Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
goodheart |
I used to be in charge of preventive medicine guidelines for a very large multi specialty group practices in California. We spent a great deal of time and effort examining the scientific evidence of benefit vs harm of many medical interventions designed to prevent illness. It turned out that only a few were clearly beneficial compared with the harm (anxiety and financial cost of being a “patient”). Every time we read of new guidelines that suggest that a larger and larger percent of the population needs to be treated for some condition, we should be skeptical. How many people need to be treated to prevent death or severe illness from that condition? 10? 100? 1000? These numbers are rarely published or publicized. Here is a long but interesting article from Science Magazine that raises serious questions about the push to put people with “prediabetes” on metformin, a diabetes drug. It confirms what I have suspected: the benefits are questionable for those not at very high risk for developing diabetes, and unproven at that.
Link _________________________ “Remember, remember the fifth of November!" | ||
|
Member |
Thanks for posting. I am fortunate that my physician understands the "work" of being a patient. Controlling blood pressure to the point where the patient feels terrible all the time could be another example. The guidelines seem to be lowered all of the time. JMHO | |||
|
We gonna get some oojima in this house! |
Prediabetes is the most treatable "disease" there is with diet, because it is caused by diet. I'm learning about insulin response, resistance, blood sugar etc. The food pyramid needs to be reversed. When that happens, a lot of metabolic diseases will go away. ----------------------------------------------------------- TCB all the time... | |||
|
Baroque Bloke |
I consume little sugar – easy for me since I don’t have a sweet tooth. And lots of fiber in my diet. Serious about crackers | |||
|
Staring back from the abyss |
Been saying it for years. Not 10-12 years ago, normal BG was 120ish and a normal A1C was 7.0. Now they are 100 and 5.7. What has this accomplished? Thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of healthy people are being treated for a condition for which they don't have. LDLs are another one. I know cardiologists who aggressively treat anyone over a value of 70. Ridiculous IMO. ________________________________________________________ "Great danger lies in the notion that we can reason with evil." Doug Patton. | |||
|
Member |
I think the point is that it is "caused" by the lowering of target numbers. No one has ever lost their eyesight or a finger/toe at a FBG of 105, yet that makes one "pre-diabetic". The diagnosis should not even exist. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |