[Diabetes] General Chat and Support Thread

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

The Diabetic Retinal screening scheme is under threat due to the fallout from the Cervical Scan controversy.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/diabetic-eye-scans-under-threat-due-to-legal-judgment-38125435.html

Surely the frequency of Diabetic Retina screening offers a high degree of mitigation against missing or misdiagnosis of an issue?

IIRC Smear test frequency is every @3yrs and a misread test can lead to a 6yr gap in identifying an issue.
Which as we have seen can lead to catastrophic consequences.

With the DRS service, the frequency is yearly and the chance of something being missed repeatedly on such a short interval is surely an order of magnitude lower than with long interval cancer screening?

The DRS is to my mind both a vital point of early intervention for anyone who develops Retinopathy and a point of continued reassurance for those who take up the screening offer.

In addition, I do feel the likelihood of something causing visual field loss will be picked up both by the patient themselves and the screening service before becoming a serious issue.

The bright side of Retinopathy I suppose in this particular circumstance is that it rarely develops without symptom to the point where treatment can't at least mitigate.
Unlike many Cancers that can and do burn through a patient without symptom until all that is available is palliative care.

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I think their problem is with the 'absolute confidence' required and the potential liability those tasked with diagnosing progression of potential damage if they diagnose it as less serious than might be the actual case.

Misdiagnosis would be less serious than with cancer screening alright but the term 'absolute confidence' places a huge amount of extra responsibility on those screening the shots and they feel it's unnecessary?

100% agree as to the interpretation of "Absolute Confidence".
One of the unfortunate aspects of our being a common law jurisdiction is the weight albeit usually correctly, afforded to precedence.

The simple and inescapable fact of any screening programme is that none is 100% accurate and certain.
The weight afforded to the "absolute confidence" ruling will do far more harm than good if it is allowed to impact upon the screening programmes in place.

Medical accuracy and mistakes are a serious issue across all fields, and no doctor, no test and no process is completely infallible.
But a fallible process open to review and continiuous improvement will go a lot further in ensuring better outcomes for the majority of patients.
I'd rather that course of action, than throwing the programmes to the side to avoid litigation.

I'd liken the risk profile to vaccination injury.
In the vast, vast majority of cases vaccination is a public health matter that prevents disease and the likely catastrophic outcomes of epidimec illness.
It is a path to huge savings both in society and treatment and care costs.

This is offset by the risk and however rare that risk is, it is still quite real.
That a very tiny cohort of vaccine recipients will have a severe reaction to the vaccine.

Does that risk? Outweigh the very obvious and massive public health benefits?

Screening much like vaccination is never 100% effective, however those cases that are caught in the screen have a massively increased chance of a positive and cheaper treatment outcome than those caught later.

It really is quite worrying that a learned judge would expect such a complete and accurate outcome on what is basically a judgement call by a specialist on each and every review.
Almost as if we were to demand infallibilty from our Legal system and in doing so abolished the appeals process and refused to countenance any possibility of a miscarriage of justice.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/lifestyle/talented-waterford-hurler-seanie-barry-surprised-to-learn-he-has-type-1-diabetes-925962.html

Interesting article on a contemporary sports person recently diagnosed with T1

So can finally afford a Freestyle Libre and their website is not accepting new customers.

Any info on when it will be available again?

I think they are fine in limited quantities, just dont make a habit of it I guess. There doesnt seem to be any unanimous verdict on whether they trigger an insulin response or not, and seems to differ depending on the artificial sweetener used

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/diet-soda-good-or-bad#kidney-health

Although diet soda has no calories, sugar or fat, it has been linked to the development of type 2 diabetes and heart disease in several studies.

Research has found that just one serving of an artificially sweetened drink per day is associated with an 8–13% higher risk of type 2 diabetes (22Trusted Source, 23Trusted Source).

