|
Post by babaoriley on Oct 30, 2017 14:06:00 GMT -5
I thought 4/3 of the people in the US were diabetic or pre-diabetic. Sounds about right.
|
|
|
Post by ghochr on Oct 30, 2017 14:38:41 GMT -5
A thought of tought crossed my mind that you should apply for the chief marketing officer.
Please let us know may be that’s the make or break for Afrezza taking off
|
|
|
Post by ghochr on Oct 30, 2017 14:39:37 GMT -5
1/3 of U.S. has diabetes..not very narrow..growing at 12% itellthefuture777, just where exactly do you get the information you post here??? ITellTheFuture isn’t it obvious? 😜
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Oct 30, 2017 15:14:19 GMT -5
Try to find someone that doesn’t know “MY PILLOW “ what more do we need to know / 😀 🎼 FOR THE BEST NIGHT SLEEP IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD “ try AFREZZA !
|
|
|
Post by bioexec25 on Oct 30, 2017 15:43:39 GMT -5
Try to find someone that doesn’t know “MY PILLOW “ what more do we need to know / 😀 🎼 FOR THE BEST NIGHT SLEEP IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD “ try AFREZZA ! No doubt about it. Also what about "ZYPPAH". Wow what a marketing campaign. HAPPYZ!!!! Lol. Hmm. AZZERFA jingle jingle ... That's Afrezza spelled backwards. Uh, ok that doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 30, 2017 15:54:39 GMT -5
1/3 of U.S. has diabetes..not very narrow..growing at 12% itellthefuture777, just where exactly do you get the information you post here??? by 2030..1/3..looking future there are many people undiagnosed currently..
|
|
|
Post by me on Oct 30, 2017 17:48:52 GMT -5
by 2030..1/3..looking future there are many people undiagnosed currently.. Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "will have," not, "has."
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 30, 2017 18:28:56 GMT -5
by 2030..1/3..looking future there are many people undiagnosed currently.. Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "will have," not, "has." Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods).
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 30, 2017 18:30:12 GMT -5
Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "will have," not, "has." Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/index.html
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 30, 2017 18:31:54 GMT -5
Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/index.htmlNational Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017[PDF - 3 MB]
|
|
|
Post by xanet on Oct 30, 2017 23:23:27 GMT -5
Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "will have," not, "has." Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). Thanks for providing a source! That is a lot of people affected. A1C makes sense as an integrated measurement, but I am not a fan of the practice of labeling people prediabetic based on two (or sometimes just one) blood samples. Fasting glucose can be elevated for a number of reasons (e.g., anxiety over whether one may be diabetic!). So I'm not sure how accurate that 33.9% estimate is, but there is probably no better number to go with, and it is pretty sobering.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 31, 2017 0:34:09 GMT -5
Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). Thanks for providing a source! That is a lot of people affected. A1C makes sense as an integrated measurement, but I am not a fan of the practice of labeling people prediabetic based on two (or sometimes just one) blood samples. Fasting glucose can be elevated for a number of reasons (e.g., anxiety over whether one may be diabetic!). So I'm not sure how accurate that 33.9% estimate is, but there is probably no better number to go with, and it is pretty sobering. CDC is the source and methods where theirs in the determinations. The growth of this disease is alarming to say the least. Governments had better take heed and realize Afrezza's potential and insurance companies would be wise to get it dialed in the sooner the better. If they keep using cheap brands as what gets insured verses the outcomes of products and if they don't start tracking hypos's then they are doing a diservice to the patients, and themselves as well as the Nation. The One Drop App if it could track this data of hypos and other events based on what drugs where in use would be a leap forward to providing useful data to put infront of insurers. Just sayn..
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Oct 31, 2017 8:09:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by me on Oct 31, 2017 8:16:24 GMT -5
Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "will have," not, "has." Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "pre-diabetes," not, "diabetes." Look, my main point is that you're being just as much a PITA as FUDsters when you post things like this, whether through carelessness or otherwise. And that's a real shame as the point you're trying to make is critically important in the fight against diabetes. Who wants to listen to someone claiming that a third of the US population is diabetic when they know that's not the case??? Now, indulge me here as I am about to say the same thing as you did (because I truly do believe it), but in a different way: I believe that the medical community's characterization of A1c results of 5.6 to 6.4 as "pre-diabetes" is a travesty. We should call it "Stage 1 Diabetes" or "you're not going to lose a limb or your eyesight right now but maybe later, diabetes." I believe that telling someone they have pre-diabetes is as flawed (and way more dangerous) as telling someone they have chronic bronchitis, but not COPD. So, yes, I am a firm believer that a third of the US population is diabetic, but I'll never be able to gain a hearing on that if I carelessly claim it using today's accepted terminology.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Oct 31, 2017 9:24:22 GMT -5
Prevalence of Prediabetes • An estimated 33.9% of U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (84.1 million people) had prediabetes in 2015, based on their fasting glucose or A1C level. Nearly half (48.3%) of adults aged 65 years or older had prediabetes (Table 3) (Methods). Yes, but that would mean you should have said, "pre-diabetes," not, "diabetes." Look, my main point is that you're being just as much a PITA as FUDsters when you post things like this, whether through carelessness or otherwise. And that's a real shame as the point you're trying to make is critically important in the fight against diabetes. Who wants to listen to someone claiming that a third of the US population is diabetic when they know that's not the case??? Now, indulge me here as I am about to say the same thing as you did (because I truly do believe it), but in a different way: I believe that the medical community's characterization of A1c results of 5.6 to 6.4 as "pre-diabetes" is a travesty. We should call it "Stage 1 Diabetes" or "you're not going to lose a limb or your eyesight right now but maybe later, diabetes." I believe that telling someone they have pre-diabetes is as flawed (and way more dangerous) as telling someone they have chronic bronchitis, but not COPD. So, yes, I am a firm believer that a third of the US population is diabetic, but I'll never be able to gain a hearing on that if I carelessly claim it using today's accepted terminology. Thanks for your thoughts I know it is important to understand. Diabetes is the largest crisis the world has ever known. I fear the hundred of millions of diabetics won't be able to even get Afrezza with the one factory that can only make enough for 2 million patients a year for $4/6 billion a year. You would need 250 plants for as many diabetics. Best start building now..
|
|