The fight against Diabetes
glas...@yahoo.com
Diabetes and share experiences. This disease is a killer but it can
also be a toothless bulldog. The secret is to hit it hard before it
gets you. This is especially true for newly diagnosed diabetics. There
are a ton of things that can be done to prevent its complications.
Afterall, prevention of complications is why it is treated.
Diet and exercise are key but are not easy. The easiest path is to pop
pills but it is not as effective if not combined with the good old
natural way of burning more calories that is taken in.
First, you've got to believe you can do it. Hope this little pep talk
sparks something in you that will push you towards the lifestyle
modification needed to control this disease.
Good Luck
http://www.thediabeteswebsite.com
Alan S
wrote:
>I'm new here. My mission is simple. Help answer questions about
>Diabetes and share experiences.
What qualifies you to offer that advice? Are you a doctor, a
student, a diabetic? If a diabetic, what type, what is your
history and your experience?
Why should we consider you as anything other than a windbag
or just another spammer?
Put up or shut up.
Alan, T2, Australia.
%
"Alan S" <loralgtwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:838r935n8thrke221...@4ax.com...
well he's another perfect example ,
of the guy that calls me a troll ,
doing the very thing he accuse me of ,
i'll put up
krom
KROM <-- in a silly mood
"Alan S" <loralgtwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:838r935n8thrke221...@4ax.com...
Loretta Eisenberg
Loretta
Alan S
A book to cure your diabetes.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
Loretta Eisenberg
rle...@hotmail.com
Guy's the dumbest spammer ever. His website is password protected
because he's too scared of how we'll criticise it. That, or he wants
to see how many clicks a week he can get before he pays a web site
designer to put up some content....
glass318
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, well. Very interesting responses from you guys. The site is
password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening.
Alan S
<glas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Well, well. Very interesting responses from you guys. The site is
>password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
>physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
>trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
>which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
>practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
>back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening.
Oddly, I don't remember being blocked when I looked at it
originally.
Now, you claim to be a doctor.
Sickening? An odd word to use to diabetics from a "doctor".
You are on usenet. Anyone can claim to be anything. If you
are a doctor - provide some support for that claim. There
are doctors on usenet that I trust, but trust is not given
lightly in the skeptical anarchic atmosphere of the net. So
they didn't appear on a group from nowhere without
introducing themselves first and establishing some
credibility.
So, as I said in the first answer - put up or shut up. If
you are a doctor be prepared to justify and support any
advice that you offer; we are not your average acquiescent
patients. We tend to ask doctors something that causes
aggravation: "why is it so?".
Wingmask
>
> - Show quoted text -
We diabetics are all in a leaking boat...why bother?
Loretta Eisenberg
Loretta
Help! My igloo's on FIRE!
> On Jul 19, 6:59 am, rle...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Dear Loretta:
>> Guy's the dumbest spammer ever. His website is password protected
>> because he's too scared of how we'll criticise it. That, or he wants
>> to see how many clicks a week he can get before he pays a web site
>> designer to put up some content....
>>
>> rle...@hotmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Loretta Eisenberg wrote:
>>> I am too lazy to go to his website. what is he selling?
>>> Loretta- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Well, well. Very interesting responses from you guys. The site is
> password protected by choice. Will open it up soon.
It is a cheap GoDaddy site that isn't set up yet. You are using a brand new
Yahoo address and posting through a new Google account.
Yes, I am a
> physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time.
Not how I would expect a genuine physician to describe his role. More the
way a nurse would respond. You initially claimed that you wanted to "share
experience" as though you were a diabetic, but now you claim to be a Doctor
"on a mission". You have made no previous posts in any groups let alone a
diabetic or medical group but expect to have instant acceptance.
Could you imagine any real Doctor advising his patients to heed a
completely unknown source of medical advice on usenet? If you say yes, then
you are a fool, if you say no, then you were foolish in your expectations.
I guess that illustrates quite clearly that the only thing that we can
really be sure of is that you either are a somewhat foolish man or a total
fool. You haven't got much going for you in the way of credibility, have you?
Anyway, I was just
> trying to offer FREE advice.
In most cases, free advice from an unknown source is worth far less than
you pay for it.
The website's only revenue is from ads
> which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
> practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
> back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening.
>
David - (Eskimo Joe)
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>
> I'm new here. My mission is simple. Help answer questions about
> Diabetes and share experiences. This disease is a killer but it can
> also be a toothless bulldog. The secret is to hit it hard before it
> gets you.
Actually, the key is to eat less, down to the optimal amount to lose
the VAT, cure the IR/MetS, and possibly cure the type-2 diabetes:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Healing
Be hungry... be healthy... be blessed:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/PressRelease
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
krom
doctors..especially a real nutburger..so knowing this the response you
recieved was valid.
Also we get many many spammers here trying to prey on our disease..as a
doctor you would be well aware of this and more sensitive to us eh?
Sombody rides in claiming to have all the answers and not bothering to be
part of the group or even get to know it then when politely questioned goes
on a rant..
Hmmm doc yer bedside manner leaves alot to be desired.
KROM
"glass318" <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote >
Sanity's Little Helper
news:1185124602.2...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com to
alt.christnet.christianlife:
> glass...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> I'm new here. My mission is simple. Help answer questions about
>> Diabetes and share experiences. This disease is a killer but it can
>> also be a toothless bulldog. The secret is to hit it hard before it
>> gets you.
>
> Actually,
HO! <whack>
The fewer words you type, my boy, the better place the universe is. You
will learn this in time, meanwhile, just to remind you....
HO! <whack>
--
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N.
aa #2208
"If you are informed by God, you can be misinformed by nobody" - Osama
Bin Laden
ted rosenberg
Well stupid - if you ARE a doctor, you are one of the dumbest on
record. Even the Chung troll doesn't advertise a site that is password
protected.
Reminds me of the mouthy doctor and spammer who was on "to help us"
once. She didn't realize that we could check her credentials online.
She WAS a doctor - of English literature. She was fronting for a
Tijuana clinic
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
>On Jul 19, 6:59 am, rle...@hotmail.com wrote:
There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
The world is loaded with diabetic information today.
The progress stinks.
Maybe it is because of us calling a collection of diseases
that has one common symptom -----one disease.
Too many answers that do not apply to others.
For example----Do you now why I was experiencing
sudden blood sugars of over 800 that persisted for several hours and
then started to respond to insulin input. Do you know that the blood
sugar control is a complex closed loop system. Or do you have
a bunch of recipes
That is the sick part of the diabete$ game.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Cheri
gu...@consolidated.net wrote in message
>There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
>not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
>very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
Chung who posts everywhere, I haven't seen doctors posting here before
being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
past.
Cheri
percy
> Wing you are being negative.
>
> Loretta
>
Maybe, but bailing out water is good exercise!
Vicki
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
He finally left when some challenged him so much.
He was a great help for me.
The sue birds and professional demeanor is a
factor. That sets the posting style for some
here now. A weak lawsuit still cost attorney\
fees for you.
glass318
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:00:24 -0700, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > >There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
> >>not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
> >>very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
>
> >If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
> >riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
> >Chung who posts everywhere, I haven't seen doctors posting here before
> >being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
> >past.
>
> >Cheri
>
> Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
> did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
>
> He finally left when some challenged him so much.
>
> He was a great help for me.
>
> The sue birds and professional demeanor is a
> factor. That sets the posting style for some
> here now. A weak lawsuit still cost attorney\
> fees for you.
>
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Teddy Rosenburgo et al.
Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
little but talk a lot to patients.
Fact is, DM is a disease that kills and unfortunately (or
fortunately), the power to wrap our hands around it lies in the
patient! Yes, the usual don't eat this or that, exercise like this or
like that, etc. Then we top it with some oversized pills and as if not
enough, a shot in the belly ot thigh up to 4 times per day. Did I
mention all that (maybe unnecessary) finger sticking? I would be
frustrated too. I admire your skepticism but I'm sorry to inform you
that I do not need to gain your trust before I can POST here! No, I do
NOT! I can only gain your trust by posting. You read, you judge, you
choose to trust (or not). Its like the guy who was left holding his
falling jaw while his friends went to get help. He started yelling,
threatening to drop the jaw if help didn't arrive early. Its totally
your decision.
Obviously, I am not a web designer and cannot control what happens to
the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
And for the person touting the 'go daddy site' stuff, sorry to
disappoint you. Its not a parked page.
More to come. Keep shooting at me. I'll survive.
Alan S
Maybe unnecessary? Read the thread on the BMJ article on
SMBG - or read the rapid responses to the article. Some of
those responses are from posters here and will show our
bias.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/bmj.39247.447431.BEv1#172564
> I would be
>frustrated too. I admire your skepticism but I'm sorry to inform you
>that I do not need to gain your trust before I can POST here! No, I do
>NOT! I can only gain your trust by posting.
Asked and answered. Yes you can post, with or without trust.
However, the respect you earn will depend on those posts.
Start by reading our associated web-page, particularly the
"Newly Diagnosed" advice. Then skim through some of the
posts here to get a feel for the depth and accuracy (or
otherwise) of the knowledge of various posters.
>You read, you judge, you
>choose to trust (or not). Its like the guy who was left holding his
>falling jaw while his friends went to get help. He started yelling,
>threatening to drop the jaw if help didn't arrive early. Its totally
>your decision.
>
>Obviously, I am not a web designer and cannot control what happens to
>the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
>that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
>intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
>
>And for the person touting the 'go daddy site' stuff, sorry to
>disappoint you. Its not a parked page.
>
>More to come. Keep shooting at me. I'll survive.
>
Not shooting. Testing.
glass318
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:08:58 -0700, glass318
>
>
>
>
>
> <glass...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 22, 6:08 pm, g...@consolidated.net wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:00:24 -0700, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >g...@consolidated.net wrote in message
>
> >> > >There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
> >> >>not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
> >> >>very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
>
> >> >If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
> >> >riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
> >> >Chung who posts everywhere, I haven't seen doctors posting here before
> >> >being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
> >> >past.
>
> >> >Cheri
>
> >> Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
> >> did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
>
> >> He finally left when some challenged him so much.
>
> >> He was a great help for me.
>
> >> The sue birds and professional demeanor is a
> >> factor. That sets the posting style for some
> >> here now. A weak lawsuit still cost attorney\
> >> fees for you.
>
> >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
>
> >Teddy Rosenburgo et al.
>
> >Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
> >some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
> >Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
> >reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
> >like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
> >prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
> >A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
> >little but talk a lot to patients.
>
> >Fact is, DM is a disease that kills and unfortunately (or
> >fortunately), the power to wrap our hands around it lies in the
> >patient! Yes, the usual don't eat this or that, exercise like this or
> >like that, etc. Then we top it with some oversized pills and as if not
> >enough, a shot in the belly ot thigh up to 4 times per day. Did I
> >mention all that (maybe unnecessary) finger sticking?
>
> Maybe unnecessary? Read the thread on the BMJ article on
> SMBG - or read the rapid responses to the article. Some of
> those responses are from posters here and will show our
> latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforesthttp://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
> latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using Insulin.
The frequency of testing (I advise) depends on the intensity of the
treatment. In my patients who are let's say on basal insulin (eg
Lantus) plus oral meds or even patients on intense regimens (e.g Pre-
meal Aspart plus basal insulin at night), I usually only require once
daily testing but alternating tesing times (pre-breakfast on day 1,
pre-lunch on day 2, pre-dinner on day 3 and at bedtime on day 4. They
can perform symptom-driven extra testing at any time of the day. This
gives me an average blood sugar for each testing time of the day.
Patients are usually really pleased with that.
I depend heavily on well-designed and relevant medical evidence in my
practice. A lot of studies do show a relationship between variables
but such relationships are sometimes not causal. Saying frequent
testing, for example, leads to better glycemic control is like
designing a study and successfully demonstrating that frequent blood
pressure monitoring leads to better BP control. There might be other
factors (sometimes purposefully ignored by the researchers) that
determine the association. I tend to look more at all-cause mortality
and quality of life data. Why should I care if your A1C drops by 0.5
percentage points if it does not improve your overall survival or your
quality of life?
Wingmask
>
> - Show quoted text -
What percentage of your patients are in poor control of their diabetes?
Gantlet
"glass318" <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Well, well. Very interesting responses from you guys. The site is
> password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
> physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
> trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
> which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
> practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
> back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening.
Hello Glass and welcome to Alt.support.diabetes.
I basically have most of the group in my kill file. I mostly will only talk
to newbies
letting them know its going to be ok or should I say those that claim to be
newbies.
it was recently found out that 1 poster was pretending to be 4 different
people.
2 type 1 girls, a lady in her 30's? and a bearded man lol. No doubt still
here but using
new names and probably more than 4.
I welcome all that come to this group regardless of who or what they
believe.
I wish you would stay even if its only to reply to those claiming to be
newbies.
i already noticed someone saying you are selling books on your web site but
then admits
he wasnt able to see your site because it is password protected.
if you really want to help diabetics.. Welcome.
they will not make it easy for you.
--
Tom
Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web
Site.
http://community.diabetes.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=index&webtag=amdiabetesz&redirCnt=1
Information You Can "Trust" From Your American Diabetes Association
www.diabetes.org
Information on Specific Types of Fat.
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
>On Jul 22, 6:08 pm, g...@consolidated.net wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:00:24 -0700, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
>> wrote:
>>
This fellow may be physician. I have found the poor
ones always use the ploys---"' It is the patients fault."
Come to think of it. A universal ploy.
Even the poor doctors I see do not waste their
time on a thing like arguing with people like us.
I suppose you can post a detailed description of the
glucose control system and a few
of the failures we see and call diabetes.
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
Will, T2
wrote:
>You can't gain anyone's trust by posting here about A1cs of 7 and 8%.
>Scorn is more like it, if you consider those boastworthy.
>
>>
>> Obviously, I am not a web designer and cannot control what happens to
>> the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
>> that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
>> intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
>
>Obviously, you're not much of a clinician, either. With good self
>management and mutual self help and support on this group, we're doing
>better than your patients.
>
>Susan
I think this swine is just trying to make some money on the backs of
diabetics.
Will, T2
Will, T2
wrote:
I think you called it right, Susan...
Will, T2
Cheri
gu...@consolidated.net wrote in message
>Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
>did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
OK, if they didn't post as doctors, that's why I missed them. At any
rate, I'm glad that one was informative to you. Every little bit helps
in this battle, that's for sure. Take care.
Cheri
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
>prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
>A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
>little but talk a lot to patients.
Perhaps you should be doing something more than talking. Below 8, and
*some* proudly surfing under 7? My only question is, how happy are YOU
with that? As a physician treating diabetics I mean? Just curious.
Cheri
ted rosenberg
<snip
>>> Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
>>> some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
>>> Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
>>> reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
>>> like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
>>> prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
>>> A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
>>> little but talk a lot to patients.
Assuming you are legit
"Proudly under 7" ????!!!! not an accomplishment to be proud of. As
others have pointed out, we don't consider 7, let alone 8 a reasonable
level here. Neither does the ADA or the AACE
1) This group is under constant attack by people pushing some phony
nostrum, or some woo-woo approach, so we are suspicious, and rightfully so
3) Among those of us who are legit, there are some strong differences of
opinion.
3) Anyone who posts a website, and then uses a locked one is not going
to inspire confidence. One with adds for scam products will surely
destroy any credibility.
4) Anyone who does not prescribe Insulin for T2's is making a decision
without facts - Many T2's should not get insulin, and many should.
5) Many of us are here because the medical profession has failed us, so
the fact that you may be a physician doesn't always instill confidence -
Dr. Chung had fine credentials - unfortunately he is mentally ill, AND
THE STATE KEEPS RENEWING HIS LICENSE.. Dr Biggs discloses his
credentials, and, while not everyone agrees with him all the time, after
a lot of experience with him, he is considered by most of us a reliable
source.
6) Most of us can (and do) use Medline, Cahiers, the AMA, ADA, AACE,
ABMS, NEJOM, and The Lancet
.
SO, dealing with us is like herding cats, at best and we are VERY
suspicious. If you are actually legit - go back and READ some of the
threads. and then come back and introduce your self to us. DO NOT offer
a non-existent web site. If you have a web site, using double click,
google or Yahoo will probably simply get you dismissed as a fraud, the
first ad for a "cure" or a weight' loss product.
Alan S
<glas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>
>I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using Insulin.
>The frequency of testing (I advise) depends on the intensity of the
>treatment. In my patients who are let's say on basal insulin (eg
>Lantus) plus oral meds or even patients on intense regimens (e.g Pre-
>meal Aspart plus basal insulin at night), I usually only require once
>daily testing but alternating tesing times (pre-breakfast on day 1,
>pre-lunch on day 2, pre-dinner on day 3 and at bedtime on day 4. They
>can perform symptom-driven extra testing at any time of the day. This
>gives me an average blood sugar for each testing time of the day.
>Patients are usually really pleased with that.
>
>I depend heavily on well-designed and relevant medical evidence in my
>practice. A lot of studies do show a relationship between variables
>but such relationships are sometimes not causal. Saying frequent
>testing, for example, leads to better glycemic control is like
>designing a study and successfully demonstrating that frequent blood
>pressure monitoring leads to better BP control. There might be other
>factors (sometimes purposefully ignored by the researchers) that
>determine the association. I tend to look more at all-cause mortality
>and quality of life data. Why should I care if your A1C drops by 0.5
>percentage points if it does not improve your overall survival or your
>quality of life?
I will respond on the presumption that you are what you say
you are. Excuse my skepticism - but that is still unproven.
However, in that context, you are, unfortunately, an
excellent example of GP's everywhere treating diabetes. I
don't mean that in a censorious way - it is just a fact that
we as patients must face.
We are a study of n=thousands who have succeeded following
this "test, test, test" advice:
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm
I accept that we are anecdotal and subjective - but we are
also real. I have met many of the frequent posters here
personally. We are not just cyber-space figments of your
imagination.
I, as are others here, am an individual subjective study of
n=1 who has succeeded with that method. I have a modified
version of that advice here:
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/2006/10/test-review-adjust.html
I, like others here, have had unsolicited emails appear in
the inbox from total strangers who followed that advice -
and succeeded in changing their diabetes management
dramatically.
I wrote a response to a similar comment to yours on that BMJ
article's "Ready Responses". Please read it.
You said earlier "Our average A1C is below 8, with some
patients proudly surfing under 7."
We would consider those A1c's unacceptably dangerous. Even
the AACE recommends an upper limit of 6.5.
http://www.aace.com/pub/pdf/guidelines/OutpatientImplementationPositionStatement.pdf
If I took a survey right now on this group I think you'll
find that our average A1c, for any T2's who have been
reading this newsgroup for more than six months, is below
6.5 with many proudly surfing below 6 (check out the "5%
club" on our web-site). I have become lazy lately so my
latest snuck in at 6.2 - but it will be back in the 5's at
the next check. In that context, go and read the
EPIC-Norfolk study report again, especially the bit that
says:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/7277/15
"HbA1c was continuously related to subsequent all cause,
cardiovascular, and ischaemic heart disease mortality
through the whole population distribution, with lowest rates
in those with HbA1c concentrations below 5%. An increase of
1% in HbA1c was associated with a 28% (P<0.002) increase in
risk of death independent of age, blood pressure, serum
cholesterol, body mass index, and cigarette smoking habit".
That was published in January 2001 - yet little has changed
in A1c targets since. What was that you were saying about
"if it does not improve your overall survival"? There is
also the matter of quality of life if blindness, amputation,
dialysis or similar occur as a result of poor control.
The problem we face in convincing the medical establishment
of the value of SMBG is that there have been no studies of
what we do. No researchers anywhere have studied structured
systematic SMBG by patients educated in how to change their
menu to minimise blood glucose peak post-prandial
excursions. Instead, the very few studies that have been
done tend to consider testing once a day as frequent,
testing at any post-prandial time other than two hours as
misleading and changing diet as a consequence as nonsense.
We are living proof that it is not.
Over the past three years I, and others like me, have been
slowly spreading the word to people on how to do this. Not
just on this newsgroup but on the ADA forum and similar
places. Patients discovered this method, not doctors. So
doctors, like yourself, just don't accept that it can work.
I didn't discover it - I gratefully read it and put it into
practice after discovering the mhd and asd diabetes
newsgroups.
