Room For All

[Mendalla]

My latest A1C was 7.2 which is not ideal but still pretty good. The latest thinking is that we should not be getting lows AT ALL & I see no way on my current regime to get the A1C down any further.

The American College of Physicians has actually relaxed their A1C guidelines but no one here has followed suit as of yet. They are saying that 7-8 may not need treatment depending on circumstances and goals and if someone on meds gets down to 6.5, it's time to look a backing off on the meds. There's a lot more to it than that, but that's the gist of some of it. I was 6.3 on my last A1c (c. 3 weeks ago), which was also my first on metformin, and the local diabetes clinic (my doctor referred me in like February and I didn't get in until last week) basically said, "You don't need our help. Call us when you do."

 

[paradox3]

Would agree @Mendalla. If you are achieving an A1C of 6.3 with lifestyle management and a little metformin you are doing great!

 

[paradox3]

The American College of Physicians has actually relaxed their A1C guidelines but no one here has followed suit as of yet.

My GP was telling me he is happy with A1C's of 8 or so in the elderly (he didn't mean me, ha ha). Especially if the individuals are prone to hypoglycemia. Lows are being shown to be dangerous in both the short term (we knew this already) and the long term.

 

[paradox3]

G.P. also told me the thinking is changing about putting Type 2's on insulin so quickly. Because insulin promotes weight gain it sometimes makes the problem worse. The diabetic clinic I went to years ago was quite aggressive about recommending insulin earlier rather than later.

 

[Luce NDs]

So much of the news seems to get sensationalized these days.

Totally sensationalized and slipping from sensibility? Such is oily garch eh! That (g) dark arch ... carried off by the riders in the night ... Geist's? Those with only phantom thoughts ... all within de bell curve!

 

[Mendalla]

My GP was telling me he is happy with A1C's of 8 or so in the elderly (he didn't mean me, ha ha). Especially if the individuals are prone to hypoglycemia. Lows are being shown to be dangerous in both the short term (we knew this already) and the long term.

One thing that they really pushed in the new guidelines stateside was that if a senior has other conditions that are more serious or that will likely kill them before diabetic complications do, then the goal should be mitigating the complications rather than trying to fight for a lower A1C. Basically if the side effects are going to be a greater risk for the patient than a higher A1C, opt for the higher A1C. Which likely ties into what your GP said about insulin.

 

[Luce NDs]

Doctor rushed to treat my younger sister with statins and insulin ... because of family history. When the forensics were done she was found plugged full of cholesterol related material ... even though her glycosides and fatty material was limited.

Causes me to scratch head ...

 

[Mendalla]

Doctor rushed to treat my younger sister with statins and insulin ... because of family history.

Docs sometimes overreact to history these days, though there is good reason in some cases. I have an appalling family history on my mother's side (all died young due to heart conditions) but so far, my doctor just watches my ticker like a hawk. Annual ECG, checks lipids regularly, a couple consultations with cardiologists that came up negative. I'm pretty much convinced I'm taking after Dad's side where heart is concerned. His mother had heart problems (double bypass, IIRC) but he and his father both had good hearts up to the end.

 

[Luce NDs]

Docs sometimes overreact to history these days, though there is good reason in some cases. I have an appalling family history on my mother's side (all died young due to heart conditions) but so far, my doctor just watches my ticker like a hawk. Annual ECG, checks lipids regularly, a couple consultations with cardiologists that came up negative. I'm pretty much convinced I'm taking after Dad's side where heart is concerned. His mother had heart problems (double bypass, IIRC) but he and his father both had good hearts up to the end.

My dad said we escaped it due to heartless ness ... some woman from the past told him that! He was quite a cold appearance ... although my late sister stated he was a soft chit under it all ... appearances?

I have an aortic congenital defect that my GP feels in non-critical .. and yet the Internalist says should be followed closely as it can collapse rapidly. Tis a game of cards for me ... given the difference of opinions I discover while reading medical texts on what is known ... some connections should be made ... but remain isolated.

Like body cavity infections are dangerous ... my GP believes there is no connection with mouth infections and sinus area ... although I have lost a great deal of my upper teeth due to sinus infections that seem to be false ailments of unknown connections ... thus re-X?

I remain inquisitive and this has pistis off many that say they know .. when apparently Uncertainty Theo is retained ... I go on learning ... while many professionals are stuck ... some renegade ministers express that many The o'logical Stern's remain with bs impacted at stages approximating 7-8 years of mellowing ... Nous whine?

When rye and bared will these sol's scream at what was mist in the fogs of excess desires? Possibly a' myth c'est ... the violet stones as purple ... U'V had it then ... that odd beam ... a strike in the woods 've Wotan nature ... KaLigia ... spin off of linguist, lignin bonds and chelation, critical DNA? Indu fixation on the front of business store ... banked! A hinted code as icon of something beyond ...

The human psyche fascinates me as something mystical ... kind 'a out there rite? Going deeper it gets darker .. carry a torch when trying to lighten the central domain of PTSD ... tis curios ...

 

[Seeler]

Where is @Seeler with the soup? She was planning to bring a over a pot to share in the Room.

I'm right over here in the kitchen nook, Paradox. I've got the soup simmering on the stove. Grab a bowl and help yourself. There is enough for everyone. Hambone soup with carrots, potatoes, celery, onions, canned tomatoes, etc. etc. Delicious. And no sugar.

 

[Jaebius]

I get my news from Alexa.

 

[Mendalla]

I get my news from Alexa.

Good to hear, but not sure why you're saying that here.

* helps self to some soup *

 

[Jaebius]

Good to hear, but not sure why you're saying that here.

* helps self to some soup *

In response to @BetteTheRed suggesting that the only acceptable ways to get one's news are the radio, regular TV news broadcasts (evening & late night), and newspaper.

 

[Mendalla]

In response to @BetteTheRed suggesting that the only acceptable ways to get one's news are the radio, regular TV news broadcasts (evening & late night), and newspaper.

You should have quoted her. I had to go hunting to figure out what post you meant.

And she never said anything about what was "acceptable" only "satisfactory", meaning enough to satisfy. Essentially, that she feels the constant flow of news via apps, Twitter, etc. is "too much news" and things may have been better when the flow of news was slower and less immediate. At least the post I found reads that way.

Does anyone remember the days before news channels? When you got your news in one of several satisfactory ways. Via the radio on an hourly basis. That's what I do now. Am I missing any large world crises? I don't think so. Via the "nightly news" - an hour, at 6 or at 10, when you get more detail on the stories you'd heard outlines of on the radio during the day. From a newspaper - in print then (could be on-line now), to get opinions, some of the research behind the stories, more local, or conversely, world, news than you'd get from the radio or your daily 1-hour broadcast. How was that not enough news?

 

[Jaebius]

You should have quoted her. I had to go hunting to figure out what post you meant

And she never said anything about what was "acceptable" only "satisfactory", meaning enough to satisfy. Essentially, that she feels the constant flow of news via apps, Twitter, etc. is "too much news" and things may have been better when the flow of news was slower and less immediate. At least the post I found read that way.

I disagree with her. All she can say is what is satisfactory _to_her_. I'm happy getting my news from Alexa. I sometimes tune in to other things as well of course. To each their own.

 

[Mendalla]

I disagree with her. All she can say is what is satisfactory _to_her_. I'm happy getting my news from Alexa. I sometimes tune in to other things as well of course. To each their own.

I use various apps for news. Globe & Mail, CBC, BBC plus following various new sources on Twitter (I get all my local news that way). I'm not sure @BetteTheRed is really concerned about the source of news so much as the pace of news. I'm sure she doesn't care if you watch the National on TV or in the CBC News app, her concern is more that she feels getting your news once a day with a few updates in between is enough and that the constant flow of news that apps provide is actually doing more harm than good by putting news out there before details are really known accurately or sufficiently.

 

[Jaebius]

I use various apps for news. Globe & Mail, CBC, BBC plus following various new sources on Twitter (I get all my local news that way). I'm not sure @BetteTheRed is really concerned about the source of news so much as the pace of news. I'm sure she doesn't care if you watch the National on TV or in the CBC News app, her concern is more that she feels getting your news once a day with a few updates in between is enough and that the constant flow of news that apps provide is actually doing more harm than good by putting news out there before details are really known accurately or sufficiently.

So again, though, who is @BetteTheRed to say that for anyone beyond herself? She may choose to update herself once a day and feel that's fine. However, others may choose to do so more regularly, and that's fine too. Some people, it seems, want to lay down the rules not only for themselves but for everyone else too. I see a better way - let each one choose for themselves.

 

[Mendalla]

So again, though, who is @BetteTheRed to say that for anyone beyond herself? She may choose to update herself once a day and feel that's fine. However, others may choose to do so more regularly, and that's fine too. Some people, it seems, want to lay down the rules not only for themselves but for everyone else too. I see a better way - let each one choose for themselves.

She expressed an opinion, Jae. She's allowed to do that. If you can go on about the superiority of Second Cup, she is certainly allowed to wax nostalgic about how news was better in the heyday of radio and TV.

 

[Jaebius]

She expressed an opinion, Jae. She's allowed to do that. If you can go on about the superiority of Second Cup, she is certainly allowed to wax nostalgic about how news was better in the heyday of radio and TV.

Sorry Mendalla, but I disagree. Imho, it's fine for her to say what's satisfactory for her. It is not up to her, though, to say what's satisfactory for anyone else.

 

[Mendalla]

Sorry Mendalla, but I disagree. Imho, it's fine for her to say what's satisfactory for her. It is not up to her, though, to say what's satisfactory for anyone else.

It's fine for you to say what coffee is satisfactory for you but it's not up to you to say what coffee is satisfactory for anyone else. End of discussion since we're in Room for All and it's not the place for dealing with this.