Recently I have been diagnosed with type 1 and a-half diabetes and am
seeking information on this diagnosis. (my doctor calls it type 1.5
diabetes because I have some of the symptoms of a type 1 diabetic-my
identical twin brother was a type 1 at 15 – but I am older, 38. I am of
average weight and exercise regularly.)
My doctor says the chances of me becoming a type 1 diabetic are very high,
it is just a matter of time before my pancreas shuts down completely.
(currently i am in the "honeymoon" phase and have gone off the oral
medication.)
any insights would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Bill
Bill:
You are a type one diabetic if you are insulin dependent. Even if you are
taking small amounts of insulin because of your honeymoon phase….you are
still a type one diabetic. Please get yourself to an endocrinologist.
This type 1.5 business is dangerous for your health. It shows your
doctors ignornance. Diabetes is serious business. It is best to get
educated now. Good luck.
Sandra
In article <4cjnan$…@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, san…@aol.com (SANMOM) writes:
=Bill:
=You are a type one diabetic if you are insulin dependent. Even if you are
=taking small amounts of insulin because of your honeymoon phase….you are
=still a type one diabetic. Please get yourself to an endocrinologist.
=This type 1.5 business is dangerous for your health. It shows your
=doctors ignornance.
Just as you demonstrate yours in the above paragraph. For example, you make no
mention of figuring out whether or not he’s insulin-dependent. The mere fact
that one is using insulin injections to control diabetes does NOT mean that one
is insulin-dependent. Many Type-II’s use insulin injections. Now, as to the
Type 1.5, I’ve seen that term used to describe slow-onset Type I diabetes,
especially if there’s insulin resistance as well as below-normal insulin
production.
—————————————————————————
I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
to keep blood glucoses in the normal range. Dr. Eisenbarth
has done a number of studies in families where one member
has IDDM, first degree relatives were tested for islet cell
antibodies and glucose tolerance tests were done over a
period of years. As the number of Beta cells decrease,
glucose metabolism is impaired and eventually the person
develops clinical symptoms of diabetes. In other word the
diabetes evolved, rather than appearing all at once. I
guess you could call it Type 1.5 which usually becomes
plain old Type I
While generally people over the age of thirty who develope
diabetes have Type II diabetes [non insulin dependent],
Type I diabetes occurs at any age, not just in children.
You may want to contact the American Diabetes Association
or NIH for information about the IDDM prevention trials.
web sites:
http://www.diabetes.org for the ADA
http://www.cdc.gov
http://www.niddk.nih.gov
Hopes this helps
In article <4cjnan$…@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, SANMOM <san…@aol.com> wrote:
>Bill:
>You are a type one diabetic if you are insulin dependent. Even if you are
>taking small amounts of insulin because of your honeymoon phase….you are
>still a type one diabetic. Please get yourself to an endocrinologist.
>This type 1.5 business is dangerous for your health. It shows your
>doctors ignornance. Diabetes is serious business. It is best to get
>educated now. Good luck.
I would not be so hard on him. The current classification is far
from scientific. There is likely a collection of diseases with
different causes all lumped together into two categories.
Even the classification into two categories seems problematic.
Are these two different diseases, two different sets of symptoms
or two different causes?
For example, Type I has been referred to as juvenile diabetes
while Type II is adult onset; however, the latter is now believed
to be much more common than previously believed with over half of
Type I patients being adults.
Another way of doing it is to define IDDM as insulin
insufficiency and NIDDM as hyperinsulinemia and insulin
resistance. However, this does not clear up the confusion either.
Rather than two distinct diseases, there is often a progression
which starts out as NIDDM but then exhausts the insulin producing
beta cells leading to IDDM.
Current research may lead to a better classification system;
however, until then individual practitioners and researchers are
forced into a variety of nonstandardized descriptions.
Louis Kates
l…@teleride.on.ca
Of course, you are absolutely right that being on insulin does not mean he
is type 1. But does he sound to you like he is type 2 or even type 1.5 ?
Don’t be so mean just because you are literal. It makes YOU look ignorant
also. The point is the denial of calling oneself diabetic 1.5. It’s as
dangerous to his health as your nastiness is to you.
