From January 21 at 9:19pm
Other than changing lifestyles, one of the reasons is also because the indices for qualifying as a 'diabetic' have been lowered by the pharmaceutical/medical communities -so even people who wouldn't normally have been termed diabetic are considered so today. The only pro in this is it puts you on guard for preventing all the consequences!
// but suddenly I keep hearing this a lot more than I used to.//
YES
At present, Insulin Resistance in TN is more than 50 %
Increased Blood Glucose can cause a lots of complication
One Such Complication is Called Diabetic Keto acidosis, which occurs at high levels
So Previously, the target was just avoiding Ketoacidosis
But
Later we found that Increased Blood Glucose can also cause Vision Problems (Retinal involvement), Kidney Problems (Renal Failure), Heart Attack (Atherosclerosis), Stroke etc
So
To prevent these complications, we want to keep the blood sugar at lower level than what we previously were aiming for
Even now
If your aim is only preventing Ketoacidosis, but you are not worried about Vision Problems (Retinal involvement), Kidney Problems (Renal Failure), Heart Attack (Atherosclerosis), Stroke etc , you need to "treat" Blood Sugar 160
Any Doubts ?
Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas //
Shankar Ganesh
Shankar Ganesh This has been the case for a long time, or why did this increase suddenly?
//
Till 1960s, we had famines
After 1970s only people started coming out of malnutrition - so called கால் வயித்து கஞ்சி state
It took a Well Working PDS 30 years to eliminate malnutrition
Once Malnutrition has been eliminated, we see Diabetes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
//
.
Let me summarise
1. Indices have been lowered - YES. No Doubt
2. This has been lowered by Big Pharma - WRONG
3. Indices have been lowered for Big Pharma to get profit. - WRONG. When Indices are low, profit of Big Pharma comes down
4. There is a communication gap between the medical community and the common person - Yes. But it is not because the medical community does not say, but because, even when medical community explains in detail, the common man is in denial mode
5. If there is no means to reassure them why these guidelines are revised or why they are also seeing more people who are now 'diabetic', - WRONG . There is a mean to reassure and this has been done
.
//
Olympia Shilpa Gerald Dear Sir, I respect your argument and perspective and see a lot of good reasons on it- but I dont see why that should deter be from reading the perspectives of the proponents of the original debate on this issue
//
Madam
You can very well read the perspectives of the proponents of the original debate on this issue
Who said you cannot
But
If any one says that treating diabetes gives more profit to Big Pharma than Bye Pass Surgery, he is either a fool or a fraud and why should you be fooled by a fraud
.
Olympia Shilpa Gerald
There are five levels of care
Primordial
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
Quaternary
Cost increases as you move from primary to Quarternary
Big Pharma likes High Costs
So
If any one says that Primordial prevention gives more profit to Big Pharma than Bye Pass Surgery, he is either a fool or a fraud
. .
Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas Olympia Shilpa Gerald
I don't know who the <<proponents of the original debate >> are
But I am willing to bet a Five Star Chocolate that he belongs to Alternative medicine group
Ready for the Bet
Shankar Ganesh will be the referee
.
. //
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other than changing lifestyles, one of the reasons is also because the indices for qualifying as a 'diabetic' have been lowered by the pharmaceutical/medical communities -so even people who wouldn't normally have been termed diabetic are considered so today. The only pro in this is it puts you on guard for preventing all the consequences!
// but suddenly I keep hearing this a lot more than I used to.//
YES
At present, Insulin Resistance in TN is more than 50 %
Increased Blood Glucose can cause a lots of complication
One Such Complication is Called Diabetic Keto acidosis, which occurs at high levels
So Previously, the target was just avoiding Ketoacidosis
But
Later we found that Increased Blood Glucose can also cause Vision Problems (Retinal involvement), Kidney Problems (Renal Failure), Heart Attack (Atherosclerosis), Stroke etc
So
To prevent these complications, we want to keep the blood sugar at lower level than what we previously were aiming for
Even now
If your aim is only preventing Ketoacidosis, but you are not worried about Vision Problems (Retinal involvement), Kidney Problems (Renal Failure), Heart Attack (Atherosclerosis), Stroke etc , you need to "treat" Blood Sugar 160
Any Doubts ?
Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas //
Shankar Ganesh
Shankar Ganesh This has been the case for a long time, or why did this increase suddenly?
//
Till 1960s, we had famines
After 1970s only people started coming out of malnutrition - so called கால் வயித்து கஞ்சி state
It took a Well Working PDS 30 years to eliminate malnutrition
Once Malnutrition has been eliminated, we see Diabetes
//
Olympia Shilpa Gerald I am fully aware of that, and that is a worthy effort- but again as I pointed out, there is a communication gap between the medical community and the common person (which is not helped in anyway on how relatively impersonally doc-patient interactions are becoming today).
//
No Madam
There is no communication gap at all
This concept has been clearly told
Only that Public do not want to read proper texts, but believes some nonsense web sites and crappy forwards , most of which are written by SCAMsters (SCAM - so called alternative medicine)
//
If there is no means to reassure them why these guidelines are revised or why they are also seeing more people who are now 'diabetic', it leads to- as we are seeing- wonderment, alarm, panic, skepticism, even shunning of responsibility and sometimes dismissal of the doctor's advice.
//
This is the fault of the patient
We can only say the facts
It is for the patient to use their common sense to find the fact
//
Olympia Shilpa Gerald Mariano Anto I clearly used the words 'supposed to have been influenced by big pharma";
//
Yes
But
Even then
Why would a big pharma spend money to LOWER their profit
Your problem is very simple
You wrongly assumed that treating diabetes gives more profit to the pharma companies
The truth is treating diabetes gives less profit to the pharma companies
//
I accept this is a controversial statement to make- I am not saying it is a fact, but I am not rubbishing it outright - i want to read/find out more about that
//
Just read all my comments
I have explained in detail
.
.
.
.
//Olympia Shilpa Gerald Mariano Anto You admitted yourself that we are treating blood sugar levels much earlier now- that is what I am talking about. That is a decision made by the medical community, policy makers etc,This is what I meant by revised indices//
This is Correct
But
The issue of contention is whether
This reduces the profit of Big Pharma or increases the profit of Big Pharma
This reduces the profit of Big Pharma
.
Let me summarise
1. Indices have been lowered - YES. No Doubt
2. This has been lowered by Big Pharma - WRONG
3. Indices have been lowered for Big Pharma to get profit. - WRONG. When Indices are low, profit of Big Pharma comes down
4. There is a communication gap between the medical community and the common person - Yes. But it is not because the medical community does not say, but because, even when medical community explains in detail, the common man is in denial mode
5. If there is no means to reassure them why these guidelines are revised or why they are also seeing more people who are now 'diabetic', - WRONG . There is a mean to reassure and this has been done
.
//
Olympia Shilpa Gerald Dear Sir, I respect your argument and perspective and see a lot of good reasons on it- but I dont see why that should deter be from reading the perspectives of the proponents of the original debate on this issue
//
Madam
You can very well read the perspectives of the proponents of the original debate on this issue
Who said you cannot
But
If any one says that treating diabetes gives more profit to Big Pharma than Bye Pass Surgery, he is either a fool or a fraud and why should you be fooled by a fraud
.
Olympia Shilpa Gerald
There are five levels of care
Primordial
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
Quaternary
Cost increases as you move from primary to Quarternary
Big Pharma likes High Costs
So
If any one says that Primordial prevention gives more profit to Big Pharma than Bye Pass Surgery, he is either a fool or a fraud
. .
Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas Olympia Shilpa Gerald
I don't know who the <<proponents of the original debate >> are
But I am willing to bet a Five Star Chocolate that he belongs to Alternative medicine group
Ready for the Bet
Shankar Ganesh will be the referee
.
. //
Olympia Shilpa Gerald I never said "treating diabetes gives more profit to Big Pharma than bye pass urgery" haha. I've again said big pharma involvement is a supposition'!!!
//
OK
//
But I will not dismiss it outlright- sometimes we simplify things too much as here.
//
Madam
It is very very simple
When you prevent a disease, the pharma company loses
You are only complicating simple things
Let me put it bluntly
What you said is as absurd as saying that Helmet Rule was brought in because Neurosurgeons want to make more money ?
//
As I said, I'd rather discuss this by revisiting the pieces (no, they're not internet crap)
//
May be Offline Crap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment