we have a new name for this disease since "Diabetes" in so many cases is used exclusively for Type 2 - as for this event, which is clearly designed to be for Type 2 only - and there becomes a lot of confusion amongst the uneducated general public as a result. I swear, if I hear from 1 more person that I can "reverse" my type 1 diabetes with weight loss, I'm going to start getting upset.2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Neat!
*FYI, as a Type 1, I keep suggesting we have a new name for this disease since "Diabetes" in so many cases is used exclusively for Type 2 - as for this event, which is clearly designed to be for Type 2 only - and there becomes a lot of confusion amongst the uneducated general public as a result. I swear, if I hear from 1 more person that I can "reverse" my type 1 diabetes with weight loss, I'm going to start getting upset.
Based on this that was posted in another thread - https://blog.thediabetessite.com/5-types/ - not even all type 2 are alike. People look at me sideways when I say I was diagnosed with T2 as even at my "fattest" my bf% was about 22% and I was lifting weights 5 days a week along with just plain being active.
From reading this and what I could from the associated article in the Lancet, I am fairly certain I fall into that second category where I just don't produce enough insulin. LCHF keeps my BG reasonable, but I am beginning to think if that is the case, then I may never get to optimal levels.0 -
cstehansen wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Neat!
*FYI, as a Type 1, I keep suggesting we have a new name for this disease since "Diabetes" in so many cases is used exclusively for Type 2 - as for this event, which is clearly designed to be for Type 2 only - and there becomes a lot of confusion amongst the uneducated general public as a result. I swear, if I hear from 1 more person that I can "reverse" my type 1 diabetes with weight loss, I'm going to start getting upset.
Based on this that was posted in another thread - https://blog.thediabetessite.com/5-types/ - not even all type 2 are alike. People look at me sideways when I say I was diagnosed with T2 as even at my "fattest" my bf% was about 22% and I was lifting weights 5 days a week along with just plain being active.
From reading this and what I could from the associated article in the Lancet, I am fairly certain I fall into that second category where I just don't produce enough insulin. LCHF keeps my BG reasonable, but I am beginning to think if that is the case, then I may never get to optimal levels.
Yes, I acknowledge Type 2 is often used as a "catch-all" for more than 1 pathway. It's frustrating, right? I can't think of any other disease where the symptoms determine the diagnosis rather than the pathway to the disease.0 -
Awesome. Thanks for sharing this.midwesterner85 wrote: »cstehansen wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Neat!
*FYI, as a Type 1, I keep suggesting we have a new name for this disease since "Diabetes" in so many cases is used exclusively for Type 2 - as for this event, which is clearly designed to be for Type 2 only - and there becomes a lot of confusion amongst the uneducated general public as a result. I swear, if I hear from 1 more person that I can "reverse" my type 1 diabetes with weight loss, I'm going to start getting upset.
Based on this that was posted in another thread - https://blog.thediabetessite.com/5-types/ - not even all type 2 are alike. People look at me sideways when I say I was diagnosed with T2 as even at my "fattest" my bf% was about 22% and I was lifting weights 5 days a week along with just plain being active.
From reading this and what I could from the associated article in the Lancet, I am fairly certain I fall into that second category where I just don't produce enough insulin. LCHF keeps my BG reasonable, but I am beginning to think if that is the case, then I may never get to optimal levels.
Yes, I acknowledge Type 2 is often used as a "catch-all" for more than 1 pathway. It's frustrating, right? I can't think of any other disease where the symptoms determine the diagnosis rather than the pathway to the disease.
Coming from a bitter patient with a few autoimmune diseases, I'd say this is almost every autoimmune disease... from my experience. No symptoms = no diagnosis. Course then again, I've had every symptom and because a lab came up negative I had no diagnosis either... until the lab finally did get bad enough. Pffft.
0