An observational study in 64,850 women found that artificially sweetened drinks were associated with a 21% higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes. However, the risk was still half that of regular sugary drinks. Other studies have found similar results (24Trusted Source, 25Trusted Source, 26Trusted Source, 27Trusted Source).

Conversely, a recent review found that diet soda is not associated with an increased risk of diabetes. Also, another study concluded that any association could be explained by the existing health status, weight changes and body mass index of participants (28Trusted Source, 29Trusted Source).

Diet soda has also been linked to increased risks of high blood pressure and heart disease.

A review of four studies including 227,254 people found that for each serving of artificially sweetened beverage per day, there is a 9% increased risk of high blood pressure. Other studies have found similar results (30Trusted Source, 31Trusted Source, 32Trusted Source).
Because most of the studies were observational, it may be that the association could be explained another way. It’s possible that people who were already at risk of diabetes and high blood pressure chose to drink more diet soda (24Trusted Source, 34Trusted Source, 35Trusted Source).

More direct experimental research is needed to determine if there is any true causal relationship between diet soda and increased blood sugar or blood pressure.

So its not really well known at all the effects that diet drinks have on our bodies. Theres just too many chemicals and interactions in all the different drinks to be ever accurately able to assess their effects on the human body, so as I said I would just drink it in moderation. Most highly processed foods and beverages are just really really bad for your body, theres hardly any exceptions, no matter how good it might look on the surface(such as diet drinks with no fat no sugar no salt etc) so steer fairly clear. On the other hand, if you are unable to stop yourself from drinking full sugar drinks then this is obviously a much better alternative though

And thats just the sugars end, lots of studies showing sweeteners do no favours to gut bacteria.

Can never understand how they are approved for food when they don't know their affects.

kind of a random question but anyone have the CAC test done? it seems to be bubbling up as a great go to test to see what your likelihood of having heart disease is, whatever your number is the main idea seems to be to try stabilise it and not see it increase too much on a yearly basis



for example the Mater do it.
https://www.materprivate.ie/dublin/centre-services/all-services/coronary-calcium-scanning/

ebbsy wrote: »

So back over to Newcastle today to get another 6 months of Noctura 400 Glasses, plus a scan.

Great news!
Thanks for the update ebbsy!

Eircom_Sucks wrote: »

What type of foods do people with type 2 usually eat ?

Just look for low carb, Chicken, meat, cheese, nuts, berries, green veg etc..

silverharp wrote: »

kind of a random question but anyone have the CAC test done? it seems to be bubbling up as a great go to test to see what your likelihood of having heart disease is, whatever your number is the main idea seems to be to try stabilise it and not see it increase too much on a yearly basis



for example the Mater do it.
https://www.materprivate.ie/dublin/centre-services/all-services/coronary-calcium-scanning/

I haven’t but feel like I should, think my time is coming, is it possible to get it on public system anyone knows?

Or else how much is it?

Hey all, my 13 year is a T1D (diagnosed just over 2 years ago). Things going well enough I suppose. I’m a big believer in what technology can and will bring to world of diabetes over the coming years.

One thing I’d love to get more involved in is OpenAPS/Looping. I have been researching loads over the past 6 months and feel ready to make a start. My boy is already on a Medtronic pump but unfortunately its not compatible with looping.

Anybody have any ideas where I could buy an older model Medtronic pump? I’ve been pulling my hair out trying to source one with no success. Any ideas?

Anyway, thanks in advance for any replies. Wish you all the best of luck with your diabeticking. Take care.

Folks,

I was diagnosed type 2 a couple of months ago and I was given medication and a blood sugar meter.

I wasn't given any guidelines about taking readings but from Google it appears I should check at least daily and two hours after eating.

Is this correct?

Yesterday my reading was 5.2 and I felt great as if I am winning the battle to reverse it.

However today at midday I got 6.2 and later this evening I got a 9.2

Today was my worst readings since I started recording 6 weeks ago. Feeling very down tonight