It’s not a serious problem but it is something that needs continuous monitoring.
And I’m slowly learning to monitor it. The single most important thing seems to be the blood sugar level (measured using Boehringer-Mannheim sticks), but blood pressure is important too. I use, as advised, mmol/L units (millimoles per litre, the units they used in hospital) and they appears to be the most commonly used worldwide.
The exception, naturally, is the U.S.A., where they use mg/dL (milligrams per decilitre).
It turns out that according to most British GP practices I should only be measuring my blood sugar once a day but
at a different time each day.
This is entirely rational if the intention is to record this data in a fashion that smooths out small irregularities and gives, when simply analysed, a proper indication of trends.
Single anomalies may be important in themselves but the chance of missing them is well outweighed by the reduced psychological pressure on the patient - me.
That’s the theory anyway.
But there is a school of thought that truly believes detailed figures are necessary as reactions to individual foodstuffs are relevant by the hour (rarely smaller intervals).
This may well be true - I think it is.
However there may be greater risk in over-testing than in proper sampling. In particular the additional stress this will cause may be worse, maybe far worse, than any benefit it offers.
Professionals can certainly make use of more detailed information, figures taken in controlled circumstances by experts in collecting and collating such data. This is only done in particular circumstances (in Britain), namely, in hospitals or by some diabetics themselves.
I said that I’d follow the medical advice I’d been given and test blood sugar only once a day. But I discovered that both the National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the Department of Health believe that diabetics should be allowed to test blood sugar as often as they feel is necessary (that opinion is not now available).
Nowadays I test my blood sugar three times most days. I always test first thing in the morning and in the late evening. I also test after breakfast, before and after lunch or before supper. That means, for me, three times 5 days a week and four times the other 2 days (I find a seven day rotation more convenient).
Actually I think now that this is rather more sensible as neither the diabetic clinic nor the doctor have once asked for any of my records - not once
.
The conclusion I draw is that testing is irrelevant to them so it must only be relevant to me!
My diabetes was probably diagnosed as a consequence of my not being able to take as much exercise as before my stroke. I’m certainly not obese, not even very fat. At worst I’ve been about five kilograms overweight, that from a base healthy (and very fit) weight of about 75 kilograms (currently I’m about 2 kilograms overweight at 69 kilograms - I’m not very fit yet).
Now I’m getting more exercise and I hope to be able to walk about 5 kilometers a day by next summer.
Interestingly there are a number of idiot posters, apparently mostly from the United States (I’m an ex-pat yank myself), on the newsgroup alt.support.diabetes (not alt.support.diabetes.uk aka asduk) whose support consists of abusing diabetics for being diabetic!
I don’t actually understand this.
To help, to support, diabetics is their avowed aim but their idea of support is to berate all diabetics as being the sole architects of their own fate. The idea seems to be that all diabetics must admit their faults - and everything will be OK!
It’s twaddle, of course, anti-diabetic diatribes by ill-informed and ill-educated people who enjoy the idea of causing pain.
Unfortunately they sometimes succeed.
But the other groups are pretty good.
A disenchanted diabetic has started a forum that I hope will be successful. I joined it as soon as I found it (though I’m no longer a member).
It seems to be a positive and good effort. My only concern is that it will become rather bigger the the founder anticipates.
It may need more than one person to monitor it.
Although I’m against censorship (even when given the weasel-title of moderation), I do understand that others do want it. I hope Anita only censors out abusive and aggressive posts, not necessarily argumentative ones.
Argument is truly a spice of life.
Certainly it is getting going on the right lines. The jargon of diabetes sufferers is one of the first things the forum is addressing. That is important as otherwise some won’t actually know what others are talking about!
I’m not in any way anti U.S.A.!
I was born in Ohio, U.S.A., and I love much U.S. culture. I do find some things in that culture quite as quaint as many U.S. citizens find things from other cultures quaint.
One of the things I find quaint is the insistence of using units the rest of the world has abandoned. “Look at Sam, he’s the only one in step.”
Diabetes is usually divided into two types, Type 1 and Type 2.
Routine treatment for Type 1 diabetics is often simpler than for Type 2. Type 1 itself is pretty clear-cut. The pancreas produces progressively less insulin, eventually none at all. Insulin is therefore injected.
In Type 2 the pancreas produces insulin normally but the body’s ability to use it varies. In the worst case the body can’t use any of its own insulin and injected insulin is necessary making the condition’s treatment nearly equivalent to Type 1.
But it’s more common for Type 2 to be treated by pills, diet and exercise. The condition is more complex than Type 1 but neither more nor less serious.
I was under the misconception that Type 2 was less serious than Type 1 but it seems that the two types are not equivalent in any way. So Type 2 is neither less nor more serious than Type 1.
In fact the two types may only have a very tenuous connection - maybe only in the mechanics of diagnosis and treatment. It’s sobering to think that there may be distinctly different causes for the two types (as there are) but even more so to realise that the two conditions only appear superficially related.
As a contributor to the Diabetes Files forum told me, either type of diabetes is serious.
What I mean is that neither is what medical science calls acute, rather they’re what is known as chronic.
(Is that better, Gemstone?)