Finally, "excessive testing" does not decrease quality of
life. Testing without purpose, excessive or otherwise, will.
Testing is a tool, to be used in association with diet,
exercise and medications to combat this affliction. At the
moment it is a tool misused and misunderstood by the medical
establishment.
The thing that WILL decrease my quality of life is the
'opathys (retin-, neuro-, neph) or other diabetic
complications.
Cheers Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience.
Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be
an expensive teacher.
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
Alan S
<mugtec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>What percentage of your patients are in poor control of their diabetes?
Thank you WM; you have totally surprised me with that
excellent question.
May I add to it?
For the "doctor": First, define poor control please.
johnniemccoy@
> On Jul 19, 6:59 am, rle...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Dear Loretta:
>> Guy's the dumbest spammer ever. His website is password protected
>> because he's too scared of how we'll criticise it. That, or he wants
>> to see how many clicks a week he can get before he pays a web site
>> designer to put up some content....
>>
>> rle...@hotmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Loretta Eisenberg wrote:
>> > I am too lazy to go to his website. what is he selling?
>>
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
> physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
> trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
> which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
> practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
> back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening.
>
on your page that isn't already second nature to the regulars here.... basic
knowledge and very well known links to this group.
John
John
johnniemccoy@
> daily testing but alternating tesing times (pre-breakfast on day 1,
> pre-lunch on day 2, pre-dinner on day 3 and at bedtime on day 4. They
> can perform symptom-driven extra testing at any time of the day. This
> gives me an average blood sugar for each testing time of the day.
>
John
glass318
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:09:00 -0700, Wingmask
>
>
> >What percentage of your patients are in poor control of their diabetes?
>
> Thank you WM; you have totally surprised me with that
> excellent question.
>
> May I add to it?
>
> For the "doctor": First, define poor control please.
>
> Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
> d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
> Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
> latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforesthttp://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
> latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
Well, I guess you guys look at Daibetes from your individual
perspectives. That is expected. I look at it from a practioner's
perspective. I have about 800 Diabetic patients so its bread and
butter for me. I wish I had a magic wand so I could come here claiming
to have a panacea for all Diabetes-related troubles. Nope. I come here
neither to make up numbers or to please you with fictitious numbers.
For those of you (Susan et al) making fun of my practice's A1C average
below 8, I ask you to go to your physician's office and randomly
select 50 to 100 Diabetic patients and calculate the A1C. You'll be in
for a big surprise. When we started our practice 3 yrs ago, our
average A1C was 10.5. I even saw patients with starting A1Cs as high
as 22 .
Having said that, I would also like you guys to step out of your
comfort zone and face the national reality that, of about 20 million
Americans living with diabetes, a whopping 34% are poorly controlled
(for the guy who wanted to know, poorly controlled in HEDIS lingo is
A1C > 9%). If you take only medicaid patients, a mind boggling 50%
have A1Cs of more than 9%! It is very naive to think that the average
medical practice has an A1C below 7. That is the ultimate goal but we
are legions from there. About 20% of Diabetics don't even get the
minimum 2 A1C checks per year!
I think HEDIS data is great for those who want to evaluate medical
practices and their performance: Scroll to page 32:
http://www.ncqa.org/communications/sohc2006/sohc_2006.pdf
Some of my patients cannot even afford the healthy foods that I
recommend to them. You are fortunate to have scaled Maslow's hierarchy
to a point where you have a clear enough mind to think critically
about the disease but I urge you to look at the bigger picture. If you
already have your A1C below 6, you are doing great but you are a
sideshow. You may want to join hands with the medical community to get
more people to that goal because we are struggling. The data does not
lie.
For those quoting ADA or AACE or whomever's standards, kudos for
knowing the standards and striving to get there. Most physicians know
the standards but how do we get our patients there? Show me a
physician with an average patient A1C of less than 7 (no biased
Hollywood-based concierge practices---real world mix of
commercial,self-pay,medicare and mediacid patients).
For those who want to give me classes in studies showing the effects
of percentage rises in A1C on DM complications, please hold that for
when I'm recertifying with the ABIM. DCCT, UKPDS, etc, etc. The data
is there but data does not save your body parts from being burried all
over the place.
I'll give you a better one: For every 1 percent reduction in blood
glucose levels (HbA1c blood tests), the risk of developing eye, kidney/
ESRD and nerve disease is reduced by 40 percent (
http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/index.htm#5 )
I am just being realistic. If patients with Diabetes see the
establishment as their enemy, woe betides us all in the war on
Diabetes. Its OK to be skeptical but some of your arguments sound more
like turf protection a la 'I have the lowest A1C so who the heck are
you to teach me anything?'
Come to think about it, I'm here to stay.
glass318
wrote:
> "glass318" <glass...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Hmmm? Good or bad? Thoughts?
johnniemccoy@
John
glass318
Boss, save the clinical advice for when you get your MD. Do you
understand the word seldom or do you just like to play devil's
advocate? What facts do you have about Type 2 DM and insulin that
makes you think it is the solution? If you REQUIRE insulin, why would
I not prescribe it? You guys sometimes even forget that most of the
data that we use are from controlled trials during which patients are
unusually adherent to medical advice. There is usually some sort of
bias there. I just try to make my patients understand that they do
produce a bit of insulin and they have the power to defeat insulin
resistance. Whenever I get to the point where I HAVE TO prescribe
insulin, I do it. The end result though is that patients do end up
skipping doses, etc. Why did we even bother to take a shot at inhaled
Insulin? Adherence to treatment is as important a factor as anything
else.
FYI, I am not here to inundate you with data. Like I've said before,
data do not save legs. Never have
Stop ranting about the website issue. To me I'm doing here what I
intended to do with the site so I care less now.
.
Andy is Evil
@emorycardiology.com> wrote in news:1185124602.200344.221130
@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
Sock Notice: heartdoc9 in use. Sockpuppets 11 thru 17 and "andrew"
occupied running in circles and poking each other with pitchforks as they
wait for their spam launchers to reload.
> glass...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> I'm new here. My mission is simple. Help answer questions about
>> Diabetes and share experiences. This disease is a killer but it can
>> also be a toothless bulldog. The secret is to hit it hard before it
>> gets you.
Andrew too has a mission which is to bow before his personal unholy ghost
and pridefully spam his scam regardless of the damage to the electronic
forums he abuses.
>
> Actually, the key is to eat less, down to the optimal amount to lose
> the VAT, cure the IR/MetS, and possibly cure the type-2 diabetes:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Healing
SPAM SITE
SPAM
SPAM
SPAM
>
> Be hungwy... be heawthy... be bwessed... be wubbew... be gwue... be
wock... be papew... be scissows... be eviw... B. Chung:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/PressRelease
SCAM ALERT
SPAM
SPAM
SPAM
To complain about the excessive use of socks and the spamming of above
url:
multiple Google accounts. All of these @emorycardiology.com,
i.e. hear...@emorycardiology.com:
------------------------------------------------------------
andrew
heartdoc9
heartdoc11
heartdoc12
heartdoc13
heartdoc14
heartdoc15
heartdoc16
heartdoc17
Complain to:groups...@google.com
posted to Usenet sent via bellsouth IP addresses
68.211.197.166 or 67.34.27.12 or 68.19.48.236 :
-----------------------------------------------
RAbuseHandle: ABUSE81-ARIN
RAbuseName: Abuse Group
RAbusePhone: +1-404-499-5224
RAbuseEmail: ab...@bellsouth.net
heartmdphd.com appears to be hosted by Softcom:
----------------------------------------------
RTechHandle: TY12-ARIN
RTechName: Yustein, Tony
RTechPhone: +1-416-957-7400
RTechEmail: to...@softcomca.com
emorycardiology.com appears to be hosted by godaddy:
----------------------------------------------------
OrgAbuseHandle: ABUSE51-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: Abuse Department
OrgAbusePhone: +1-480-624-2505
OrgAbuseEmail: ab...@godaddy.com
Judge for yourself the quality of our resident spam-boi:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.support.diabetes/msg/d559bc684dd89f72
?hl=en&
Andy is Evil
>
snip
> --
> 2PD-O-Fries Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD/NJ/WOKA/SCM**
> Ex-Cardiologist
>
>
Andy is Evil
**NJ-->NutJob,WOKA-->Winner Of K00K Awards,SCM-->Sad Counter Monkey
glass318
wrote:
> "glass318" <glass...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
lol. NADA, RIEN, NOTHING! Not a salesman. WOuld be a terrible one 'cos
judging from these exchanges, I would piss customers off by not
telling them what they want to hear. Anyway, to bed I go.
johnniemccoy@
who share knowledge from doctors, and countless other sources, from all over
the world.... not to mention their own personal experiences with methods of
bg control that have produced positive results. The tone of your initial
post was like, "Ok, I'm here to educate you." It sounded like some kid,
newly diagnosed, who had read some articles about the subject, considered
himself an expert and tried to elbow in with the grown-ups to get some
attention. The real-life diabetics, in this group, who have lived, daily,
with diabetes and have heard all that doctors have to say are wondering what
the hell you think you know that we don't consider common knowledge. Your
website was pitiful, childlike and just reinforced the above. You need to
stop acting like our savior and sit back and read some posts. This is a very
good place for doctors to learn a few things about what diabetes means to
people after they leave your office.
John
glass318
>
> - Show quoted text -
Help me understand where I sounded like I was here solely to educate
you. Yes, I can educate you regardless of how much you may or may not
know. I also learn during the process. I can share my experience over
the past 11 yrs treating diabetics; the past 4 with a predominantly
diabetic patient population.
We keep doing the same things over and over again expecting different
results so if some people are trying novel things, why not? Do you
believe it is only the patients' God-given right to do things
differently like some of you are successfully doing? I'm not here to
push a website or a product. What makes you associate a 'childish' or
'unprofessionally made' website to mediocrity? Alas! I am not a web
designer, I repeat for the umpteenth time. I'm a Doc for chrissakes.
Let go with the website.lol.
Alan S
<glas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I've interleaved some responses.
We seem to have a failure to communicate in a vital area.
You'll see what I mean.
>Well, I guess you guys look at Daibetes from your individual
>perspectives. That is expected.
The world is egocentric.
>I look at it from a practioner's
>perspective. I have about 800 Diabetic patients so its bread and
>butter for me. I wish I had a magic wand so I could come here claiming
>to have a panacea for all Diabetes-related troubles. Nope. I come here
>neither to make up numbers or to please you with fictitious numbers.
>
We don't ask for either. However, it would help if you came
with an open mind, ready to learn from some "sideshow"
patients who are proactive and a little out of the ordinary.
When you hear of patients getting the results we do - it may
be worth studying both our methods and our motivations. It
may even be possible to teach what you learn here to your
own proactive patients. Surely, out of 800 there are some
who ask "why" instead of saying "Yes Doctor"?
>For those of you (Susan et al) making fun of my practice's A1C average
>below 8, I ask you to go to your physician's office and randomly
>select 50 to 100 Diabetic patients and calculate the A1C. You'll be in
>for a big surprise. When we started our practice 3 yrs ago, our
>average A1C was 10.5. I even saw patients with starting A1Cs as high
>as 22 .
>
We also see them. They don't stay that way if they hang
around here. Your practice may, or may not, be the best in
the USA - but that still doesn't cut ice here. Different
situation, different standards. And our standards are the
toughest ones.
We do not pretend to have a doctor's medical knowledge. Nor
do we all agree - the herding cats analogy was a good one.
However, the collective wisdom here on the complex
relationships between diet, exercise, lifestyle, blood
glucose levels, lipids, complications and even meds is
greater than the individual and comes from hard experience,
not books.
> Having said that, I would also like you guys to step out of your
>comfort zone and face the national reality that, of about 20 million
>Americans living with diabetes, a whopping 34% are poorly controlled
>(for the guy who wanted to know, poorly controlled in HEDIS lingo is
>A1C > 9%). If you take only medicaid patients, a mind boggling 50%
>have A1Cs of more than 9%! It is very naive to think that the average
>medical practice has an A1C below 7. That is the ultimate goal but we
>are legions from there. About 20% of Diabetics don't even get the
>minimum 2 A1C checks per year!
>
We are well aware of all of that and can also quote you the
statistics for every other country in the world.
Your point? Mine is that they could learn from us. We
certainly don't wish to emulate them or copy the
motivational and medical advice that is not helping them.
>I think HEDIS data is great for those who want to evaluate medical
>practices and their performance: Scroll to page 32:
>http://www.ncqa.org/communications/sohc2006/sohc_2006.pdf
>
We have no wish to evaluate your practice. We wish to
successfully manage diabetes. Is there a practice on your
list that meets our standards?
>Some of my patients cannot even afford the healthy foods that I
>recommend to them. You are fortunate to have scaled Maslow's hierarchy
>to a point where you have a clear enough mind to think critically
>about the disease but I urge you to look at the bigger picture. If you
>already have your A1C below 6, you are doing great but you are a
>sideshow. You may want to join hands with the medical community to get
>more people to that goal because we are struggling. The data does not
>lie.
>
Apart from being, hopefully, a small proportion of your
patients - which healthy foods? How do you know they are
healthy? Because the USDA said so? Or the ADA or the AHA?
This is where we will disagree most strongly.
>For those quoting ADA or AACE or whomever's standards, kudos for
>knowing the standards and striving to get there. Most physicians know
>the standards but how do we get our patients there?
That is what we have been trying to tell you since this
conversation started. Start here:
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm
Then here:
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/2006/10/d-day.html
>Show me a
>physician with an average patient A1C of less than 7 (no biased
>Hollywood-based concierge practices---real world mix of
>commercial,self-pay,medicare and mediacid patients).
>
There are no average patients. However, show me a physician
whose T2 patients are still over 7% after 12 months
treatment and I'll show you a failure at treating diabetes.
Once again - we are not interested in emulating the failures
of the medical profession. If that includes every physician
in the nation or the world - then it just demonstrates the
problem, not the acceptable excuse.
>For those who want to give me classes in studies showing the effects
>of percentage rises in A1C on DM complications, please hold that for
>when I'm recertifying with the ABIM. DCCT, UKPDS, etc, etc. The data
>is there but data does not save your body parts from being burried all
>over the place.
>
>I'll give you a better one: For every 1 percent reduction in blood
>glucose levels (HbA1c blood tests), the risk of developing eye, kidney/
>ESRD and nerve disease is reduced by 40 percent (
>http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/index.htm#5 )
>
We agree on that point. So why accept >6.5%?
Just because the task is difficult does not mean it should
not be attempted.
>I am just being realistic. If patients with Diabetes see the
>establishment as their enemy, woe betides us all in the war on
>Diabetes. Its OK to be skeptical but some of your arguments sound more
>like turf protection a la 'I have the lowest A1C so who the heck are
>you to teach me anything?'
>
Turf protection? What the hell am I protecting? I'm retired
and I travel.
Why on earth do you think some of us write to the ADA, the
NHS, Diabetes Australia and other authorities trying to
change the system. We don't just complain - we are trying to
make a difference. What the hell do we have to gain? Not
money; we care. Daily people are dying needlessly, going
blind, being maimed - because the damn medical profession
won't consider the knowledge people like us are discovering,
using, succeeding. I won't use false modesty. I have changed
lives. So have others here - and some have changed mine.
We are not doctors - but we have knowledge you and your
peers refuse to hear. Read the doctors on that BMJ "Rapid
Response" page. The Swedish SMBG doctor understands - but
the rest are on different planets to us.
>Come tothink about it, I'm here to stay.
Good. If you are genuine I hope you can teach me something -
but I'm sure you will learn more from us. Arrogant?
Immodest? Answer me in six months.
Cheers Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
--
I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience.
Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be
an expensive teacher.
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
KC
Doctor, I think your patients would be very lucky if you learned some stuff
from here about alot of self testing and experimenting with food and diet to
achieve very low hbA1c levels. Best to give patients really great advice,
and then if they don't comply, so be it. At least you did your best.
There's just too much bad advice out there from doctors. I so quickly
started having pregnancies after becoming diabetic in my thirties that I
learned about true tight control immediately (lucky for me). The tight
control that they do for pregnant women is to test 4 times a day: fasting
and 1 hour after each meal. Everyone gets whatever treatment they need to
achieve less than 90 mg/dl for the fasting level and less than 120 mg/dl for
the post meal levels. I treated my own diabetes between pregnancies due to
lack of medical benefits. Then, when I finally got to a doctor to treat my
diabetes again I was shocked that the advice was to test only fasting levels
and pre-meal levels (I use insulin, and have needed it from the getgo 9
years ago.) They thought I'd be able to get off of it, but never have been
able to even with a very low carb diet and Metformin). Then when the doctor
saw how good my control was, she said I could go down to testing just twice
a day. I was horrified. Personally I think it is best to keep a very good
eye on it, especially when insulin is involved. I still test my blood sugar
many times a day. Because I am on insulin I like to test before driving
too.
I will concede that if a diabetic is keeping hbA1cs in the 5 level and seems
to have a really good grasp of what different foods do to their blood
sugars, it probably won't make much difference, but if people are still at
hbA1cs of 7 and above, those are just the people who should be looking at
their blood sugars all the time so they can learn to change their behavior
to help their sugars.
I think a very real problem in type II diabetes treatment is the diet
advice. I went to dieticians for each of my pregnancies in 1999, 2003 AND
2005. They have seemed to get better over time as the first one in 1999 was
so vehement about keeping those high levels of grains in the diet. But,
they are still pushing grains way too much. They are the very last thing
added to the human diet, and in my personal experience they are the worst
thing for my diabetes. The advice here is best which is watch what foods do
to your blood sugars and then modify your diet to get better blood sugar
readings. They call that eat to your meter here.
Also, if you don't already, recommend exercise to your patients. It has
great effects at increasing insulin sensitivity. In the pregnant diabetic
program they counselled people to exercise for 15 minutes after 2 meals a
day. It burns off the glucose from the carbs people eat in the muscle
before it can be stored as fat.
As for you other posters. I would say go easier on the attitude with this
doctor. The standards he uses to treat are very common standards. Lets
just tell him the better way, and maybe his practice will change. Yes
doctors have seen the studies about hbA1c improving health, but most doctors
have no training in diet, and probably don't have diabetes themselves in
order to learn this stuff. They just send the patients to the dietician,
and then have to work from what the dieticians tell the patients.
KC
DonnaB shallotpeel
<1184733719.7...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, glas...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> I'm new here. My mission is simple. Help answer questions about
> Diabetes and share experiences. This disease is a killer but it can
> also be a toothless bulldog. The secret is to hit it hard before it
> gets you. This is especially true for newly diagnosed diabetics. There
> are a ton of things that can be done to prevent its complications.
> Afterall, prevention of complications is why it is treated.
>
> Diet and exercise are key but are not easy. The easiest path is to pop
> pills but it is not as effective if not combined with the good old
> natural way of burning more calories that is taken in.
>
> First, you've got to believe you can do it. Hope this little pep talk
> sparks something in you that will push you towards the lifestyle
> modification needed to control this disease.
>
> Good Luck
> http://www.thediabeteswebsite.com
If you re-read this, your original post. And, if you look at your website,
which is shown here, basically as your sig, rather than a nick, etc. I can't
really see how you miss seeing that you erred in the initial impression you
created.
Did you lurk at all in ASD before posting? If so, how long? If so, while
lurking, how many threads did you read?
Usenet has its own culture. You don't seem to get that or to get ASD.
Of course, no matter where this was, people don't necessarily jump to trust
that someone is who they allege that they are immediately - nor should they!
So, even if your initial post here hadn't seemed as if you were presenting
yourself as our savior, the cavalry riding in, etc. people would have
questioned you.
If you did not mean to create this impression, your best bet is to apologize
& ask for a second chance & begin again.
And, you might rethink calling us a 'sideshow' or speaking of our 'comfort
zone'. We're diabetics. We share experiences here, you know, support. But,
being diabetics we work at being as healthy as we can. I don't know that I
consider being a diabetic that comfortable a zone! <G>
We're not freaks & this newsgroup is not a sideshow. And, we know full well
that we are atypical, since being here we automatically skew, in our own
work on our disease and health.
Lastly, it seems from your website right now that you are inviting people to
come here to discuss until you get a discussion forum up associated with
your site. Gee thanks for using us as temps.