Sandra
In article <4ckf5g$…@news.duke.edu>, Margaret Wilkman <wilkm…@mc.duke.edu> writes:
=Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
=decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
=to keep blood glucoses in the normal range.
In some cases, true. In others, the loss of beta cell function can be quite
rapid.
—————————————————————————
I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
san…@aol.com (SANMOM) wrote:
> Please get yourself to an endocrinologist.
>This type 1.5 business is dangerous for your health. It shows your
>doctors ignornance.
Wrong-Wrong-Wrong….
This ‘type 1-1/2 business’, as you referred to it is now entering the
vocabulary at many major diabetes research facilities….
The Joslin Clinic (no shabby place), often alknowledges that many people
(more than one would think) don’t fit into the classic categories of Type
1 & II.
There are indeed many shades of gray. And the term type 1-1/2 is used to
describe someone who is showing many signs of both.
They also use the term ‘a 1 over a 2′…or a ’2 over a 1′…to decribe
someone who may be experiencing characteristics of both types…but a
little more of one than the other….
Well gang, my endo told me when diagnosed that I have Type III diabetes
(symptoms of both Type I and Type II). We made the final determination
by sending a pancreatic test to Gainesville FL (don’t remember what the
test was, only that it measured whether the pancreas was producing
insulin), and it was determined that I was in fact a Type II, due to the
fact that I was still producing insulin. And yes, I take two shots a day
plus Diabeta plus Glucophage as part of my regimen. I may become insulin
dependent in the future, but for now, I’m a Type II. My endo often
forgets and marks me down as a Type I on his treatment sheet. What does
that REALLY mean?
Bottom line: A diagnosis of Type 1 1/2 is not quackery. Live with it.
Chris Passant
guru…@aol.com
In article <4clh61$…@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, san…@aol.com (SANMOM) writes:
=Of course, you are absolutely right that being on insulin does not mean he
=is type 1. But does he sound to you like he is type 2 or even type 1.5 ?
He sounds as if it’s quite possible that he is. He didn’t give enough
information for that to be ruled out.
=Don’t be so mean just because you are literal.
Look, shit-for-brains, when someone give dangerous advice (even when that
advice is simply: The doctor you have, just because he called what you have
type 1.5 diabetes, is incompetent. Find another doctor), I will NOT let their
bullshit go unchallenged. Now, why don’t YOU take your own advice and keep
your moronic mouth shut when you don’t know what you’re talking about, instead
of posting advice which is likely to harm people?
=It makes YOU look ignorant
=also.
Frankly, I don’t give a flying fuck what someone as stupid as you thinks about
me.
=The point is the denial of calling oneself diabetic 1.5.
What denial?
=It’s as dangerous to his health as your nastiness is to you.
=Sandra
Sorry, Sandra, but the only thing my "nastiness’ seems to be dangerous to is
your belief that it’s OK for you to spout nonsense as long as your intentions
are good. I don’t give a damn if I hurt your feelings.
—————————————————————————
I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
In a previous article, lyd…@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) says:
>In article <4ckf5g$…@news.duke.edu>, Margaret Wilkman <wilkm…@mc.duke.edu> writes:
>=Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
>=decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
>=to keep blood glucoses in the normal range.
>In some cases, true. In others, the loss of beta cell function can be quite
>rapid.
>—————————————————————————
>I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
>bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
>preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
>throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
Actually, ladies and gentlemen, Type I (also known as Juvenile or
Insulin-dependent) Diabetes Mellitus is a RAPID onset form of the
disease. It is Type II (also known as Adult or non-insulin-dependent)
that is a gradual-onset.
Please be sure that the information circulated on this forum is
accurate. It is difficult enough to control this disease with
misinformation, disinformation, fads, or quackery being displayed in a
respectable newsgroup.
