Re: Meds.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/10/2000 12:53:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,

whimsy2@... writes:

> Yes, Teri's may have been caught early but that doesn' t make it

> less real. Mine was caught early too and here I am on insulin, even with

> low

> carbing and exercise.

I envy her, I wish mine had been caught early, I'm lucky I caught mine when I

did, but by then I had complications, I really am so happy for teri, I didn't

have access to email lists when I was dx, almost 10yrs ago.

My endo and I took my dm and symptoms back, we think I actually had dm when I

was in my 20's, I'm now 53.

I literally knew nothing, well, I knew what I was taught at the hospital

working there, but we now know all thats bunk, it was for me anyway.

carol

[Guest guest]

Sam, I have never said that only my advice is valid. I HAVE said that YOU must

quit saying that only yours is valid. I tried saying it to you nicely and

privately in email as the moderator of this list several weeks ago, but you

didn't answer my emails. That has left me no choice but to write to you publicly

on the list. So get this straight:

1) It IS dangerous to say that someone can be half a diabetic. That might lead

someone new who is in my poisition to take this disease half seriously and cause

themselves serious harm.

2) I did NOT say it is dangerous to warn people off breakfast cereals. I said

that I disagree with you. I didn't say you were wrong. Only that we have

different opinions.

Re: Meds.

Vicki, there are clearly a wide range of diabetic conditions. I always

felt that for a type 2 to use insulin is a case of the failure of

dietary control. I don't know what you mean by early, I mean that Teri

is not a serious diabetic. Not carb sensitive etc. Yet she feels that

only her advice can be true, and all other attitudes are dangerous. Is

that real?

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Who is this Sam Levy. How qualified is he to pontificate?

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 00-11-10 00:37:57 EST, you write:

<< Yet she feels that

only her advice can be true, and all other attitudes are dangerous. Is >>

No, Sam, I don't think that's what she meant. Only that it works for her. V.

[Guest guest]

Well, I have been on this egroup less than a week and already I have learned

things about Sam. By

the way Sam I was warned about you. I must say that I disagree with the " half a

diabetic " comment.

Come on, you either have it or you don't. Some people might have higher sugars

than others or have

higer meds; everyone's is different and what works/doesn't work for them must be

different also. I

don't think you are an expert Sam, as I am not. I have had this disease for

almost 3 years now so

obviously I am learning what works for me, not everyone else. I came to this

site to hopefully

learn some other tips to help me, not to listen to all this nitpicking. So, why

don't you lay low

for a while? However, everyone, I do have to agree with the fact that for type

2s it is good to try

and modify the diet before taking large quantities of meds. Of course, we

humans aren't perfect and

this method works very well for some as opposed to others. I don't think it

makes you a bad person

or a bad diabetic however, if you to have to end up taking higher meds. The

comments about type 2's

on insulin was totally out of line Sam. I am a type 2 and I am on insulin. Of

course, that is

because I am planning to hopefully get pregnant. So what was I supposed to do?

Stay on my oral

meds and harm the baby? I hope as I read the rest of my messages today I will

find that you calm

down Sam. No need to be snappy or brusque. To everyone else, thanks for the

help and the tips that

I have been getting.

Teri wrote:

> Sam, I have never said that only my advice is valid. I HAVE said that YOU must

quit saying that

> only yours is valid. I tried saying it to you nicely and privately in email as

the moderator of

> this list several weeks ago, but you didn't answer my emails. That has left me

no choice but to

> write to you publicly on the list. So get this straight:

> 1) It IS dangerous to say that someone can be half a diabetic. That might lead

someone new who is

> in my poisition to take this disease half seriously and cause themselves

serious harm.

> 2) I did NOT say it is dangerous to warn people off breakfast cereals. I said

that I disagree with

> you. I didn't say you were wrong. Only that we have different opinions.

>

>

> Re: Meds.

>

>

> Vicki, there are clearly a wide range of diabetic conditions. I always

> felt that for a type 2 to use insulin is a case of the failure of

> dietary control. I don't know what you mean by early, I mean that Teri

> is not a serious diabetic. Not carb sensitive etc. Yet she feels that

> only her advice can be true, and all other attitudes are dangerous. Is

> that real?

