Re: Meds.

[Guest guest]

<< I exercise at least 30 minutes at least five days a week >>

What kind of exercise do you do? My main form of exercise is walking and I

did not get any results until I upped it from 30 minutes 3 to 5 times a week

to literally everyday for 45 minutes to an hour. It made a real difference

for me. I would miss maybe a day or 3 a month. My legs have gotten really

strong. I still seem to be sporting quite the big belly though. I guess that

is from the high sugar. I am really good about my walking but I just can't

motivate myself to do a sit up or a push up.

<<I still need to lose quite a bit of weight that appears NOT

to be inclined

to go anywhere.>>

Me too.

[Guest guest]

Sam,

First of all, my garlic bread is a very thin slice of whole wheat bread with a

bit of butter mixed with crushed garlic spread on it and then toasted under the

broiler. Secondly, the entire point of my post was that you were taking that out

of context. You didn't know the portions, how it fit into the whole day, or

anything else. You were making assumptions, as you tend to do. You were also

putting it into the context of YOUR way of eating and treating diabetes. THAT's

why I said you were being an ass. My last HbA1c was 5.4. What was yours?

Teri.

Re: Meds.

Teri, I see postings from peoplee wwho have reduced their carbs and lost

weight. I don't know what your garlic bread looks like, but i seem to

see it as loaded with carbs and fat. Sam

tteri said, among other things...

I exercise at least 30 minutes at least five days a week and eat

properly yet I still need to lose quite a bit of weight that appears NOT

to be inclined

to go anywhere.

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Hi, .

I have 15 minutes of stretching exercises that I don't count. Then I do at least

30 minutes of treadmill walking. With the arthritis I have, 30 consecutive

minutes is all I can handle for now. Well, some days, I can stretch it a bit.

When I can, I do. Some days, I can also get in a second session of 15 or 20

minutes and some more stretches. I never do the walking without warm-up

stretches and then a few minutes of slowly walking around the room to cool off

the muscles, too. Thanks for your suggestion. I'll keep working on increasing.

Teri

Re: Meds.

<< I exercise at least 30 minutes at least five days a week >>

What kind of exercise do you do? My main form of exercise is walking and I

did not get any results until I upped it from 30 minutes 3 to 5 times a week

to literally everyday for 45 minutes to an hour. It made a real difference

for me. I would miss maybe a day or 3 a month. My legs have gotten really

strong. I still seem to be sporting quite the big belly though. I guess that

is from the high sugar. I am really good about my walking but I just can't

motivate myself to do a sit up or a push up.

<<I still need to lose quite a bit of weight that appears NOT

to be inclined

to go anywhere.>>

Me too.

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

\a1c most recent 6.0, and yes that weight is in front of me. sam

[Guest guest]

Sam:

How could you say someone with diabetes is an onlooker? Seems like you have

no compassion for your fellow diabetic. I would think that you joined this

list to get and give helpful information not to put down others.

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Sam, gotta giggle at that. Being " half diabetic " is like being " half

pregnant " . Yes, Teri's may have been caught early but that doesn' t make it

less real. Mine was caught early too and here I am on insulin, even with low

carbing and exercise. Vicki

In a message dated 00-11-09 23:20:25 EST, you write:

<< eri, I think our conflict comes from the fact that you are about half

diabetic. When I went for a glucose tolerance test, my fasting was 200.

As I understand it, you have never had serious high sugars, yours were

caught early and you have had no serious consequences, and do well on

more carbs than the rest of us.

I represent those that have had a serious bout with high sugars, and do

need greater carbohydrate restriction than you may. It does not make me

wrong, it is that your viewpoint is that of an onlooker, rather than

those in the trenches. sam

>>

[Guest guest]

Okay, Sam n' Teri, time to mellow out! We have to remember...everyone's

body is different; everyone reacts differently. It's the ol' YMMV. We're

telling people what works for us as individuals. They can make their own

conclusions. :-) Vicki

[Guest guest]

Just personal experience, cereals make me go high. So does bread, pasta,

rice, etc. I love 'em all but they don't love me, darnit. . Teri, I envy

you (and anyone else on the list) that can still eat that stuff. I can't.

