|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 31, 2017 14:01:12 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. While I think it is good that the primary care medical community is beginning to monitor A1c more closely and recommend lifestyle changes for those within the prediabetic range (as healthy diet and exercise is never bad), I think it is at best premature to start treating an A1c of 5.6 as "Stage 1 diabetes" (presumably meaning with pharma intervention). Many people tend to have moderate rises in BG levels as they get older. I've been urging family/friends for years to get their A1c tested due to my education in diabetes because of MNKD. I've seen that some people within the prediabetic range seem to have pretty darn stable moderately elevated A1c readings over years with very little if any progression. Certainly worthy of more research, however.
|
|
|
Post by od on Oct 31, 2017 19:45:46 GMT -5
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. While I think it is good that the primary care medical community is beginning to monitor A1c more closely and recommend lifestyle changes for those within the prediabetic range (as healthy diet and exercise is never bad), I think it is at best premature to start treating an A1c of 5.6 as "Stage 1 diabetes" (presumably meaning with pharma intervention). Many people tend to have moderate rises in BG levels as they get older. I've been urging family/friends for years to get their A1c tested due to my education in diabetes because of MNKD. I've seen that some people within the prediabetic range seem to have pretty darn stable moderately elevated A1c readings over years with very little if any progression. Certainly worthy of more research, however. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4116271/Perm J. 2014 Summer; 18(3): 88–93. doi: 10.7812/TPP/14-002 PMCID: PMC4116271 Prediabetes and Lifestyle Modification: Time to Prevent a Preventable Disease Phillip Tuso, MD, FACP, FASN Abstract More than 100 million Americans have prediabetes or diabetes. Prediabetes is a condition in which individuals have blood glucose levels higher than normal but not high enough to be classified as diabetes. People with prediabetes have an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes. An estimated 34% of adults have prediabetes. Prediabetes is now recognized as a reversible condition that increases an individual’s risk for development of diabetes. Lifestyle risk factors for prediabetes include overweight and physical inactivity. Increasing awareness and risk stratification of individuals with prediabetes may help physicians understand potential interventions that may help decrease the percentage of patients in their panels in whom diabetes develops. If untreated, 37% of the individuals with prediabetes may have diabetes in 4 years. Lifestyle intervention may decrease the percentage of prediabetic patients in whom diabetes develops to 20%. Long-term data also suggest that lifestyle intervention may decrease the risk of prediabetes progressing to diabetes for as long as 10 years. To prevent 1 case of diabetes during a 3-year period, 6.9 persons would have to participate in the lifestyle intervention program. In addition, recent data suggest that the difference in direct and indirect costs to care for a patient with prediabetes vs a patient with diabetes may be as much as $7000 per year. Investment in a diabetes prevention program now may have a substantial return on investment in the future and help prevent a preventable disease.
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Oct 31, 2017 21:14:39 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 ! Ok, I don't know a thing about "My Pillow" or "Zippiddy-Do-Dah" or whatever the latest marketing campaign is. I don't watch television so I wouldn't have a clue. Must be prolific however if you have to search for someone that doesn't know. Hope you enjoy it!
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Nov 1, 2017 0:27:35 GMT -5
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. While I think it is good that the primary care medical community is beginning to monitor A1c more closely and recommend lifestyle changes for those within the prediabetic range (as healthy diet and exercise is never bad), I think it is at best premature to start treating an A1c of 5.6 as "Stage 1 diabetes" (presumably meaning with pharma intervention). Many people tend to have moderate rises in BG levels as they get older. I've been urging family/friends for years to get their A1c tested due to my education in diabetes because of MNKD. I've seen that some people within the prediabetic range seem to have pretty darn stable moderately elevated A1c readings over years with very little if any progression. Certainly worthy of more research, however. Imagine you had a back up pancreas incase the first one got injured or over taxed or genetically not functioning as it should..basically Afrezza at mealtime where diabetics lose control might help stave off progression or possibly halt it for those that don't regulate properly. In a nutshell inhaled insulin holds far greater promise then Metformin clinically for the patient. Lets see what Mannkind developments will be out of these clinicals who knows..might be a good thing..
|
|
|
Post by swanybuaya on Nov 1, 2017 1:31:29 GMT -5
LoL that’s fake news. CNN is number one and fox is more like number 3. Who did they survey all trump supporters? Fox is for the most part pro trump and he only has a 38% approval rating right now so it would make more since that CNN more con trump would get more viewers. Not that I’m being political on this board just trying to find the best network to advertise on 😉😉 Nielsen research measures homes with people-meters and acquires stats via this method. Every broadcaster/cablecaster that subscribes to their service is measured the same way, no matter which political affiliation they belong to. So when Variety (a publication that tracks the tv/movie industry business) releases these numbers, they are not fake.
