If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Alan Dicey on August 2, 2009, 8:42 pm
Pogonip wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Kate XXXXXX wrote:
>> Pogonip wrote:
>>> At this point, the notion is to prevent diabetes. DH's blood sugar
>>> is high, but not so high as to be diabetic....yet. If he can ward it
>>> off, that's all to the good. It's in his family, his
>>> great-grandfather had it. Just as glaucoma is in his family. There
>>> was "blind granny" and one of his sisters has it. He really should
>>> have been more selective about his parents, shouldn't he?
>> Indeed. Himself is Type 1, though, not Type 2. I think it's easier
>> to manage Type 1 diabetes in most cases.
>
> Type 1 is what we call juvenile diabetes, isn't it? The kind you're
> born with?
Arg.
Type 1 is also called Insulin Dependent Diabetes. It is an auto-immune
condition, where the body has destroyed its insulin producing cells (the
delightfully-named Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas) and so produces
no insulin. There may be a viral trigger - this is not yet proven. The
very splendid Canadian doctors Banting and Best proved in the '20's that
the condition was treatable by injecting insulin under the skin - before
then it was a slow death sentence.
The condition used to be known as juvenile-onset diabetes, however it
can manifest at any age and the name has been out of favour for some
time. I contracted it at age 42. It does not manifest gradually.
Type 2 is a catch-all term, also called Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes,
for any one of several conditions that weaken the bodies ability to
react to or produce insulin. Treatment should be matched to the nature
of the complaint i.e. which type of Type 2 you've got. Treatment can
range from diet-only to insulin injection, pills and dietary
restrictions. I'm not expert enough to say if it can be warded off or
reversed.
|
|
Posted by Pogonip on August 2, 2009, 9:20 pm
Alan Dicey wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Arg.
>
> Type 1 is also called Insulin Dependent Diabetes. It is an auto-immune
> condition, where the body has destroyed its insulin producing cells (the
> delightfully-named Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas) and so produces
> no insulin. There may be a viral trigger - this is not yet proven. The
> very splendid Canadian doctors Banting and Best proved in the '20's that
> the condition was treatable by injecting insulin under the skin - before
> then it was a slow death sentence.
>
> The condition used to be known as juvenile-onset diabetes, however it
> can manifest at any age and the name has been out of favour for some
> time. I contracted it at age 42. It does not manifest gradually.
>
> Type 2 is a catch-all term, also called Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes,
> for any one of several conditions that weaken the bodies ability to
> react to or produce insulin. Treatment should be matched to the nature
> of the complaint i.e. which type of Type 2 you've got. Treatment can
> range from diet-only to insulin injection, pills and dietary
> restrictions. I'm not expert enough to say if it can be warded off or
> reversed.
Thanks, Alan. I don't know a great deal about it, even though I have a
cousin who is insulin dependent. It's not in my family, her paternal
grandmother seems to be her connection and our mothers were sisters so
it's in another line we don't share. I never really wanted to learn too
much about it - I've already got enough stuff in my brain. ;-)
At this point what we have is an elevated glucose level in the blood,
which has never been treated, although DH has been "cutting back" on
sugar for a while. How far back is anybody's guess. I keep sugar-free
snacks, etc., on hand, but I'm not his mother and I don't feed him or
monitor his food intake. ;-) I gather that our doc wants to see if we
can get the glucose level down without medication, just by severely
limiting sugars and starches. If that doesn't result in an improvement,
I'm sure we'll be moving on to some kind of medication. Suddenly I find
myself married to a person with multiple prescriptions what with
glaucoma and diverticulitis. At least the Lipitor is gone for now.
--
Joanne
stitches @ singerlady.reno.nv.us.earth.milky-way.com
http://members.tripod.com/~bernardschopen/
|
|
Posted by Samatha Hill -- take out TRASH on August 3, 2009, 2:43 am
Alan Dicey wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>
> Type 2 is a catch-all term, also called Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes,
> for any one of several conditions that weaken the bodies ability to
> react to or produce insulin. Treatment should be matched to the nature
> of the complaint i.e. which type of Type 2 you've got. Treatment can
> range from diet-only to insulin injection, pills and dietary
> restrictions. I'm not expert enough to say if it can be warded off or
> reversed.
For some people, it can be reversed through losing weight and/or
exercise. Not sure if it can for everybody, but I had an aunt who lost
a whole bunch of weight and her type 2 went away.
|
|
Posted by Kate XXXXXX on August 3, 2009, 3:38 am
Pogonip wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Kate XXXXXX wrote:
>> Pogonip wrote:
>>> At this point, the notion is to prevent diabetes. DH's blood sugar
>>> is high, but not so high as to be diabetic....yet. If he can ward it
>>> off, that's all to the good. It's in his family, his
>>> great-grandfather had it. Just as glaucoma is in his family. There
>>> was "blind granny" and one of his sisters has it. He really should
>>> have been more selective about his parents, shouldn't he?
>> Indeed. Himself is Type 1, though, not Type 2. I think it's easier
>> to manage Type 1 diabetes in most cases.
>
> Type 1 is what we call juvenile diabetes, isn't it? The kind you're
> born with?
A misnomer and inaccurate. It *usually* develops when the subject is in
their early teens, but every dinosaur curve has a far end... Himself
was 42, and there is no known history of diabetes of either sort in his
family.
--
Kate XXXXXX R.C.T.Q Madame Chef des Trolls
Lady Catherine, Wardrobe Mistress of the Chocolate Buttons
http://www.katedicey.co.uk
Click on Kate's Pages and explore!
|
|
Posted by Pogonip on August 3, 2009, 4:43 am
Kate XXXXXX wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Pogonip wrote:
>> Kate XXXXXX wrote:
>>> Pogonip wrote:
>>>> At this point, the notion is to prevent diabetes. DH's blood sugar
>>>> is high, but not so high as to be diabetic....yet. If he can ward
>>>> it off, that's all to the good. It's in his family, his
>>>> great-grandfather had it. Just as glaucoma is in his family. There
>>>> was "blind granny" and one of his sisters has it. He really should
>>>> have been more selective about his parents, shouldn't he?
>>> Indeed. Himself is Type 1, though, not Type 2. I think it's easier
>>> to manage Type 1 diabetes in most cases.
>> Type 1 is what we call juvenile diabetes, isn't it? The kind you're
>> born with?
>
> A misnomer and inaccurate. It *usually* develops when the subject is in
> their early teens, but every dinosaur curve has a far end... Himself
> was 42, and there is no known history of diabetes of either sort in his
> family.
>
But you'll be keeping a close eye on the GMNT, right?
--
Joanne
stitches @ singerlady.reno.nv.us.earth.milky-way.com
http://members.tripod.com/~bernardschopen/
|
Page 3 of 12 < 1 2 3 > last >>
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
>> Pogonip wrote:
>>> At this point, the notion is to prevent diabetes. DH's blood sugar
>>> is high, but not so high as to be diabetic....yet. If he can ward it
>>> off, that's all to the good. It's in his family, his
>>> great-grandfather had it. Just as glaucoma is in his family. There
>>> was "blind granny" and one of his sisters has it. He really should
>>> have been more selective about his parents, shouldn't he?
>> Indeed. Himself is Type 1, though, not Type 2. I think it's easier
>> to manage Type 1 diabetes in most cases.
>
> Type 1 is what we call juvenile diabetes, isn't it? The kind you're
> born with?