>

>

> eGroups Sponsor

>

>

> Public website for Diabetes International:

> http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think about as qualified as the rest of us!

brian Terry wrote:

> Who is this Sam Levy. How qualified is he to pontificate?

>

>

> eGroups Sponsor

>

> Public website for Diabetes International:

> http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I like Cheerios

Teri wrote:

> Sam, I am calm. Are you a psychologist as well as an endocrinologist now

telling me I'm a type a personality going to have a heart attack? You're being

an ass again. I'm telling you it isn't true for everyone that every breakfast

cereal has to be off limits. I'd be willing to bet that there are at least a

couple of other list members who can eat small servings of some kind of

breakfast cereals. I don't give a shit if you've personally written to four

THOUSAND people. When you make such sweeping generalizations, you're out of

line.

>

> Re: Meds.

>

> Explain to me what is dangerous about warning people off breakfast

> cereals. When someone is reporting very high sugars they need to know

> what steps to take. Your saying that isn't true, or is dangerous is in

> itself dangerous. I have written personally to over 400 people about my

> experience with starches, and the feedback has been largely approving,

> and the results good. What good do you do by saying that reasonable,

> need advice is wrong, or dangerous. These people need help from people

> who have been there, you haven't.

> Your type A personality is going to get you a heart attack. Calm down.

> Sam

>

> eGroups Sponsor

>

>

> Public website for Diabetes International:

> http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sam, you know, I agree with a lot of what you say...I also find cereals,

pastas, rice, bread hard on my BGs, as you and many other diabetics do. But

not all. And on the other hand, while you can apparently eat fruits without

a problem, I cannot. And a lot of other's can't, either.

I think it's very important when presenting your views that you make it very

clear that this is what works for you and may not necessarily work for

everyone. There are no experts here -- just a buncha diabetics relating our

own experience. Newbies come here confused and hopefully find help. But I

think you're doing something potentially harmful and dangeous when you offer

to help diabetics privately off-list and you shouldn't be doing this. You're

no doctor...and neither are we.

New diabetics need to find what works for them. Many have heard of

low-carbing for the first time and want to know how it works. We can tell

them our experience. But the single most important thing we can tell them is

to eat something and test, eat and test, and keep doing it until they know

how their own bodies react to certain foods. This is our real value here.

Vicki

Vicki

In a message dated 00-11-10 00:48:37 EST, you write:

<<

, I did nt join this group to get basic information on diabetic

control, been there done that. I want to give them basic guidance to get

in control. I personally deplore the idea thatr people can eat as they

have been and keep adding medication to gain control. I know it's the

American way, have an ill take a pill. That adds up to big drug bills.

Sam

>>

[Guest guest]

Vicki, I generally do not eat fruits whole. I make up fruit dishes, or

at midmorning may eat a juice orange, moderate size. My sugar an hour

later was 109. I had a large ripe peach, an hour later 144, and it took

3 hours to get back to 109. A whole banana in one hour was

139, but i seldom eat whole fruits. I prepare a dish with a variety of

fruits, generally pear, 1/2 mango, banana some melon cantaloupe or

honeydew. This will last me all day, eaten with a little vanilla yogurt.

I suggest the yogurt for quiet bowel performance, it changes your

intestinal bacteria that act in the lower bowel. I thought it might help

people with distress from glucophage. It prevents the absorption of

about 25% of the glucose eaten, and can act badly in the lower bowel.

I have suggested that type 3 who do not want to do a lot of testing eat

in a ssimilar manner, let the BG run down naturally until some symptom

of lower sugar appears, like hunger. Then eat a modest amount to restore

their sugar. That keeps the sugars moderate, and lowers the need for

testing.

On diet only I found my fasting morning sugar reflected the amount of

carbs i had the prior day. It is generally 85-95, buyt can rise to 100

with no food for occasions I must eat nothing, as for a medical test. I

found that meals where all thee carbs are taken in at once gave me highs

and subsequent lows, so i eat reglarly in small amounts. Sam

[Guest guest]

Carol wrote:

<< My endo and I took my dm and symptoms back, we think I actually had dm

when I was in my 20's, I'm now 53. >>

I'm in the same situation. It amazes me what a hardy organ the pancreas is,

to battle the carbohydrates all these years and still have some remaining

function.

