# TV programme about Diabetes



## Lindarose (Oct 1, 2016)

Just heard there's a tv programme on BBC1 Monday called Diabetes The hidden killer. It's on at 8.30 so may be worth a watch. It's about type 2.


----------



## Stitch147 (Oct 1, 2016)

I'll have to look out for that.


----------



## Lindarose (Oct 1, 2016)

Oops sorry just seen Matts post. Sent mine straight from work without catching up on here first


----------



## Copepod (Oct 2, 2016)

Preview of Panorama programme on Mon 3 Oct 2016 here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37524488


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 2, 2016)

This thread replicates one already started under "in the News"


----------



## BBarb (Oct 2, 2016)

I didn't see the first one, so thank you for posting this.


----------



## Lindarose (Oct 2, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> This thread replicates one already started under "in the News"


Yes I realised after I sent it and apologised. More than happy for this to be deleted to avoid confusion!


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

New-journey said:


> Just watching it and heard that dietetics type one is the one you are born with! So shocked.


Hmmm.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 3, 2016)

I saw a clip on Twitter earlier and the graphic said the person had advanced Type 2!


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Did I hear right, 130 units a day?


----------



## New-journey (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> Did I hear right, 130 units a day?


Yes, that is what I heard!


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

New-journey said:


> Yes, that is what I heard!


I don't get through in a fortnight, truly shocked


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Four FOUR Weetabix, effing topped up with frosties


----------



## Redkite (Oct 3, 2016)

I wonder how much money the NHS could save if it actually educated and supported type 2 patients in managing their condition, instead of just sending them away with the instruction to "lose a bit of weight".


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 3, 2016)

This is on about half an hour later in Wales, after a program looking at the LCHF diet with Jamie Owen, which largely seems to replicate the results that many of us have on that diet. However, there is also a look at the debate on government advice, so worth a look on iplayer if you can find it. I can't criticize the diet of the guy on the show, mine was utterly atrocious, but making the changes after my diagnosis made a massive difference.

Edit - the BBC Wales show was called Fat v Carbs with Jamie Owen.


----------



## Peapod87 (Oct 3, 2016)

Omg this programme is scaring me


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> Omg this programme is scaring me


I stand up for many people, but this guy is a nurse! This certainly shows the reality of bad control.


----------



## New-journey (Oct 3, 2016)

Superheavy said:


> This is on about half an hour later in Wales, after a program looking at the LCHF diet with Jamie Owen, which largely seems to replicate the results that many of us have on that diet. However, there is also a look at the debate on government advice, so worth a look on iplayer if you can find it. I can't criticize the diet of the guy on the show, mine was utterly atrocious, but making the changes after my diagnosis made a massive difference.
> 
> Edit - the BBC Wales show was called Fat v Carbs with Jamie Owen.


Very interested in this, will look for it. Thanks.


----------



## Stitch147 (Oct 3, 2016)

Forgot it was on. Will watch it tomorrow on catch up.


----------



## New-journey (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> Omg this programme is scaring me


Me too! Wondering what to watch after to raise my spirits.


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 3, 2016)

Alas, I will probably not be able to watch it (for some reason the BBC doesn't like expats!!!)

Interesting write up in the daily mail, apparently our diet needs to change (but they didn't suggest to what)


----------



## Peapod87 (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> I stand up for many people, but this guy is a nurse! This certainly shows the reality of bad control.




I've given up watching it but who is a nurse? I saw a guy who checked his level and was like 14 something but o got scared afterwards.   x


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 3, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> Alas, I will probably not be able to watch it (for some reason the BBC doesn't like expats!!!)
> 
> Interesting write up in the daily mail, apparently our diet needs to change (but they didn't suggest to what)



Sounds like the kind of health story propaganda loved by the Mail. Google the list of things that cause cancer according to the mail, must admit it gave me a laugh.


----------



## Peapod87 (Oct 3, 2016)

New-journey said:


> Me too! Wondering what to watch after to raise my spirits.




I've stopped watching it tbh, need to remember they are trying to scare people in a way x


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> I've given up watching it but who is a nurse? I saw a guy who checked his level and was like 14 something but o got scared afterwards.   x


The Weetabix guy


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> I've stopped watching it tbh, need to remember they are trying to scare people in a way x


Its working.


----------



## New-journey (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> I've stopped watching it tbh, need to remember they are trying to scare people in a way x


Very true, wish I had turned it off!


----------



## Hazel (Oct 3, 2016)

Yet again no mention of education, so that no-one becomes overweight and then as a result, T2.

Shocking programme, no mention of the thousands who live with well controlled T2.

Really wish I had not watched it - really angry!!


----------



## New-journey (Oct 3, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Yet again no mention of education, so that no-one becomes overweight and then as a result, T2.
> 
> Shocking programme, no mention of the thousands who live with well controlled T2.
> 
> Really wish I had not watched it - really angry!!


Yes, Me too,  been reading tweets and many people are feeling the same.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> Omg this programme is scaring me


Me too Peapod...makes me more determined to manage my diabetes...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Yet again no mention of education, so that no-one becomes overweight and then as a result, T2.
> 
> Shocking programme, no mention of the thousands who live with well controlled T2.
> 
> Really wish I had not watched it - really angry!!


Yes Hazel...felt it was a very negative prospective...I had no idea I had diabetes...no typical symptoms...since diagnosis determined to manage mine...agree with you entirely...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> The Weetabix guy


Couldn't believe his breakfast...I know how difficult it is to diet...and for me the Metformin has really supressed my appetite...but come on...four Weetabix...topped up with Frosties...


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 3, 2016)

I can only agree with what other people have said about this programme being quite frightening, but only make me more determined to knock off the rest of the weight I need to lose myself and try to reverse the disease, rather than having to look at surgery or those kind of options. Have to manage this and avoid the kind of results that may come further on in my life, but I would like to make sure it doesn't for many decades to come.

For those without diabetes though, this is a programme that seems to look at the very extreme end of what can happen.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> Four FOUR Weetabix, effing topped up with frosties



The problem some (and I do stress some) T2s find on diabetes is it just compounds with their existing insulin resistance.  

Many (observationally, although I don't have any stats, sorry) T2s produce plenty of insulin, but have insulin resistance.  If they also the inject further insulin, this is often when weight piles on, then it's in upward requirement for insulin, as it becomes less and less effective.

Their bodies are insulin resistant, so more is added in an attempt to bring the numbers down,  Effectively they're being flooded in insulin.

To stress again, this isn't  how it works for everyone, but it is not uncommon for T2s on insulin to be taking otherwise "unexpectedly high" doses of insulin to make, in relative terms, a modest reduction in their bloods.  

Sadly, this is just another reason insulin therapy isn't a great solution for T2s, producing plenty of insulin themselves; particularly if they are still consuming decent levels of carbs.


----------



## happydog (Oct 3, 2016)

This programme was really scary.  It also did not give much information on the huge amount that T2's can do to improve their condition.  I found myself feeling very guilty because I have not really worked out what I did to cause this condition.  I have always been active, normal weight (even had the doctor telling me not to loose any more weight when I was diagnosed) and did not eat a lot of sweet things except maybe two pieces of fruit a day.  It does not run in our family and so I just don't know.  However trying hard not to cost the NHS a lot of money.  Do wish they would put some energy into telling people about good eating habits and be more open about the huge amount of sugar and carbs in convenience foods etc.  Couldn't we have some T2 success stories like Saving Dad instead of the frightening stuff?


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> Couldn't believe his breakfast...I know how difficult it is to diet...and for me the Metformin has really supressed my appetite...but come on...four Weetabix...topped up with Frosties...