--
DonnaB
06-07-06 Diagnosis T2 hbA1C 8.1, D&E & Metformin 500mg
..................09-11-06 hbA1C 5.0
..................12-20-06 hbA1C 5.2
..................05-18-07 hbA1C 5.3
"Sorry, I would have introduced you guys, but I didn't want you to meet." -
Alex to Seth & Jody, 'The Accomplice' on THE O.C., 1/27/2005
johnniemccoy@
John
Alan S
<glas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>We keep doing the same things over and over again expecting different
>results so if some people are trying novel things, why not?
On this point we are in total agreement.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
krom
It is one thing to just be a poster offering opinion and advice and another
to claim to be a professional.
KROM
"Alan S" <loralgtwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ldt7a3hjsrs6a0vq4...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:08:58 -0700, glass318
> <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 22, 6:08 pm, g...@consolidated.net wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:00:24 -0700, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >g...@consolidated.net wrote in message
>>>
>>> > >There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
>>> >>not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
>>> >>very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
>>>
>>> >If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
>>> >riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
>>> >Chung who posts everywhere, I haven't seen doctors posting here before
>>> >being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
>>> >past.
>>>
>>> >Cheri
>>>
>>> Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
>>> did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
>>>
>>> He finally left when some challenged him so much.
>>>
>>> He was a great help for me.
>>>
>>> The sue birds and professional demeanor is a
>>> factor. That sets the posting style for some
>>> here now. A weak lawsuit still cost attorney\
>>> fees for you.
>>>
>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
>>> News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>>> 120,000+ Newsgroups
>>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
>>> =----
>>
>>Teddy Rosenburgo et al.
>>
>>Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
>>some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
>>Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
>>reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
>>like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
>>prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
>>A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
>>little but talk a lot to patients.
>>
>>Fact is, DM is a disease that kills and unfortunately (or
>>fortunately), the power to wrap our hands around it lies in the
>>patient! Yes, the usual don't eat this or that, exercise like this or
>>like that, etc. Then we top it with some oversized pills and as if not
>>enough, a shot in the belly ot thigh up to 4 times per day. Did I
>>mention all that (maybe unnecessary) finger sticking?
>
> Maybe unnecessary? Read the thread on the BMJ article on
> SMBG - or read the rapid responses to the article. Some of
> those responses are from posters here and will show our
> bias.
> http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/bmj.39247.447431.BEv1#172564
>
>> I would be
>>frustrated too. I admire your skepticism but I'm sorry to inform you
>>that I do not need to gain your trust before I can POST here! No, I do
>>NOT! I can only gain your trust by posting.
>
> Asked and answered. Yes you can post, with or without trust.
> However, the respect you earn will depend on those posts.
>
> Start by reading our associated web-page, particularly the
> "Newly Diagnosed" advice. Then skim through some of the
> posts here to get a feel for the depth and accuracy (or
> otherwise) of the knowledge of various posters.
>
>>You read, you judge, you
>>choose to trust (or not). Its like the guy who was left holding his
>>falling jaw while his friends went to get help. He started yelling,
>>threatening to drop the jaw if help didn't arrive early. Its totally
>>your decision.
>>
>>Obviously, I am not a web designer and cannot control what happens to
>>the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
>>that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
>>intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
>>
>>And for the person touting the 'go daddy site' stuff, sorry to
>>disappoint you. Its not a parked page.
>>
>>More to come. Keep shooting at me. I'll survive.
>>
> Not shooting. Testing.
DonnaB shallotpeel
<fi_oi.2730$Da.778@trnddc07>, "johnniemccoy@"
<johnni...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
> "glass318" <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1185173587.8...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Editing judiciously. [Chomp.]
> > We keep doing the same things over and over again expecting different
> > results so if some people are trying novel things, why not? Do you
> > believe it is only the patients' God-given right to do things
> > differently like some of you are successfully doing? I'm not here to
> > push a website or a product. What makes you associate a 'childish' or
> > 'unprofessionally made' website to mediocrity? Alas! I am not a web
> > designer, I repeat for the umpteenth time. I'm a Doc for chrissakes.
> > Let go with the website.lol.
> >
> I feel a sales pitch coming on.
Well, at least it's not a song!
--
DonnaB finished reading HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HOLLOWS
"Some guys collect art. Bruce collected enemies." - CSI, 02-17-05
krom
Great!
So um wheres the credentials and advice?
So far all you responded to was this thread...
KROM
"glass318" <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote
Alan S
<shall...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Lastly, it seems from your website right now that you are inviting people to
>come here to discuss until you get a discussion forum up associated with
>your site. Gee thanks for using us as temps.
Yeah, just checked on that. The website is now up (and full
of ads) and this thread is the discussion link.
To be fair, it's not edited so all of the negative is there
as well as the positive, including, unfortunately, Chung and
a couple of other trolls. To the "Doctor" - Chung has
prejudiced some here concerning doctors on usenet.
On the other hand, it becomes yet another diabetes web-page
feeding off us; recognition would be nice on some of them,
but I suppose that means that "test, test, test" is also
getting out there. I'm still waiting on the cheque from any
of the 40+ websites feeding off our writings and squabbles
here:-) Some in the past actually used to edit out the
squabbles, I don't know if it still happens.
Try this test Donna, to see how widely you are read. Do a
simple google on "DonnaB shallotpeel" and see what comes up.
You're in for a surprise:-)
If nothing else, this thread has been a valuable
clarification of our own position, at least for me. It has
forced me to review why I'm here.
glass318
wrote:
> In alt.support.diabetes on Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:41:59 -0700 in Msg.#
>
> - Show quoted text -
The invitation to this site is new. I think this is a good medium [for
change]
glass318
>
> - Show quoted text -
The 'sideshow' comment was not meant to be derrogatory but rather to
point out that you guys are not the norm. You are the exception if
your A1C is constantly below 6. I also have patients with A1Cs below
6; maybe a couple who even overdid it and forayed below 5. I do not
rest my laurels on their stories but have invited them to be 'Diabetes
Champions' in my group diabetes sessions. They did it mostly by
themselves. They had more power to control their diabetes than I ever
could have provided them. That is my message and that was expressed in
my first post. A lot of patients rely on us but fail to see how little
we can do from our end apart from the usual DM chat, warning about
complications, adherence to diet, blah, blah. If we had ALL the right
answers to the Diabetes control problem, we would not even be having
this discussion.
glass318
> He still gives zero credentials to back his claims.
> It is one thing to just be a poster offering opinion and advice and another
> to claim to be a professional.
>
> KROM
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I will stay anonymous for a while. Credentials mean nothing to me in
this discussion because I do not consider myself giving medical advice
to patients on this forum. I could post a 10-page CV here but for what
purpose? Credibility? It comes with substance...and time. No
appologies here.
Susan
glass318 wrote:
> The 'sideshow' comment was not meant to be derrogatory but rather to
> point out that you guys are not the norm. You are the exception if
> your A1C is constantly below 6. I also have patients with A1Cs below
> 6; maybe a couple who even overdid it and forayed below 5.
!!!!!d Effing idiot.
Susan
Chris Malcolm
> Having said that, I would also like you guys to step out of your
> comfort zone and face the national reality that, of about 20 million
> Americans living with diabetes, a whopping 34% are poorly controlled
> (for the guy who wanted to know, poorly controlled in HEDIS lingo is
> A1C > 9%). If you take only medicaid patients, a mind boggling 50%
> have A1Cs of more than 9%! It is very naive to think that the average
> medical practice has an A1C below 7. That is the ultimate goal but we
> are legions from there. About 20% of Diabetics don't even get the
> minimum 2 A1C checks per year!
This isn't surprising news. It's been well documented on the ADA web
pages for ages, and we've discussed it here ad nauseam.
> Some of my patients cannot even afford the healthy foods that I
> recommend to them. You are fortunate to have scaled Maslow's hierarchy
> to a point where you have a clear enough mind to think critically
> about the disease but I urge you to look at the bigger picture.
We do look at the bigger picture. Looks like an A1C of 6-8% is the
best you could hope for if your medical practice is based on the
guidance given on the ADA's web pages of guidance for professionals,
which seems to be generally the case in at least the Anglophone
nations.
> If you
> already have your A1C below 6, you are doing great but you are a
> sideshow.
Of course we're a sideshow. In general we're a bunch of pro-active
eccentrics who've found ways of doing a lot better than the average
diabetic. This isn't a web site for the education of the average
diabetic. There's plenty of those. This is our rather unusually
successful sideshow.
> You may want to join hands with the medical community to get
> more people to that goal because we are struggling.
If you check the archives you'll find that several of us have tried to
do that, with pretty pretty discouraging results. The best we've got
is that some of us have open-minded docs that like what we're doing,
and some of them are still optimistic enough (or unconstrained enough
by their employers) to try to get some of our success across to their
other patients.
> The data does not
> lie.
That's a rather naive remark to make in a newsgroup which contains a
number of people of postgrad research standard :-)
> For those quoting ADA or AACE or whomever's standards, kudos for
> knowing the standards and striving to get there. Most physicians know
> the standards but how do we get our patients there? Show me a
> physician with an average patient A1C of less than 7 (no biased
> Hollywood-based concierge practices---real world mix of
> commercial,self-pay,medicare and mediacid patients).
There have been many posters here who have found that if they followed
the advice given in
http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/NewlyDiagnosed.htm
if necessary instead of the advice given by their physicians that
they've been able to get their A1Cs under 7% and in a number of cases
under 6%. You've been given that reference before. Isn't that just the
kind of thing you're asking for?
> For those who want to give me classes in studies showing the effects
> of percentage rises in A1C on DM complications, please hold that for
> when I'm recertifying with the ABIM. DCCT, UKPDS, etc, etc. The data
> is there but data does not save your body parts from being burried all
> over the place.
> I'll give you a better one: For every 1 percent reduction in blood
> glucose levels (HbA1c blood tests), the risk of developing eye, kidney/
> ESRD and nerve disease is reduced by 40 percent (
> http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/index.htm#5 )
So we agree on the importance of getting A1C as low as possible
without risk of hypos etc.. In that case why are you telling us so
much about how unsucessful your methods are at reducing your patients'
A1Cs, and paying so little attention to how we've been successful where
you've failed?