(sigh). Vicki

[Guest guest]

Sam, my reason for asking A1c levels is that I believe my WOE works for me if I

can maintain an A1c of 5.4. Yours is working for you, too.

Re: Meds.

\a1c most recent 6.0, and yes that weight is in front of me. sam

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Teri, I think our conflict comes from the fact that you are about half

diabetic. When I went for a glucose tolerance test, my fasting was 200.

As I understand it, you have never had serious high sugars, yours were

caught early and you have had no serious consequences, and do well on

more carbs than the rest of us.

I represent those that have had a serious bout with high sugars, and do

need greater carbohydrate restriction than you may. It does not make me

wrong, it is that your viewpoint is that of an onlooker, rather than

those in the trenches. sam

[Guest guest]

Sam,

That's a statement that could cause people who don't know better serious

problems. There's no such thing as about half a diabetic. You either are or

aren't. Now, I'll give you the fact that I was diagnosed early, have never had

complications, and have not had seriously high glucose levels.

Nonetheless, I have glaucoma, diagnosed before I had diabetes. If I let my

diabetes slip, I could end up blind. My father DIED at the age of 59 from not

controlling his diabetes. No, Sam, people are either diabetic or not, and they

can't afford to play around saying they're about half diabetic. That leads them

to take it about half seriously. STATEMENTS LIKE THAT ARE DANGEROUS SAM, AND

YOU'RE DANGEROUS WHEN YOU PERSIST IN MAKING THEM!

I also argue with you on statements such as the one you made the other day that

ALL breakfast cereals are out for everyone. I argue with everyone who says that

and you know it.

What the hell do you think I do, pig out on carbs all the time? The meal you

quoted back to me was quite a balanced meal, and even though it included a few

carbs, I doubt that the count was very high., A thin slice of garlic bread and

1/2 cup of pasta doesn't constitute a feast of carbs, but it was a balanced meal

with grains, vegetables, protein, dairy, and fruit.

Re: Meds.

Teri, I think our conflict comes from the fact that you are about half

diabetic. When I went for a glucose tolerance test, my fasting was 200.

As I understand it, you have never had serious high sugars, yours were

caught early and you have had no serious consequences, and do well on

more carbs than the rest of us.

I represent those that have had a serious bout with high sugars, and do

need greater carbohydrate restriction than you may. It does not make me

wrong, it is that your viewpoint is that of an onlooker, rather than

those in the trenches. sam

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Explain to me what is dangerous about warning people off breakfast

cereals. When someone is reporting very high sugars they need to know

what steps to take. Your saying that isn't true, or is dangerous is in

itself dangerous. I have written personally to over 400 people about my

experience with starches, and the feedback has been largely approving,

and the results good. What good do you do by saying that reasonable,

need advice is wrong, or dangerous. These people need help from people

who have been there, you haven't.

Your type A personality is going to get you a heart attack. Calm down.

Sam

[Guest guest]

, I did nt join this group to get basic information on diabetic

control, been there done that. I want to give them basic guidance to get

in control. I personally deplore the idea thatr people can eat as they

have been and keep adding medication to gain control. I know it's the

American way, have an ill take a pill. That adds up to big drug bills.

Sam

[Guest guest]

Sam, I am calm. Are you a psychologist as well as an endocrinologist now telling

me I'm a type a personality going to have a heart attack? You're being an ass

again. I'm telling you it isn't true for everyone that every breakfast cereal

has to be off limits. I'd be willing to bet that there are at least a couple of

other list members who can eat small servings of some kind of breakfast cereals.

I don't give a shit if you've personally written to four THOUSAND people. When

you make such sweeping generalizations, you're out of line.

Re: Meds.

Explain to me what is dangerous about warning people off breakfast

cereals. When someone is reporting very high sugars they need to know

what steps to take. Your saying that isn't true, or is dangerous is in

itself dangerous. I have written personally to over 400 people about my

experience with starches, and the feedback has been largely approving,

and the results good. What good do you do by saying that reasonable,

need advice is wrong, or dangerous. These people need help from people

who have been there, you haven't.

Your type A personality is going to get you a heart attack. Calm down.

