Looking Past Blood Sugar

Who is Gina Kolata? And as Bernard so kindly pointed out this morning, why didn’t she do her homework and at least mention our book, which had the scoop on the five other key factors that influence your health with diabetes long before she touted them in today’s New York Times? Ugh.

Good article otherwise, however. The point being that many doctors don’t explain clearly how to look after your health with diabetes beyond using a blood sugar meter. “Like many diabetes patients, Mr. Smith ended up paying the price for his misconceptions about diabetes…”

Watch the news clip HERE (it’s practically an ad for our book).

So Gina, here’s the handbook patients could really use:


Just a reminder that this book not only explains the five factors you need to monitor, but actually presents you with action plans to bring them back in range:

• hemoglobin A1c (average blood glucose levels)

• blood pressure (indicating heart health)

• lipid profile (cholesterol and triglycerides)

• microalbumin (demonstrating kidney damage)

• annual eye exam

But don’t take my word for it. Read more about the book at About.com.


In other Monday news, kindly consider voting for DiabetesMine.com as best health blog in the Bloggers’ Choice Awards. It’s just a click on a stick HERE :) Thanks!


9 Responses

  1. N=1
    N=1 August 20, 2007 at 7:34 am | | Reply

    Exactly. Which is why I emailed her with the same message. I also added that she failed to speak to the partnerships that are essential to successful management – those between people diagnosed with diabetes and their physicians, nurses (diabetic educators) and dietitians.

    I hope this beings you more traffic and that the NYT will get on the stick about including patients and nurses in healthcare reportage.

  2. riva
    riva August 20, 2007 at 10:50 am | | Reply

    As you know, Amy, I fully support your book, and this article could have used it. But here’s another sore point I have with the article. She separates blood sugar control out, saying it has little to do with the other maladies of diabetes like heart attacks, that’s fine, but she never said tight blood sugar control helps reduce the risk of all these other problems. So, while we need to look at the 5 numbers, it doesn’t negate how important tight control is. A point I don’t think she made at all.


  3. Vicki
    Vicki August 20, 2007 at 4:21 pm | | Reply

    I read that article. I was very interested in the sentence that

    “Most people who have diabetes
    are treated by primary care doctors who had just a few hours of instruction on diabetes, while they were in medical school.”

    Clearly, doctors need a LOT more instruction about diabetes in medical school!

  4. Lauren
    Lauren August 20, 2007 at 7:33 pm | | Reply

    What about the greatest miracle “drug” of all, EXERCISE??? Why not try a serious fitness regimen first and foremost? Even if regular exercise won’t make everyone skinny, it can help make everyone healthier. In my opinion exercise is the #1 thing that should be prescribed to any patient who is capable of engaging in physical activity.

    I don’t think partnerships with nurses, diabetes educators, even endocrinologists are necessary aspects of diabetes management. At the end of the day, it’s between you and your diabetes. I have to find what works for me. There’s no way my schedule will ever permit me to eat 3 meals and 3 snacks a day, and exercise in the morning rather than the evening, even though this is what’s “recommended.” I can’t live my life according to the educator’s diabetes manual. I wish more educators could understand the importance of flexibility. PWD’s don’t just have diabetes, we also have lives.

  5. mollyjade
    mollyjade August 21, 2007 at 7:29 am | | Reply

    But that’s exactly what a good partnership with your healthcare team should be. They should help you come up with flexible solutions when the standard ones don’t work.

  6. Melitta
    Melitta August 21, 2007 at 1:04 pm | | Reply

    Actually, there were A LOT of flaws and inaccuracies in that article. Some of the same old tired wrong information was presented as fact (90-95% of diabetes is Type 2, Type 2′s insulin production decreases with time, not all Type 2′s are overweight). The actual facts are that if you include slow-onset autoimmune diabetes in adults (slow onset Type 1), then 75% have Type 2 and 25% have autoimmune diabetes. If you take the slow onset Type 1 diabetics OUT OF the population of Type 2′s, then a 12 year study of insulin production in true Type 2′s showed no decline in insulin production. And if you take those thin slow onset Type 1′s out of the Type 2 numbers, then almost 100% of Type 2 diabetics are overweight or obese. It is time to debunk the tired old myths.

  7. Nicholas Dynes Gracey
    Nicholas Dynes Gracey August 23, 2007 at 4:50 am | | Reply

    Hi Amy Tenderich, Gina Kolata, Riva, Vicki, Lauren, mollyjade, Melitta (?) and Anyone else who appears to be advocating statin drugs and/or is apparently other than aware of Jeff Cable’s petition for a worldwide investigation into statins…


    “They’re all going on a statin holiday…”

    By Dr James Le Fanu, Sunday Telegraph SUN.03.JUN.2007…

    “Second Opinion”

    Back in March, regular readers may recall, I described the case of Roger Andrews, saved from decrepitude by a three-week holiday for his son’s wedding in Hawaii. He needed a wheelchair at the transfer stops on the way out but was able to skip (almost) through passport control on the way back – a transformation he attributed to having forgotten to pack his cholesterol-lowering statin drugs.