> I am just being realistic. If patients with Diabetes see the
> establishment as their enemy, woe betides us all in the war on
> Diabetes.
The "establishment" is a rather vague entity. Let's consider the
specific example of the ADA's dietary advice for diabetics. I have no
doubt that following the ADA's dietary advice would be a significant
improvement to anyone eating a crap fast food diet which may even be
most diabetics. I also well know from my own experience that the ADA's
advice would seriously worsen my BG control and my neuropathic
symptoms. So anyone who advises me that for the sake of avoiding
diabetic problems in later life I ought to follow the ADA's dietary
advice is enough of a wrong-headed nincompoop to be considered an
enemy of my health.
> Its OK to be skeptical but some of your arguments sound more
> like turf protection a la 'I have the lowest A1C so who the heck are
> you to teach me anything?'
Isn't that rather a good question to ask if your teachings haven't
been able to produce A1Cs under 6%?
> Come to think about it, I'm here to stay.
If you want to be taken seriously rather than as a troll you'll need
to raise the level of your debate quite a bit. I'm sure I'm not alone
in finding your remarks so far to be insultingly patronising. But I'm
willing to brush that aside and give you the benefit of the doubt. Of
course after such a stupid start you'll have to work a bit harder to
earn our trust, but if you passed your medical exams higher than in
the bottom quartile that shouldn't be beyond you.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
krom
to do was chat.
In fact you didnt come in and chat at all..just came in said we in need of
your help and then only lurk this one thread responding only to it and
giving zero help to the group..interesting.
Starting to smell like a troll..since it is classic trolldom to haunt a
single thread or topic and ignore the group as a whole.
Sooooo..since this group is made up of the excetptions..people who strive
for tight control over thier numbers and own health in general...what is it
you offer?
Im in no way opposed to a real doctor answering medical questions and
offering tales of patients in sililar situations and what did or didnt help
them.
That would be great...but as has been stated here by many..the sheepskin
doesnt mean your knowlede or advice will be good.
My personal doctor is a great guy..knows medicine and has been a doc for 30
years.
He told me 480 was a fasting number to get all flustered about...
He told me that id probably never see numbers below 175 and he also
pronounced id be on insulin..
Of course he was wrong on all of the above...so i saw a dibaetic specialist
and a diabetic nutritionalist.
Thier advice was wildly different from my doctor a GP and is the case with
most of the people who find thier way here.
My numbers hover between 85-95 most all the time and im doing great despite
my docs predictions.
But you have been told this and would know this about this group had you
listened and read.
You simply dismiss this and proclaim you are stayign and not to be swayed by
us freaks....sad.
Again your bedside manner leaves much to be desired and i am personally done
feeding this thread which you hover in like a troll would.
If you are legit..welcome and all the best..i hope you can deliver what you
have claimed....but as i say your not showing it.
KROM
"glass318" <glas...@yahoo.com> wrote
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
>designer, I repeat for the umpteenth time. I'm a Doc for chrissakes.
>Let go with the website.lol.
Or you could be Anon. Time will tell. :-)
Cheri
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
>I will stay anonymous for a while. Credentials mean nothing to me in
>this discussion because I do not consider myself giving medical
advice
>to patients on this forum. I could post a 10-page CV here but for
what
>purpose? Credibility? It comes with substance...and time. No
>appologies here.
As in Anon? Seriously, if credentials mean nothing to you, then why
did you say you were an M.D.? To get real information, it would have
been much better to just start posting, voicing opinions etc.,
becoming part of the group, instead of saying things like "Boss save
your clinical advice for when you get your MD" as you did to Chris.
That is exactly the attitude that a lot of doctors have when patients
question them about bad advice, and sometimes gets a diabetic listed
as non-compliant on their records. I do agree with you that you should
not consider yourself as giving medical advice to *patients* (whatever
the Hell that means) on this forum though. Time will tell the rest.
Cheri
La...@notmy.com
<tro...@renotworthsaving.net> wrote:
>> I have about 800 Diabetic patients so its bread and
>>butter for me. I wish I had a magic wand so I could come here claiming
>>to have a panacea for all Diabetes-related troubles. Nope. I come here
>>neither to make up numbers or to please you with fictitious numbers.
>>
>
>a vested interest in keeping your victims unhealthy.
Thank you, Mack. Referring to patients as Bread & Butter was sticking
in my craw. I just lacked the ability to put it as plainly as you
did.
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
>
>glass318 wrote in message
>
>
It kinda wore this old man trying to read all of the thread.
But I must thank this gentleman for starting it. It
reinforces my belief in ASD and MHD and the value of
both groups.
At times I swear I will never read the tripe
again but I am so wrong.always relent and come back.v
Thanks to all.
It is a good experience to go to the archives
and read back in time to get a perspective.
If you are honest "Doc' you will be accepted here,
but at times yo will need a thick skin.
I will warn you, I am a bit down on the medical
profession. Recently I finally found I had a hook
worm infection which seems to be long standing,
It has done much damage and much suffering.
IN my opinion it was a doc failure since the final skin lesions
were classic. I should have said Docs. It took the
seventh one to diagnose it, He is 70 year old.
So if I complain about "production line medicine' you
know why.
My first surgery was by a Mayo Clinic doc in1965 and he went over me
thoroughly. Even asked me about a scratch on my ear. Today
they read the charts and to hell with the ignorant patent. This Doc
had the time to examine me before he cut on me.
Get the drift.
But I do hope you will post. I never find out enough about my malady.
Guy
.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
glass318
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> ass318 wrote:
> > On Jul 22, 10:35 pm, Alan S <loralgtweightandca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll give you a better one: For every 1 percent reduction in blood
> > glucose levels (HbA1c blood tests), the risk of developing eye, kidney/
> > ESRD and nerve disease is reduced by 40 percent (
> >http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/index.htm#5)
>
>
> and their kidney function.
>
> Every increment in A1c above 4.6% comes with a significant increase in
> CVD mortality.
>
> Susan
Yes, madam. We all know that already. The real problem is how to get
MOST patients there. The numbers mean very little if it cannot be
translated into saved limbs, eyes, etc.
I think you are missing the point here. Traditional medical training
(and practice) teaches us how to communicate these values to patients
with empathy, blah, blah, blah...but how can we actually CHANGE
behaviour effectively enough to get to these numbers.
Susan, you do not get my point. You are not going to enlighten me
about DM data. I have contributed my share of the data but that is not
fulfilling to me. Currently, we preach data to patients and maybe out
of a hundred we get (I guess) 10 or less to modify their behaviour
enough to save a limb over the long term. That is not enough.
Preaching doom (invoking fear--e.g. you'll lose your limb or sight if
you don't do what I say, etc) works over the short term but not over
the long term.
W. Baker
: Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
: I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using Insulin.
: The frequency of testing (I advise) depends on the intensity of the
: treatment. In my patients who are let's say on basal insulin (eg
: Lantus) plus oral meds or even patients on intense regimens (e.g Pre-
: meal Aspart plus basal insulin at night), I usually only require once
: daily testing but alternating tesing times (pre-breakfast on day 1,
: pre-lunch on day 2, pre-dinner on day 3 and at bedtime on day 4. They
: can perform symptom-driven extra testing at any time of the day. This
: gives me an average blood sugar for each testing time of the day.
: Patients are usually really pleased with that.
: I depend heavily on well-designed and relevant medical evidence in my
: practice. A lot of studies do show a relationship between variables
: but such relationships are sometimes not causal. Saying frequent
: testing, for example, leads to better glycemic control is like
: designing a study and successfully demonstrating that frequent blood
: pressure monitoring leads to better BP control. There might be other
: factors (sometimes purposefully ignored by the researchers) that
: determine the association. I tend to look more at all-cause mortality
: and quality of life data. Why should I care if your A1C drops by 0.5
: percentage points if it does not improve your overall survival or your
: quality of life?
If a diabetic tests, but doesn't use or know how to use the results of teh
tests to improve their control, I would say that there sino need to test,
but, if the diabetic uses the results fo the tests, particularly, post
prandial tests to adjust their food intake or exercise, thereby preventing
high blood glucose over varying periods of time, I cannot see why this
would not be advantagous to the diabetic, even if it gives no "new
information" to the doctor. It improves the ciabetic and general health
of the diabetic. I am 20 years with type 2 and have , so far, no
complications. My wet macular degeneration is a problem as is my
sciatica, but they are not diabeticlly related. i hope, with continued
monitoring of my own bgs, to continues for many more years in reasonably
good health.
In addition to actual physical effects of onitoring and adjusting my diet
to keep my bgs in order, there is a pshchological effect of knowing that
eatign soem dumb carby treat will show up on the test o take later that
helps keep many people on track. In addition, posting to a group like
this, where others are working fo rthe same kind of control, gives you a
community of like-minded paeole and keeps you on track becasuse you know
that others are doing the same thing. All these things add up to results
that you, as a doctor, would like to see in your patients. Not everyone
may be cut out to do this, but for those of us who are it works very well.
I see no raeson to not suggest it to your patients who are willing to do
the frequent testing and adjusting. Trust us, we can do much more than
you expect us to be able to do.
As to the A1c issue, I don't care if my A1c moves up or down a few tenths
of a percentbge points form test to test, but I do try to keep it under
6(currently 5.7). I think that were I keeping it ad 6.7 or 6.9, under the
7 figure so often recommended, I would be more likely to develop
complications. I really don't want to take that chance. I take meds for
bp and lipids and my numbers are good and I intend to continue as I don't
wanat cardio or stroke problems. Keeping my Aic and bgs in order go along
with that same thinking.
Wendy
glass318
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:02:15 -0700, glass318 <glass...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>
> >I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using Insulin.
>
> I. and the above advise indicates you should not be treating any
> diabetics.
> --
> Måck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper
> Type 1 since 1975http://www.alt-support-diabetes.orghttp://www.diabetic-talk.orghttp://www.insulin-pumpers.orghttp://www.pandora.com enter "Jason & Demarco"
>
> "To announce that there must be no criticism of the
> President, or that we are to stand by the President
> right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
> but is morally treasonable to the American public."
> ...Theodore Roosevelt
>
> (o ô)
> --ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------
>
> "I don't know half of you
> half as well as I should like;
> and I like less than half of you
> half as well as you deserve."