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Nov 1, 2017 6:15:39 GMT -5
Demographically probably more type 2 diabetics on CNN than Fox anyway / hmmm ,maybe cnn is the station to go with !
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Nov 1, 2017 7:27:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Nov 1, 2017 7:45:02 GMT -5
LoL that’s fake news. CNN is number one and fox is more like number 3. Who did they survey all trump supporters? Fox is for the most part pro trump and he only has a 38% approval rating right now so it would make more since that CNN more con trump would get more viewers. Not that I’m being political on this board just trying to find the best network to advertise on 😉😉 Nielsen research measures homes with people-meters and acquires stats via this method. Every broadcaster/cablecaster that subscribes to their service is measured the same way, no matter which political affiliation they belong to. So when Variety (a publication that tracks the tv/movie industry business) releases these numbers, they are not fake. Exactly! I’m not interested in what anyone thinks is fake news! I watch CNBC, Fox, CNN in that order. But it doesn’t matter what I watch... I’m interested in where MNKD can get the best bang for their buck. At this time in history with the “divided states of America” and the market on one of the biggest bull runs ever, these cable ratings are off the charts!
|
|
|
Post by swanybuaya on Nov 1, 2017 9:43:55 GMT -5
Dang a 1:30 commercial for World Series is loooong.
|
|
|
Post by me on Nov 1, 2017 10:13:12 GMT -5
While I think it is good that the primary care medical community is beginning to monitor A1c more closely and recommend lifestyle changes for those within the prediabetic range (as healthy diet and exercise is never bad), I think it is at best premature to start treating an A1c of 5.6 as "Stage 1 diabetes" (presumably meaning with pharma intervention). Many people tend to have moderate rises in BG levels as they get older. I've been urging family/friends for years to get their A1c tested due to my education in diabetes because of MNKD. I've seen that some people within the prediabetic range seem to have pretty darn stable moderately elevated A1c readings over years with very little if any progression. Certainly worthy of more research, however. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4116271/Perm J. 2014 Summer; 18(3): 88–93. doi: 10.7812/TPP/14-002 PMCID: PMC4116271 Prediabetes and Lifestyle Modification: Time to Prevent a Preventable Disease Phillip Tuso, MD, FACP, FASN Investment in a diabetes prevention program now may have a substantial return on investment in the future and help prevent a preventable disease.And because a physician must get the attention of the patient before the patient becomes part of the team trying to prevent diabetes (especially since lifestyle change is patient - and family - activity only), I believe the medical community needs to be more direct with patients with "prediabetes." "You have Stage 1 Diabetes and things will go downhill from here unless you do X, Y and Z."
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Nov 1, 2017 17:43:40 GMT -5
While I think it is good that the primary care medical community is beginning to monitor A1c more closely and recommend lifestyle changes for those within the prediabetic range (as healthy diet and exercise is never bad), I think it is at best premature to start treating an A1c of 5.6 as "Stage 1 diabetes" (presumably meaning with pharma intervention). Many people tend to have moderate rises in BG levels as they get older. I've been urging family/friends for years to get their A1c tested due to my education in diabetes because of MNKD. I've seen that some people within the prediabetic range seem to have pretty darn stable moderately elevated A1c readings over years with very little if any progression. Certainly worthy of more research, however. Imagine you had a back up pancreas incase the first one got injured or over taxed or genetically not functioning as it should..basically Afrezza at mealtime where diabetics lose control might help stave off progression or possibly halt it for those that don't regulate properly. In a nutshell inhaled insulin holds far greater promise then Metformin clinically for the patient. Lets see what Mannkind developments will be out of these clinicals who knows..might be a good thing.. None of the current trials are looking at prediabetic range. And if 5.6 is the start of the range, I am already in it, and no I would not start using any insulin at this point... and my doctor wouldn't prescribe it and my insurance wouldn't pay for it.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Nov 1, 2017 18:44:56 GMT -5