    His story struck a most resonant chord, with several hundred readers (and friends to whom they passed my column) recounting their own variations on the same theme.

    Statins have been around for 20 years and no doubt have reduced the risk of heart trouble in many with markedly raised cholesterol levels. But prescribing them indiscriminately, with all its serious consequences, is a relatively new phenomenon whose origins can be pinpointed to July 6, 2002, and the publication in The Lancet of the Heart Protection Study.

    This investigation of the value of statins in a large group “at risk” of heart disease revealed substantial benefits to all, irrespective of their cholesterol levels. “This stunning result,” commented the organiser, Prof Rory Collins, of Oxford University, “has massive implications” – with the potential to save 1,000 lives a week.

    These extravagant claims, based on statistical extrapolation, are always suspect, concealing here a trivial absolute benefit of a mere 1.7 per cent increase in the chances of survival over a five-year period. But the message was clear enough. Doctors no longer need use their clinical judgment on whether statins are appropriate – they should be prescribed routinely.

    Over the past 10 weeks, many readers at the receiving end of this policy have taken up my suggestion of giving their statins a rest, with results illustrated by the experience of Mary Anderson from Kent. Her cardiologist prescribed statins after a small heart attack at 68, since when she’s been troubled by insomnia, chronic tiredness, thinning hair, muscle weakness, unhealing itchy rashes, memory loss and loss of her skill in creative writing – all of which she (reasonably) attributed to “getting on”.

    Since the start of her statin holiday a month ago, she sleeps well, with greatly increased energy, her rashes have cleared, her hair has regained its lift, her memory has improved and her writing skills returned. Her family doctor, she says, is “amazed”. Those interested should read Dr Malcolm Kendrick’s witty The Great Cholesterol Con (ISBN 978-1-84454-360-1).



    When You read Dr Kendrick’s ‘cholesterol con book’ You should quickly understand that … statins BLOCK the production of cholesterol in your brain [starving brain function] and BLOCK the production of co-enzyme Q10 in your heart & other muscles [draining muscle fibre strength]…

    also … please discuss this statin research with your medical Advisors… awareness of: (a) the documented {Golomb BA, et al. Severe irritability associated with statin cholesterol-lowering drugs. Quarterly Journal of Medicine, 2004;97:229-235}; and (b) traumatic psychological side effects of statins {Hyyppa MT, et al. Does simvastatin affect mood and steroid hormone levels in randomized double-blind trial. Psychoneuroendocrinology, Feb,2003;28(2):181-19} including homicidal & suicidal impulses, threats to others, road rage, generation of fear in family members; and (c) the fact that statins factually cause the artery lumen to NARROW…

    Please study the PICTURES of the alleged ‘artery sclerosis’ in the following 2 sources and comment on the integrity of what is being propagated about statins as the ‘alleged truth’ in the global media … including the BBC…

    (A) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4800772.stm [note the drawings with the alleged wider arteries].


    (B) http://www.jpands.org/vol12no1/kauffman.pdf [note the real photos with the actual narrower arteries].

    … and after comparing the BBC drawings with the original research pictures … see what happened, in real life, to a real life genuine Guy … in the UK … please study/watch all of this short 6-7 minute video…


    and please note…


    Eat Less Often … specifically … Eat JUST clean water [zero % carbohydrate] between meals & eat ONLY when your blood glucose level, following your previous eat, has NATURALLY reduced to your chosen baseline blood glucose level [eg as related to the relative fuel demands of your particular activity level] and maintaining this habit, of ‘supply & demand’ glucose control, makes your prevention, of diabetes mellitus, sustainable.

    …Warm thanks; Nick Dynes Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian c/o http://www.DiabetesMine.com @ 12:27hrs THU.23.AUG.2007.

    ps… Diabetes Is Caused By Food And Or Drug Administration Too Much And Or Too Often.


    pps… FOR MORE related info please follow the links via…









    ppps… Diabetes is NOT a disease … diabetes is the CURE [for relative HYPOglycaemia].

    Harry M Salzer @ January 1966 @ Vol 58 @ Number 1 @ “Relative Hypoglycemia As A Cause Of Neuropsychiatric Illness”

  8. AmyT
    AmyT August 23, 2007 at 7:21 am | | Reply

    Yikes, Nicolas, please post just the link next time instead of the whole story.

    Meanwhile, please see this:

  9. Nicholas Dynes Gracey
    Nicholas Dynes Gracey August 24, 2007 at 2:34 pm | | Reply

    Hi AmyT, Yes, BUT the whole story has been hidden for so long.

    Moreover, please see these…




    Warm thanks; Nick

Leave a Reply