A1C’s and what’s causal…
Morning,
I’ve got time for one more, hope nobody minds terribly??? I realize I’ve asked before but my email system was ummmmmm, played with Tuesday night….. some files are gone (:: ( My question:
At what point does one’s A1C number become directly causal of problems. For example, we’re all been bashed over the head with the DCCT trial information big-time, one assumes? The more we control the sugars the “better off” in general. We’ve seen the studies which say for every point you bring the A1C down the better off… again no magic. (Provided we don’t go crazy over controlling it….)
If you can bring it down with ease, fine. But at what point does making ourselves ~insano~ cancel out the benefits (I.e. When does bringing it down become instead a control-freak thing?) ? The required efforts canceling out the reduction whether great or small?
Any of the research out here pointing to the continuous time requirements my A1C must be X, to guarantee impotence? To guarantee kidney failure, foot problems, eye problems? When does the A1C just become a number we’d all like lower, versus guaranteed 100% certain, cause and effect… (I.e. I’m toast its back at 8.5 (or whatever) for the second time in 15 years say and therefore that means…. I don’t know that I can be confidant my toes will tingle… in 10 years because of that)?
I can’t remember what conclusions, perspectives we might have come to… but would like to rehash it just for a brief time, please.
Jeff (Back to work I go…)
March 10th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Good afternoon, Jeff.
I have read a lot of reports, statistics and such…….it still is determined by what the individual does with their diabetes once diagnosed. The last I heard from a dr. is the jury is still out on just when exactly complications set in. Common sense it seems to me would tell the average person that the least control they maintain, would easily factor into the sooner the complications. But…….very many people do not know that there are other diseases that mimic the same complications and are often overlooked when diabetic and complaining of symptoms. This happened to me, I’ve been diabetic a long time so when I lost feeling in feet per the electric shock feeling, tingling in 95, it was blamed on the diabetes. Only when I was diagnosed with a nerve damaged bladder 3 years ago that further exploration proved them wrong due to the fact that I have Cervical Spondylosis. CS destroys nerves just like diabetes. A friend of mine was diagnosed with CS and she has only been a
Type 2 for two years. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two????? My first words to her were to see a urologist to make sure her bladder is working properly. I knew many Type 1’s that lived into their 70’s - 80’s without complications. Most of the patients I had died from pneumonia but their death cert. or obituary always read “death due to diabetic complications”. I believe it depends on the person’s life plan dealing with the disease and that no statistic is going to prove otherwise, simply because every T-1 cannot be monitored on the earth to give us the percentage we would need to substantiate the time frame.
Take care,
Carol
Morning,
I’ve got time for one more, hope nobody minds terribly??? I realize I’ve asked before but my email system was ummmmmm, played with Tuesday night….. some files are gone (:: ( My question:
At what point does one’s A1C number become directly causal of problems. For example, we’re all been bashed over the head with the DCCT trial information big-time, one assumes? The more we control the sugars the “better off” in general. We’ve seen the studies which say for every point you bring the A1C down the better off… again no magic. (Provided we don’t go crazy over controlling it….)
If you can bring it down with ease, fine. But at what point does making ourselves ~insano~ cancel out the benefits (I.e. When does bringing it down become instead a control-freak thing?) ? The required efforts canceling out the reduction whether great or small?
Any of the research out here pointing to the continuous time requirements my A1C must be X, to guarantee impotence? To guarantee kidney failure, foot problems, eye problems? When does the A1C just become a number we’d all like lower, versus guaranteed 100% certain, cause and effect… (I.e. I’m toast its back at 8.5 (or whatever) for the second time in 15 years say and therefore that means…. I don’t know that I can be confidant my toes will tingle… in 10 years because of that)?
I can’t remember what conclusions, perspectives we might have come to… but would like to rehash it just for a brief time, please.
Jeff (Back to work I go…)