> ....Bilbo Baggins
>
> DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me
> offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
> If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
> me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate...
> .
What grammar skills? Go back and read the above again and learn from
me.:-0
ted rosenberg
I just looked in on the spammers website and find an ad for a "natural"
"cure" for diabetes - DIAMAXOL !
It was already aparent that the unidentified physician was possibly a
physician - he was much more concerned with his own ideas than with the
facts of the group
Now it is clear that he is a fraud. His website pushes scams. Time to
go to abuse notification
PLOINK !
Gantlet
> I think you are missing the point here. Traditional medical training
> (and practice) teaches us how to communicate these values to patients
> with empathy, blah, blah, blah...but how can we actually CHANGE
> behaviour effectively enough to get to these numbers.
by showing it can be done.
before I was diagnosed diabetic I was 330lbs and unable to walk more than
a block before having to stop because of pains in my ankle.
Diagnosed in January of 2003 FBS of 300 with a 12 or 13A1C in 3 months I my
A1C was in the 5% range and in another 3 months I was off all medications. I
wasnt able to do much walking and took my car everyplace.
While waiting for clients I would use the curb as a stepper. 2 years
later I was doing 15 minutes on
the stepper as a warm up on weight lifting days ( 3 days per week ) and 30
minutes on cardio days ( 3 days )
I went from 1 end of the belt to the other and had to add 2 holes for a
total of about 11 or 12 inches. I sold my car and bought a motorcycle
simply because while waiting in Manhattan NY traffic I could walk the 700lb
motorcycle to red lights and stretch my legs when ever I wanted.
in June of the same year I gave my self a treat of my favorite dish. I
posted that meal here and the blood sugar numbers that followed. While its
not a dish I would recommend I do recommend the life style that allowed me
to get these numbers for that meal. I am curious if you have any comment
about the following.
t 8:30 I had
General tso chicken
1 pint pork fried rice
egg roll
and a diet soda
tested at 930: = 121
tested again at 10:45 = 121
im testing again right now 10:57 = 121 huh this is fudged up.
cant have the same number 3 times can it?
these numbers are lower than when I was taking medications.
I think its time for a new meter lol I don't understand it.
what do I have to eat or do to be diagnosed again.
I tested again at 11pm it was 130
I tested again at 11:15 it was 113
ok I mixed up the 2 last times a bit now its 11:13 and my bs is 104.
I really don't know what to make of this.
im going to little Italy this week end and will give another test.
12:01 blood sugar 126
I am laughing my ass off right now.
I can not believe this.
I was really expecting to see much higher numbers.
when I was on medication and I had the same thing
my blood went up to 170 - if I remember right. but with that meal I also had
dumplings.
the link below this is to a even larger meal
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.diabetes/browse_thread/thread/1a73593a6da898e1/ad3d22a09d398720?lnk=st&q=&rnum=9#ad3d22a09d398720
I call what I did..
Runing for the carbs instead of running away from them.
>
> Susan, you do not get my point.
and some people never will. it is up to you and only you to decide when you
will
start doing what you came here to do. I for one am very curious as to what
you can
give this group and look foward to what you have to say.
--
Tom
Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web
Site.
http://community.diabetes.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=index&webtag=amdiabetesz&redirCnt=1
Information You Can "Trust" From Your American Diabetes Association
www.diabetes.org
Information on Specific Types of Fat.
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp
Gantlet
> password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
> physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
> trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
> which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
> practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
> back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening
My web site is nothing special but I do hope to ad to it from time to time.
it only cost me $7 per month and there are even cheaper ones out there.
I offer this as friendly advice.
you will be trusted more by those you are looking to help if you remove
those
types of ads. Yes I know there are some here that have blogs that also have
ads
but I will not put them as being like yours. It does smell like spam and I
hope it is not.
unless you want to be like Chung - no matter what his advice is.. good or
bad he is not taken seriously
and kind of makes me wonder why he even bothers.
Nicky
wrote:
>Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
>some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
>Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
>reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
>like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
>prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
>A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
>little but talk a lot to patients.
"proudly surfing under 7" - wow, poor bastards. Maybe if you spent a
little less time patronising them and a little more time trying to
listen to them, you might both benefit.
>Did I
>mention all that (maybe unnecessary) finger sticking?
Uh-huh. "Proudly surfing under 7" is a direct result of that kind of
ostriching.
Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 100ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.6% BMI 25
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
<1185207198.6...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>...
On Jul 23, 9:40 am, MĺckŠŽ <tro...@renotworthsaving.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:02:15 -0700, glass318 <glass...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>
> >I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using
Insulin.
>
> I would expect a doctor to have better typing and grammar skills
than
> I. and the above advise indicates you should not be treating any
> diabetics.
>>What grammar skills? Go back and read the above again and learn from
me.:-0
OK, since you asked...learn the difference between *advice* and
*advise* as in "I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are
using Insulin." Wrong.
Cheri
gu...@consolidated.net
wrote:
>
>glass318 wrote in message
><1185207198.6...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>...
>On Jul 23, 9:40 am, MåckŠŽ <tro...@renotworthsaving.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:02:15 -0700, glass318 <glass...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>>
>> >I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using
>Insulin.
>>
>> I would expect a doctor to have better typing and grammar skills
>than
>> I. and the above advise indicates you should not be treating any
>> diabetics.
>
>>>What grammar skills? Go back and read the above again and learn from
>me.:-0
>
>OK, since you asked...learn the difference between *advice* and
>*advise* as in "I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are
>using Insulin." Wrong.
>
>Cheri
>
I have seen cases where a person that did test more were more
compliant in the diet area. They found the little bit of food that
does not "matter" did matter -in blood sugar rises. In that
case it is a teaching tool.
glass318
>
> > Yes, madam. We all know that already.
>
>
> The real problem is how to get
>
> > MOST patients there. The numbers mean very little if it cannot be
> > translated into saved limbs, eyes, etc.
>
> patients clearly aren't receiving.
>
>
>
> > I think you are missing the point here. Traditional medical training
> > (and practice) teaches us how to communicate these values to patients
> > with empathy, blah, blah, blah...but how can we actually CHANGE
> > behaviour effectively enough to get to these numbers.
>
> with the recommendations of dopes like you are hungry, fat, and in poor
> control.
>
>
>
> > Susan, you do not get my point. You are not going to enlighten me
> > about DM data. I have contributed my share of the data but that is not
> > fulfilling to me. Currently, we preach data to patients and maybe out
> > of a hundred we get (I guess) 10 or less to modify their behaviour
> > enough to save a limb over the long term. That is not enough.
> > Preaching doom (invoking fear--e.g. you'll lose your limb or sight if
> > you don't do what I say, etc) works over the short term but not over
> > the long term.
>
> a web site for commercial purposes, IMO.
>
> Susan
Susan, let's move on. If you have the behaviour modification formula,
let me know. Just stop your childish rants and insults. You have been
by far the rudest of them all. I do not have DM but I am sure
something good will come out of this and hopefully, your offspring
will benefit from it in the future. I really hope you find inner peace
because you sound very bitter. There is an emotional problem here.
Good Luck!
glass318
Boss, stop being childish. Those ads are served automatically by
GOOGLE. Wake up, boss!
bj
>
> The real problem is how to get
> MOST patients there. The numbers mean very little if it cannot be
> translated into saved limbs, eyes, etc.
>
Discouraging them from testing to find out what effect food, exercise, etc
has on their bg is a good way to keep your business going strong & your
surgeon friends busy.
> I think you are missing the point here. Traditional medical training
> (and practice) teaches us how to communicate these values to patients
> with empathy, blah, blah, blah...but how can we actually CHANGE
> behaviour effectively enough to get to these numbers.
>
Teach them how to find out what *specific* behavior results in what bg
results.
> Currently, we preach data to patients and maybe out
> of a hundred we get (I guess) 10 or less to modify their behaviour
> enough to save a limb over the long term.
>
Try *Teaching* not preaching.
Try "You, the patient, are in charge of this; I'm just here to help."
Try *collaboration* not authoritarian dictatorship.
But I see elsewhere that you are selling snake oil, so I guess you're not
really interested in the techniques that so many of us here have found that
*really do work*. They won't make you money, they may even cost you office
visits, & you wouldn't be making those surgical referrals as often.
Those techniques have worked for me, as for so many others here (& I'm not
even a poster child for the methods :-)) -- and thrilled several of my
doctors, none of whom has ever tried to discourage me from "keep on doing
it" and some of whom have happily cooperated by writing prescriptions for
what would seem to you like an unnecessarily large supply of test strips so
my insurance will cover them. (or are you one of those doctors who act like
strips come out of your hide or you get rewarded for keeping those
particular costs down?)
bj
glass318
> "glass318" <glass...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > Well, well. Very interesting responses from you guys. The site is
> > password protected by choice. Will open it up soon. Yes, I am a
> > physician who takes care of Diabetics in real time. Anyway, I was just
> > trying to offer FREE advice. The website's only revenue is from ads
> > which only partially pay for hosting. Not selling anything. My
> > practice takes care of that. I just thought I would give something
> > back to whoever...for free. The responses are sickening
>
> My web site is nothing special but I do hope to ad to it from time to time.
> it only cost me $7 per month and there are even cheaper ones out there.
> I offer this as friendly advice.
> you will be trusted more by those you are looking to help if you remove
> those
> types of ads. Yes I know there are some here that have blogs that also have
> ads
> but I will not put them as being like yours. It does smell like spam and I
> hope it is not.
> unless you want to be like Chung - no matter what his advice is.. good or
> bad he is not taken seriously
> and kind of makes me wonder why he even bothers.
>
> --
> Tom
>
> www.TomsDiabeticDiary.com
>
> Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web
The ads are served up automatically by Google.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> gu...@consolidated.net wrote in message
>
> >There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
> >not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
> >very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
>
> If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
> riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
> Chung who posts everywhere
Actually, a handful of NGs would not be everywhere :-)
> , I haven't seen doctors posting here before
> being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
> past.
You would have not seen the lurking physicians that decide against
delurking to post in ASD. There are also folks who post here in ASD
without indicating that they are a physician (pediatrician Dr. Jeff
Utz for example).
Be hungry... be healthy... be blessed:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/PressRelease
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
ted rosenberg
Look you scamming piece of wet fecal matter
Those ads are on YOUR website
Those ads pay YOU
Those ads HURT diabetics
Just because they are automaticaly served up by Google doesn't make you
any less a commercial fraud
Arguing that you don't make MUCH scamming diabetics - doesn't make you
any less a fraud
It is clear why you conceal your name. Some of us will be happy to file
an ethics complaint with your licensing board
now -
FUCK OFF SPAMMER
Cheri
gu...@consolidated.net wrote in message ...
>I have seen cases where a person that did test more were more
>compliant in the diet area. They found the little bit of food that
>does not "matter" did matter -in blood sugar rises. In that
>case it is a teaching tool.
I agree with you 100%. Sometimes it's a huge surprise just how little
it takes of something to cause a blood sugar rise. I appreciate you
sharing some of your problems with hookworm and other things as well.
Nothing like somebody who has been there to tell it like it is IMO.
Cheri
Gantlet
I did give you a chance to talk about diabetes in my other post.
I do see that you took off the top ad on your page. That was the ad I was
worried about.
let me know what you want to talk diabetes.
--
Tom
Chat in peace with other diabetes at the American Diabetes Associations Web
Site.
http://community.diabetes.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=index&webtag=amdiabetesz&redirCnt=1
Information You Can "Trust" From Your American Diabetes Association
www.diabetes.org
Information on Specific Types of Fat.
http://www.diabetes.org/nutrition-and-recipes/nutrition/foodlabel/specific-fats.jsp
glass318
> glass318 wrote in message
>
> On Jul 23, 9:40 am, Måck©® <tro...@renotworthsaving.net> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:02:15 -0700, glass318 <glass...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>
> > >I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using
> Insulin.
>
> > I would expect a doctor to have better typing and grammar skills
> than
> > I. and the above advise indicates you should not be treating any
> > diabetics.
> >>What grammar skills? Go back and read the above again and learn from
>
> me.:-0
>
> OK, since you asked...learn the difference between *advice* and
> *advise* as in "I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are
> using Insulin." Wrong.
>
> Cheri
You are so full of yourself. How about starting a sentence in lower
case?
"...than I.and the above advise indicates you should not be treating
any diabetics."
Is that the grammar you are going to teach me? Look in the mirror, my
dear friend. You better take that the spoke out of your eye before
offering to take mine out!
glass318
>
> - Show quoted text -
You can continue with the name-calling. I care less. I know where
fecal matter comes from and I think you do too. After all, your nose
is right next to it.
Talk about Diabetes and stop your childish rants. You lot are
disappointing me with all the insults. Why? Can you not talk Diabetes
any longer? Stick to the issues, boy!
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> convicted neighbor g...@consolidated.net wrote:
> > "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote:
> > >g...@consolidated.net wrote in message
> >
> > > >There are hundred of sites for diabetes. I generally use the
> > >>not for profit sites. We have had doctor post here and some were
> > >>very good. Some of our sick ran most of the off.
> >
> > >If they left because some questioned what they were saying...good
> > >riddance, but other than Dr. Biggs who still posts in MHD, and Dr.
> > >being run off by "our sick," but I may have missed them...as they ran
> > >past.
> >
> >
> > Cheri, There were several that came here over the years. They
> > did not not post as a doctor. One was very informative to me.
> >
> > He finally left when some challenged him so much.
> >
> > He was a great help for me.
> >
> > The sue birds and professional demeanor is a
> > factor. That sets the posting style for some
> > here now. A weak lawsuit still cost attorney\
> > fees for you.
> >
>
> Teddy Rosenburgo et al.
>
> Yep, I am a Physician. Yep, I see a lot of Diabetics. I have heard
> some of these things from frustrated Diabetic patients over the years.
> Its our fault (medical community) because we seem to be recycling and
> reinventing the same therapies for Diabetics over and over again but
> like I said, you have the power to change that. Just FYI, I seldom
> prescribe Insulin for my Type 2 Diabetics. Don't panic. Our average
> A1C is below 8, with some patients proudly surfing under 7. I do very
> little but talk a lot to patients.
>
> fortunately), the power to wrap our hands around it lies in the
> patient! Yes, the usual don't eat this or that, exercise like this or
> like that, etc. Then we top it with some oversized pills and as if not
> enough, a shot in the belly ot thigh up to 4 times per day. Did I
> mention all that (maybe unnecessary) finger sticking? I would be
> frustrated too. I admire your skepticism but I'm sorry to inform you
> that I do not need to gain your trust before I can POST here! No, I do
> NOT! I can only gain your trust by posting.
Actually, it is unlikely you will gain anyone's trust while anonymous
no matter how much posting you do.
> You read, you judge, you
> choose to trust (or not). Its like the guy who was left holding his
> falling jaw while his friends went to get help. He started yelling,
> threatening to drop the jaw if help didn't arrive early. Its totally
> your decision.
Your analogy has very little utility here.
A better analogy would be the Klansman wearing a bedsheet.
It is unlikely that a non-white person can ever trust such a Klansman
until the sheet comes off no matter how many good deeds are performed.
> Obviously, I am not a web designer and cannot control what happens to
> the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
> that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
> intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
>
> And for the person touting the 'go daddy site' stuff, sorry to
> disappoint you. Its not a parked page.
>
> More to come. Keep shooting at me. I'll survive.
There is no real shooting at you until the bedsheet comes off.
Most physicians don't survive the real shooting.
glass318
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> glass318 wrote:
> > Susan, let's move on. If you have the behaviour modification formula,
> > let me know.
>
> feel better, and they don't comply with programs that don't.
> Empowerment is a tremendous motivator. So is success.
>
> Just stop your childish rants and insults. You have been
>
> > by far the rudest of them all.
>
> with a "Mission" to "advice" us. Extremely rude and presumptuous, not
> to mention marginally literate.
>
> I do not have DM but I am sure
>
> > something good will come out of this and hopefully, your offspring
> > will benefit from it in the future. I really hope you find inner peace
> > because you sound very bitter. There is an emotional problem here.
> > Good Luck!
>
>
> Nothing good will come of your presence here, you're just a noxious
> distraction from our group mission of helping one another and newbies
> exercise healthful control over their diabetes.
>
> Overdoing it to get under 5%!!
>
> Not bitter, but truly disgusted by your profound ignorance and
> presumptuousness.
>
> Susan
One bitter woman! Are you depressed and lonely? Are you a victim of
domestic violence? Wow! :-)
glass318
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, I really am not going to beg anyone to listen to me or trust me.
Those who have ears,...
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
<1185214454.7...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>...
On Jul 23, 12:37 pm, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote:
> glass318 wrote in message
>
> On Jul 23, 9:40 am, MĺckŠŽ <tro...@renotworthsaving.net> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:02:15 -0700, glass318 <glass...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Thanks for the more reasonable tone, Alan from Down Under.
>
> > >I only advice routine self-testing in patients who are using
> Insulin.
>
> >>What grammar skills? Go back and read the above again and learn
from
>
> me.:-0
>
> OK, since you asked...learn the difference between *advice* and
> *advise* as in "I only advice routine self-testing in patients who
are
> using Insulin." Wrong.
>
> Cheri
You are so full of yourself. How about starting a sentence in lower
case?
"...than I.and the above advise indicates you should not be treating
any diabetics."
Is that the grammar you are going to teach me? Look in the mirror, my
dear friend. You better that the spoke out of your eye first!
LOL, you should probably know that Mack said what you just quoted, not
me. My *advice* would be to read the posts more carefully, and
especially your own responses. Just look at the last sentence in your
post, and tell me who has what in their eye eh?
Cheri
Cheri
glass318 wrote in message
>You can continue with the name-calling. I care less. I know where
>fecal matter comes from and I think you do too. After all, your nose
>is right next to it.
>
>Talk about Diabetes and stop your childish rants. You lot are
>disappointing me with all the insults. Why? Can you not talk Diabetes
>any longer? Stick to the issues, boy!
OK, I can almost figure out which sockpuppet you are. A couple more
posts and I'll know for sure.
Cheri
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> "krom" <thekromremoverem...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > He still gives zero credentials to back his claims.
> > It is one thing to just be a poster offering opinion and advice and another
> > to claim to be a professional.
> >
> > KROM
> >
> > "Alan S" <loralgtweightandca...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:ldt7a3hjsrs6a0vq4...@4ax.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 17:08:58 -0700, glass318
> >
> > >>On Jul 22, 6:08 pm, g...@consolidated.net wrote:
> > >>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 14:00:24 -0700, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
> > > SMBG - or read the rapid responses to the article. Some of
> > > those responses are from posters here and will show our
> > > bias.
> > >http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/bmj.39247.447431.BEv1#172564
> >
> > >> I would be
> > >>frustrated too. I admire your skepticism but I'm sorry to inform you
> > >>that I do not need to gain your trust before I can POST here! No, I do
> > >>NOT! I can only gain your trust by posting.
> >
> > > However, the respect you earn will depend on those posts.
> >
> > > Start by reading our associated web-page, particularly the
> > > "Newly Diagnosed" advice. Then skim through some of the
> > > posts here to get a feel for the depth and accuracy (or
> > > otherwise) of the knowledge of various posters.
> >
> > >>You read, you judge, you
> > >>choose to trust (or not). Its like the guy who was left holding his
> > >>falling jaw while his friends went to get help. He started yelling,
> > >>threatening to drop the jaw if help didn't arrive early. Its totally
> > >>your decision.
> >
> > >>the website (which is actually down as I type...cannot control
> > >>that ...or maybe I should get another webmaster?). The site was not
> > >>intended to be password-protected so that problem will be fixed.
> >
> > >>And for the person touting the 'go daddy site' stuff, sorry to
> > >>disappoint you. Its not a parked page.
> >
> > >>More to come. Keep shooting at me. I'll survive.
> >
>
> I will stay anonymous for a while. Credentials mean nothing to me in
> this discussion because I do not consider myself giving medical advice
> to patients on this forum. I could post a 10-page CV here but for what
> purpose?
The same reason author credentials are listed on the first page of a
medical journal article. This does serve to convince folks that the
article will be worth the reading.
> Credibility? It comes with substance...and time.
Without the credentials, few will take the time to read what you
write.
> No appologies here.
None required.