Imagine you had a back up pancreas incase the first one got injured or over taxed or genetically not functioning as it should..basically Afrezza at mealtime where diabetics lose control might help stave off progression or possibly halt it for those that don't regulate properly. In a nutshell inhaled insulin holds far greater promise then Metformin clinically for the patient. Lets see what Mannkind developments will be out of these clinicals who knows..might be a good thing.. None of the current trials are looking at prediabetic range. And if 5.6 is the start of the range, I am already in it, and no I would not start using any insulin at this point... and my doctor wouldn't prescribe it and my insurance wouldn't pay for it. If you are saying you would use Metformin fine..but when it fails you and you progress..then..Afrezza is the current way I think. But you say insulin like it is a scary thing when it is what your body uses in the pre-diabetic state..if it is faltering..then you try and halt progression with Metformin..but in Type 3c where there is damage to the pancreas there is a suggestion out there to not do the oral Metformin but insulin. The type of insulin..isn't mentioned but Al said diabetics start to lose control at meal time so maybe a prandial insulin makes sense..I am not the scientist working this all out just imagining where they are going..who knows..it is still in the sciences..hopefully they find their way as we watch them study things. I think its mind blowing the work these people do to help the diabetic live a fuller better life.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Nov 1, 2017 21:56:09 GMT -5
None of the current trials are looking at prediabetic range. And if 5.6 is the start of the range, I am already in it, and no I would not start using any insulin at this point... and my doctor wouldn't prescribe it and my insurance wouldn't pay for it. If you are saying you would use Metformin fine..but when it fails you and you progress..then..Afrezza is the current way I think. But you say insulin like it is a scary thing when it is what your body uses in the pre-diabetic state..if it is faltering..then you try and halt progression with Metformin..but in Type 3c where there is damage to the pancreas there is a suggestion out there to not do the oral Metformin but insulin. The type of insulin..isn't mentioned but Al said diabetics start to lose control at meal time so maybe a prandial insulin makes sense..I am not the scientist working this all out just imagining where they are going..who knows..it is still in the sciences..hopefully they find their way as we watch them study things. I think its mind blowing the work these people do to help the diabetic live a fuller better life. At 5.6 you have absolutely no need to use insulin, you are a mile under the diabetic range and there is no way any doctor would prescribe insulin at that point. It's likely they wouldn't even prescribe metformin until you got over 6.4. Under that they would tend to go for diet and exercise. Where you have pancreatic damage in the problem is not simply lack of insulin, it's also a lack of glucagon, GLP-1, and other incretins. Taking just insulin will simply make you go low because the counter-regulatory hormones are impaired. Eating will make you spike because insulin and incretins are impaired. Then, because the cause is inflammation, this will all vary from day to day depending on the level of inflammation at the moment. The glucose metabolism is far bigger than just insulin which is why the 'pocket pancreas' name for Afrezza is silly, and this type of diabetes shows that up perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by itellthefuture777 on Nov 1, 2017 22:02:43 GMT -5
If you are saying you would use Metformin fine..but when it fails you and you progress..then..Afrezza is the current way I think. But you say insulin like it is a scary thing when it is what your body uses in the pre-diabetic state..if it is faltering..then you try and halt progression with Metformin..but in Type 3c where there is damage to the pancreas there is a suggestion out there to not do the oral Metformin but insulin. The type of insulin..isn't mentioned but Al said diabetics start to lose control at meal time so maybe a prandial insulin makes sense..I am not the scientist working this all out just imagining where they are going..who knows..it is still in the sciences..hopefully they find their way as we watch them study things. I think its mind blowing the work these people do to help the diabetic live a fuller better life. At 5.6 you have absolutely no need to use insulin, you are a mile under the diabetic range and there is no way any doctor would prescribe insulin at that point. It's likely they wouldn't even prescribe metformin until you got over 6.4. Under that they would tend to go for diet and exercise. Where you have pancreatic damage in the problem is not simply lack of insulin, it's also a lack of glucagon, GLP-1, and other incretins. Taking just insulin will simply make you go low because the counter-regulatory hormones are impaired. Eating will make you spike because insulin and incretins are impaired. Then, because the cause is inflammation, this will all vary from day to day depending on the level of inflammation at the moment. The glucose metabolism is far bigger than just insulin which is why the 'pocket pancreas' name for Afrezza is silly, and this type of diabetes shows that up perfectly. I am not sure who started the range part..it wasn't me..If your healthy..your body gives you insulin and you are in range..
|
|