Sam

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

BTW, Sam, I said that saying someone could be half a diabetic was dangerous. I

said I disagreed with you about breakfast cereals, and that making such sweeping

generalizations was out of line. Big difference.

Re: Meds.

Explain to me what is dangerous about warning people off breakfast

cereals. When someone is reporting very high sugars they need to know

what steps to take. Your saying that isn't true, or is dangerous is in

itself dangerous. I have written personally to over 400 people about my

experience with starches, and the feedback has been largely approving,

and the results good. What good do you do by saying that reasonable,

need advice is wrong, or dangerous. These people need help from people

who have been there, you haven't.

Your type A personality is going to get you a heart attack. Calm down.

Sam

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

Yes, but you said it was dangerous to warn people off breakfast cereals,

is it really dangerous? Or do you just disagree? To say something is

dangerous it must be, not just something you disagree with. I still hold

that you are not a mainstream diabetic, and your advice to them is most

likely wrong and dangerous. Sam

[Guest guest]

Vicki, there are clearly a wide range of diabetic conditions. I always

felt that for a type 2 to use insulin is a case of the failure of

dietary control. I don't know what you mean by early, I mean that Teri

is not a serious diabetic. Not carb sensitive etc. Yet she feels that

only her advice can be true, and all other attitudes are dangerous. Is

that real?

[Guest guest]

Damn it to hell, Sam. Learn to read. I did not say it was dangerous to warn

people off breakfast cereals.

Re: Meds.

Yes, but you said it was dangerous to warn people off breakfast cereals,

is it really dangerous? Or do you just disagree? To say something is

dangerous it must be, not just something you disagree with. I still hold

that you are not a mainstream diabetic, and your advice to them is most

likely wrong and dangerous. Sam

eGroups Sponsor

Public website for Diabetes International:

http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

[Guest guest]

> I must say that I disagree with the

> " half a diabetic " comment. Come on,

> you either have it or you don't.

If that statement was true, , then diabetes would be easy to

diagnose but it is not. Hyperglycemia is a continuum and does not

have an absolute threshold but an arbitrary one. Between

normoglycemia and hyperglycemia is a band known as " impaired glucose

tolerance " or " impaired fasting glucose " . Those people are not yet

diabetic according to the currently accepted diagnostic criteria and

yet are manifestly not normoglycemic. So " half a diabetic " is not a

particularly bad non-medical description for them - they fulfil half

the diagnostic criteria but not all of them.

Additionally, there is epidemiological evidence that retinopathy

begins to develop at least seven years before the clinical diagnosis

of Type 2 diabetes is made [1]. So the description " half a diabetic "

could reasonably be applied to people who in retrospect had diabetes

before they fulfilled the criteria for a secure diagnosis of the

disease. In effect, they had it but they didn't have it, i.e. they

half had it.

In any event, , your claim that " you either have it or you

don't " is not supported by the literature.

[1] , M.I.: " Undiagnosed NIDDM: clinical and public health

issues. " 16 Diabetes Care (1993) 642-652

[Guest guest]

Half diabetic... I have also heard the term type 1 1/2 used loosely to

describe diabetics that are nearly type 1, IDDM, but still have some

self generated insulin. I knew one lady that took about 3 Units of

insulin a day, and insisted she was type 1, she cycled everywhere she

went, hardbodied lean muscular type. Sam

[Guest guest]

> I suppose I must have been different then,

> because I wanted to know everything immediately!

> So I got right on the internet and starting

> doing research. But that's me.

I am very happy for you, - but I hope you didn't overlook my

point that it just is not all there on the Internet at the moment.

Some is, but a lot of the basic stuff you can find best in the

textbooks.

> I wonder what that says about doctors in

> general though. My doctor was sort of like

> that, but when I moved out of the area, I

> found an endocrinologist who is very patient

> with my questions. So that worked out for me,

> because I have many questions!

OK, so far, so good. You might want to shop around if you get

problems in any other parts, though. They seem to be specializing so

much these days that if you turn up with a complaint in one of the

bits that your man hasn't studied for a while, you might be left in

the dark.