Susie

[Guest guest]

> Often doctors are known to say

> " you have a 'touch' of diabetes " or

> " your sugars have been running a little

> high lately " . Statements like this are

> dangerous and can keep people that need

> medical treatment from obtaining it promptly.

, I don't have any data on what " doctors often say " but I

believe this is known as breaking the bad news gently, nothing more.

This is normal medical practice - it would be very easy for doctors

to give their patients a terrible fright with unpredictable

consequences. When I was on a diabetes training some time back, we

had some very simple country people there and, although they were

accustomed to the idea of eating fat, one couple were very distressed

to hear that their metabolism converts fat into fatty acids and

protein into amino acids.

I am willing to believe that if a man in a white coat had come in and

told them solemnly that their tests showed they were normoglycemic

they would have been just as distressed.

You don't produce anything to support your statement that the

euphemistic approach is " dangerous " nor even that it results in poor

patient compliance - and I just don't believe it. There are many

reasons put forward for poor compliance and I don't recollect ever

having seen the practice " breaking the bad news gently " as one of

them.

Sorry about that.

[Guest guest]

> are you a doctor that you think

> yourself such an authority

Tut, tut, . I was doing what almost everybody does on this

list - quoting from the literature. In this case the Clinical

Practice Recommendations 2000 published recently by the ADA, price

$10.

I didn't give the attribution straight away because those 3 little

letters are like a red rag to a bull (sorry, Susie) to some people on

this list and I didn't want to upset anybody (at least, I don't think

I did).

If I was a doctor I wouldn't be hanging around this list but would be

back in the practice sending out my invoices.

[Guest guest]

> I am not saying I am right. It

> is only my humble opinion after all.

> But then, who says you are right also?

> We have differing opinions and I feel

> that you ought to respect that.

Calm down, , I do respect your opinions, OK? But you are

arguing with the obvious - everything we say here is our opinion,

that is what the list is for: so that we can express our opinions. It

would be a real mess if everybody had to tack " in my opinion " onto

every single statement!

> However, I have known people (friends and

> family) where the doctor has made statements

> such as " you have a touch of diabetes " . They

> therefore were not concerned. Several years

> later the disease had progressed to alarming

> levels, such as very high fasting sugars, very

> high HA1C, etc. Whether that was their fault

> for not taking it seriously or the doctors

> fault for not ordering test periodically and

> following up with them I do not know.

No, and I don't know either but I don't believe that it is any part

of a primary-care physician's responsibility to " follow up " high-risk

diabetics if they don't show up in his waiting room. None of what you

are saying is peculiar to diabetes - there are hundreds or even

thousands of tests that could be performed if the patients insisted

on them but very few do, except the very rich, maybe. Take that to

its extreme and we would have more of a problem with hypochondriacs

than hyperglycemics!

> Also, not all people who are diagnosed

> are " country " people and would panic like

> you suggest. Some would I am sure, but not

> all.

Now hold on! I didn't say " all " , did I? I was just giving an example

of what can happen. For example, there are far more simple people in

the world who know what fat is, but have a really hard time

understanding what a protein is, far less a carbohydrate, than there

are people who have done at least first-year organic chemistry.

> However,that does not give a doctor a reason

> for not telling someone something.

But it sure does! Even if you get them to begin to understand basic

nutrition, the moment that you tell them that insulin is a protein

they are lost again.

I am pretty sure that the only way for a working physician to survive

is for him/her to tell his/her patients no more than they ask about.

I read somewhere that the majority of patients who turn up and report

diabetes symptoms ask only three questions: How is this going to

affect my job? Can I still go on vacation? Do I have to eat anything

special?

And I put myself in that group without hesitation - in fact I seem to

remember that I didn't ask my physician anything, not even what

diabetes was, and he didn't volunteer the explanation either. Next

patient, please!

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/9/00 10:36:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,

astrocarly@... writes:

<< List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:diabetes_int-unsubscribeegroups>

>>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/9/00 10:36:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,

astrocarly@... writes:

<< List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:diabetes_int-unsubscribeegroups>

>>