Mike Maturen
president, Board of Directors
American Diabetes Association
Tri-City, Michigan Chapter
—
FROM: Mike Maturen…ah…@detroit.freenet.org (517) 797-0170
————————————————————————
WORKING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF PEOPLE EVERYWHERE
In a previous article, GVST…@prodigy.com (Chris Passant) says:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Well gang, my endo told me when diagnosed that I have Type III diabetes
>(symptoms of both Type I and Type II). We made the final determination
>by sending a pancreatic test to Gainesville FL (don’t remember what the
>test was, only that it measured whether the pancreas was producing
>insulin), and it was determined that I was in fact a Type II, due to the
>fact that I was still producing insulin. And yes, I take two shots a day
>plus Diabeta plus Glucophage as part of my regimen. I may become insulin
>dependent in the future, but for now, I’m a Type II. My endo often
>forgets and marks me down as a Type I on his treatment sheet. What does
>that REALLY mean?
>Bottom line: A diagnosis of Type 1 1/2 is not quackery. Live with it.
>Chris Passant
>guru…@aol.com
Please don’t forget, Chris, that there is often a "honeymoon period" for
newly diagnosed Type I diabetics. Often (and this happened with me), the
pancreas continues to produce a small amount of insulin for a short
period of time (perhaps 6 months). During this time, an unskilled or
partially behind the time endocrinologist may misdiagnose this as
TypeII. He or she should have looked at other factors as well, such as
was this a rapid-onset or gradual onset. Rapid would seem to indicate
Type I.
Make sure your endocrinologist is up-to-date on his/her diabetes
diagnoses and treatment methods. Please understand, I am not inferring
that they aren’t, but PLEASE make sure…your life may depend upon it!
Mike Maturen
president, Board of Directors
American Diabetes Association
Tri-City, Michigan Chapter
–
FROM: Mike Maturen…ah…@detroit.freenet.org (517) 797-0170
————————————————————————
WORKING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF PEOPLE EVERYWHERE
ah…@detroit.freenet.org (Michael A. Maturen) writes:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>In a previous article, lyd…@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) says:
>>In article <4ckf5g$…@news.duke.edu>, Margaret Wilkman <wilkm…@mc.duke.edu> writes:
>>=Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
>>=decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
>>=to keep blood glucoses in the normal range.
>>In some cases, true. In others, the loss of beta cell function can be quite
>>rapid.
>Actually, ladies and gentlemen, Type I (also known as Juvenile or
>Insulin-dependent) Diabetes Mellitus is a RAPID onset form of the
>disease. It is Type II (also known as Adult or non-insulin-dependent)
>that is a gradual-onset.
>Please be sure that the information circulated on this forum is
>accurate. It is difficult enough to control this disease with
>misinformation, disinformation, fads, or quackery being displayed in a
>respectable newsgroup.
>Mike Maturen
>president, Board of Directors
>American Diabetes Association
Mike,
Better to be sure what you’re saying before you open your mouth. I’d
be interested in seeing a citation for what you claim above. Or perhaps
you’re just misunderstanding–Type I’s can have a "honeymoon" period
that lasts varying amounts of time, during which the pancreas still
produces insulin. And, if you consider the initial attack on beta cells
as the onset of the disease, type I can be very slow acting indeed, as
antibodies indicative of the autoimmune attack on the beta cells can be
detected for *years* before a clinical diagnosis is made.
But thanks anyway.
Dave
–
****************************************************************************
Dave Breeden bree…@aries.scs.uiuc.edu
Director, Radioisotope Lab, Univ. of Illinois, 139 Davenport Hall, 217-333-0476
Graduate Student, Department of Philosophy, Univ. of Illinois, 105 Gregory Hall
In article <4crobo$…@detroit.freenet.org>, ah…@detroit.freenet.org (Michael A. Maturen) writes:
=
=In a previous article, GVST…@prodigy.com (Chris Passant) says:
=
=>Well gang, my endo told me when diagnosed that I have Type III diabetes
=>(symptoms of both Type I and Type II). We made the final determination
=>by sending a pancreatic test to Gainesville FL (don’t remember what the
=>test was, only that it measured whether the pancreas was producing
=>insulin), and it was determined that I was in fact a Type II, due to the
=>fact that I was still producing insulin. And yes, I take two shots a day
=>plus Diabeta plus Glucophage as part of my regimen. I may become insulin
=>dependent in the future, but for now, I’m a Type II. My endo often
=>forgets and marks me down as a Type I on his treatment sheet. What does
=>that REALLY mean?
=>
=>Bottom line: A diagnosis of Type 1 1/2 is not quackery. Live with it.
=>
=>Chris Passant
=>guru…@aol.com
=>
=>
=
=Please don’t forget, Chris, that there is often a "honeymoon period" for
=newly diagnosed Type I diabetics. Often (and this happened with me), the
=pancreas continues to produce a small amount of insulin for a short
=period of time (perhaps 6 months). During this time, an unskilled or
=partially behind the time endocrinologist may misdiagnose this as
=TypeII. He or she should have looked at other factors as well, such as
=was this a rapid-onset or gradual onset. Rapid would seem to indicate
=Type I.
Actually, the way such a the test can indicate Type-II is by showing that the
body’s producing more insulin than a non-insulin-resistent person would
require. This is quite distinct from the honeymoon period of a Type I who has
no insulin resistance, where the test would indicate normal or lower levels of
insulin production.
—————————————————————————
I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
In article <4crnus$…@detroit.freenet.org>,
Michael A. Maturen <ah…@detroit.freenet.org> wrote:
>In a previous article, lyd…@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) says:
>>In article <4ckf5g$…@news.duke.edu>, Margaret Wilkman <wilkm…@mc.duke.edu> writes:
>>=Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
>>=decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
>>=to keep blood glucoses in the normal range.
>>In some cases, true. In others, the loss of beta cell function can be quite
>>rapid.
>Actually, ladies and gentlemen, Type I (also known as Juvenile or
>Insulin-dependent) Diabetes Mellitus is a RAPID onset form of the
>disease. It is Type II (also known as Adult or non-insulin-dependent)
>that is a gradual-onset.
Excuse me, but there are people posting here who have a gradual-onset
loss of beta-cell function. This sounds like a slow-onset form of type I
to me. Are you claiming that these people do not exist? Yea, type I is
usually fast-onset, and II is usually slow-onset, but that, like *most*
generalizations about diabetes, has exceptions.
>Please be sure that the information circulated on this forum is
>accurate. It is difficult enough to control this disease with
>misinformation, disinformation, fads, or quackery being displayed in a
>respectable newsgroup.
Speaker is the *last* person you have to say that to. Trust me.
>Mike Maturen
>president, Board of Directors
>American Diabetes Association
>Tri-City, Michigan Chapter
And I suggest that you make it a New Year’s Resolution to learn more
about the less common manifestations of diabetes; the ADA would not serve
its members well to claim they do not exist.
Rachel
–
"That leaves: shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker mother-fucker and tits (you
have to say it with *rhythm*). We could all just add these to our .sigs."
– Marco Simons on net censorship
In article <4crnus$…@detroit.freenet.org>, ah…@detroit.freenet.org (Michael A. Maturen) writes:
=
=In a previous article, lyd…@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) says:
=
=>In article <4ckf5g$…@news.duke.edu>, Margaret Wilkman <wilkm…@mc.duke.edu> writes:
=>=Type I diabetes seems to develop rather slowly with gradual
=>=decrease in the pancreas ability to produce enough insulin
=>=to keep blood glucoses in the normal range.
=>
=>In some cases, true. In others, the loss of beta cell function can be quite
=>rapid.
=>—————————————————————————
=>I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
=>bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
=>preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
=>throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
=>
=
=
=Actually, ladies and gentlemen, Type I (also known as Juvenile or
=Insulin-dependent) Diabetes Mellitus is a RAPID onset form of the
=disease. It is Type II (also known as Adult or non-insulin-dependent)
=that is a gradual-onset.
Not universally.
=Please be sure that the information circulated on this forum is
=accurate.
You might want to take your own advice: The rapidity of onset is NOT the
distinguishing feature between Type-I and Type-II. Type II is characterized by
insulin resistance; Type-I by inability to produce insulin. Type-I can have a
slow onset.
—————————————————————————
I try very hard to say exactly what I mean. I’d appreciate it if you’d
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret" my posts to fit your own
preconceived notions if I’m posting in a serious thread. Remember: If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.
Okay, since everyone is debating what disease is what, how about a little
case study – me.
26 yr male, diagnosed last february, at the time had fasting sugars around
200 and post-meal around 400. Brother 4 years younger than me has been
insulin dependent for about 7 years. I have a small spare tire, but am
very active.
At the time of diagnosis, my endo figured I would end up being insulin
dependent, so I began shooting around 15 units a day, post meal and
bedtime. Since then, my insulin requirements dropped off as expected,
went down to zero for a few weeks, and then have cycled back a forth. One
month I will need only a couple units R to help the peak after a meal, but
a month later I’ll need 8-10 for the same meal. Once, I went from taking
only a couple units a day to 20 units a day in 2 days, with no other
diet/excercise/illness factors. I also spent 2 weeks needing a midmorning
meal to keep my sugars above 60.
I obviously still produce insulin – if I experience a "dietary failure"
and go to bed with 200 mg/ml, I don’t need any shots because I’ll wake up
at 90-100 mg/ml.
Never had a C-Peptide test. I’ve mentioned it to my endo, he says " I
obviously have a fairly decent insulin production at the moment, so it
isn’t sensitive enough to tell anything." He is fairly up to speed on
most things, but I don’t think that might include C-peptide tests.
What do you think? Slow progression to type I? Type II? Type 4.7?
Should I just wait to see what happens, or press for more tests?
Any thoughts appreciated.
bh
..
>What do you think? Slow progression to type I? Type II? Type 4.7?
>Should I just wait to see what happens, or press for more tests?
>Any thoughts appreciated.
>bh
I have two children with diabetes.( age 6 and 7) The older one has had
none of her own insulin (or not enough to notice) for the 6 years she
has been on insulin.
I discovered the high blood sugar level in the younger one prior to
any symptoms and the early treatment seemed to preserve some insulin
production. His blood sugar levels were closer to normal and he needed
less insulin than his sister did at the same age.
After 4 years he now takes close to the same amount of insulin as his
sister and has the same challenges to maintain good control.
Regards … James
In article <hodgeman-0901961156220…@ganymede.ahabs.wisc.edu>,
hodge…@vms2.macc.wisc.edu (Brad Hodgeman) wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Okay, since everyone is debating what disease is what, how about a little
>case study – me.
>26 yr male, diagnosed last february, at the time had fasting sugars around
>200 and post-meal around 400. Brother 4 years younger than me has been
>insulin dependent for about 7 years. I have a small spare tire, but am
>very active.
>At the time of diagnosis, my endo figured I would end up being insulin
>dependent, so I began shooting around 15 units a day, post meal and
>bedtime. Since then, my insulin requirements dropped off as expected,
>went down to zero for a few weeks, and then have cycled back a forth. One
>month I will need only a couple units R to help the peak after a meal, but
>a month later I’ll need 8-10 for the same meal. Once, I went from taking
>only a couple units a day to 20 units a day in 2 days, with no other
>diet/excercise/illness factors. I also spent 2 weeks needing a midmorning
>meal to keep my sugars above 60.
>I obviously still produce insulin – if I experience a "dietary failure"
>and go to bed with 200 mg/ml, I don’t need any shots because I’ll wake up
>at 90-100 mg/ml.
>Never had a C-Peptide test. I’ve mentioned it to my endo, he says " I
>obviously have a fairly decent insulin production at the moment, so it
>isn’t sensitive enough to tell anything." He is fairly up to speed on
>most things, but I don’t think that might include C-peptide tests.
>What do you think? Slow progression to type I? Type II? Type 4.7?
>Should I just wait to see what happens, or press for more tests?
>Any thoughts appreciated.
>bh
Almost certainly slowly evolving type 1 diabetes (i.e. incomplete loss of
insulin production at this point). Routine C-peptide tests are not sensitive
enough to differentiate type 1 vs. 2. Your best bet is to have your MD send
blood for anti-islet cell antibody testing which is the best marker for
autoimmmune (i.e. true type 1 diabetes) but is still only 80-90% sensitive
unless sent to a research lab (eg Gainesville).
Good luck,
RS