My present guy is an internist and very enthusiastic. If I ask him

questions he just takes the appropriate textbook from his shelf and

tells me to go read that and come back to him if I have any more

qustions. The beats buying them! (I do buy the good ones). However,

internal medicine keeps him busy and I would pick somebody else if I

ever (or as soon as) I get trouble in some other part.

[Guest guest]

yes I have read a few of the textbooks, but the internet was the quickest at

first.........have done

some book research also though. by the way, my dr is a woman. lol! It seems

as though we have to

know as much or more than the drs do. I find that depressing at times but I try

to forge on.

Thornton wrote:

>

>

> > I suppose I must have been different then,

> > because I wanted to know everything immediately!

> > So I got right on the internet and starting

> > doing research. But that's me.

>

> I am very happy for you, - but I hope you didn't overlook my

> point that it just is not all there on the Internet at the moment.

> Some is, but a lot of the basic stuff you can find best in the

> textbooks.

>

> > I wonder what that says about doctors in

> > general though. My doctor was sort of like

> > that, but when I moved out of the area, I

> > found an endocrinologist who is very patient

> > with my questions. So that worked out for me,

> > because I have many questions!

>

> OK, so far, so good. You might want to shop around if you get

> problems in any other parts, though. They seem to be specializing so

> much these days that if you turn up with a complaint in one of the

> bits that your man hasn't studied for a while, you might be left in

> the dark.

>

> My present guy is an internist and very enthusiastic. If I ask him

> questions he just takes the appropriate textbook from his shelf and

> tells me to go read that and come back to him if I have any more

> qustions. The beats buying them! (I do buy the good ones). However,

> internal medicine keeps him busy and I would pick somebody else if I

> ever (or as soon as) I get trouble in some other part.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> eGroups Sponsor

>

> Public website for Diabetes International:

> http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> hmmmmmm if you are so against email

> chit chat as you call it, why then are

> you a member of this group and continue

> your emails?

Oh dear! I am NOT against e-mail chit-chat - I just wouldn't rely on

it for collecting facts or learning the basics.

Getting good tips, yes. Getting moral support - you bet. Getting the

opinion of my peers - that too. But it would be foolish of me to

expect traceability or accuracy from an e-mail exchange and I don't.

And it would be equally foolish of me to expect moral support or

sympathy from the white coats or from a pile of books! Everybody has

a place in this world, I guess.

I owe my present motivation to this group. Without them, I could

easily have gone under a long time ago. I don't tell the half of it -

we would be in real trouble if everybody poured their hearts out on

line.

As is often the case, the person who gets the greatest benefit from

my contributions is me - it doesn't matter if nobody reads my

postings - they help me to get my ideas in order, but I do appreciate

the comments I get back, they make it worth while taking the trouble.

[Guest guest]

ok then. Why didn't you just say so? hehehe If I may ask how long have

you had diabetes and

what meds etc are you on?

Thornton wrote:

>

>

> > hmmmmmm if you are so against email

> > chit chat as you call it, why then are

> > you a member of this group and continue

> > your emails?

>

> Oh dear! I am NOT against e-mail chit-chat - I just wouldn't rely on

> it for collecting facts or learning the basics.

>

> Getting good tips, yes. Getting moral support - you bet. Getting the

> opinion of my peers - that too. But it would be foolish of me to

> expect traceability or accuracy from an e-mail exchange and I don't.

> And it would be equally foolish of me to expect moral support or

> sympathy from the white coats or from a pile of books! Everybody has

> a place in this world, I guess.

>

> I owe my present motivation to this group. Without them, I could

> easily have gone under a long time ago. I don't tell the half of it -

> we would be in real trouble if everybody poured their hearts out on

> line.

>

> As is often the case, the person who gets the greatest benefit from

> my contributions is me - it doesn't matter if nobody reads my

> postings - they help me to get my ideas in order, but I do appreciate

> the comments I get back, they make it worth while taking the trouble.

>

>

>

>

>

> eGroups Sponsor

>

> Public website for Diabetes International:

> http://www.msteri.com/diabetes-info/diabetes_int

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> It seems as though we have to know as

> much or more than the drs do.

It only seems that way. And they have the big advantage of getting

clinical experience. We get it, too, but lying down.