I could go out into snow covered mountains on that, and his attitude, quoting  George Best


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

AndBreathe said:


> The problem some (and I do stress some) T2s find on diabetes is it just compounds with their existing insulin resistance.
> 
> Many (observationally, although I don't have any stats, sorry) T2s produce plenty of insulin, but have insulin resistance.  If they also the inject further insulin, this is often when weight piles on, then it's in upward requirement for insulin, as it becomes less and less effective.
> 
> ...


Nothing to do with eating that much carb on just one meal. Sorry this guy is not helping himself and comes across as if it is the fault of a high stress job  Bollards


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> I could go out into snore covered mountains on that, and his attitude, quoting  George Best


TBH Owen...bloody scared me initially...now programme has annoyed me a great deal...gave a very negative view of T2's...barely any success stories...no mention of how it can be managed effectively...and is being managed effectively...just cost cost cost ...and how much of the NHS budget we take up...I had no idea had diabetes...no typical symptoms...only diagnosed as a result of having a massive infection...wish I had not seen it...and the Weetabix man is not typical of T2's I know...feel labelled now...


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> TBH Owen...bloody scared me initially...now programme has annoyed me a great deal...gave a very negative view of T2's...barely any success stories...no mention of how it can be managed effectively...and is being managed effectively...just cost cost cost ...and how much of the NHS budget we take up...I had no idea had diabetes...no typical symptoms...only diagnosed as a result of having a massive infection...wish I had not seen it...and the Weetabix man is not typical of T2's I know...feel labelled now...


Yes now that I am reflecting, certainly new that there would be no one from this forum featured. I think I got going up on this one guy.


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 3, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> TBH Owen...bloody scared me initially...now programme has annoyed me a great deal...gave a very negative view of T2's...barely any success stories...no mention of how it can be managed effectively...and is being managed effectively...just cost cost cost ...and how much of the NHS budget we take up...I had no idea had diabetes...no typical symptoms...only diagnosed as a result of having a massive infection...wish I had not seen it...and the Weetabix man is not typical of T2's I know...feel labelled now...


That's just one thing that irritates me (G-rated version of what I think) when T2's are portrayed in a stereotypic way... overweight & it's all their fault. I had one guy on FB try & tell me I must be T1 because I'm 170lb & 6' tall....


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> That's just one thing that irritates me (G-rated version of what I think) when T2's are portrayed in a stereotypic way... overweight & it's all their fault. I had one guy on FB try & tell me I must be T1 because I'm 170lb & 6' tall....


Yes agree unequivocally Martin...ignorance is every where...and it was not a well balanced view...


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 3, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> That's just one thing that irritates me (G-rated version of what I think) when T2's are portrayed in a stereotypic way... overweight & it's all their fault. I had one guy on FB try & tell me I must be T1 because I'm 170lb & 6' tall....



It was mentioned in the programme that 9 out of 10 are overweight or obese.  They didn't say it was anyone's fault but allowed people to tell their own story.


----------



## Rosiecarmel (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> Did I hear right, 130 units a day?



I nursed someone last year that had 60u on a morning, 40u on a night then 30u with every meal. They were on the ward for three weeks and we were constantly ordering new pens! The patient was morbidly obese but was in his late 60s. The general attitude of the health professionals was there's no point trying to force lifestyle changes on them because they might as well just enjoy their life. Hardly much of a life when you're on 190u insulin a day, statins, blood pressure meds and God knows what else cocktail of medication. Quite sad, really


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 3, 2016)

Rosiecarmel said:


> I nursed someone last year that had 60u on a morning, 40u on a night then 30u with every meal. They were on the ward for three weeks and we were constantly ordering new pens! The patient was morbidly obese but was in his late 60s. The general attitude of the health professionals was there's no point trying to force lifestyle changes on them because they might as well just enjoy their life. Hardly much of a life when you're on 190u insulin a day, statins, blood pressure meds and God knows what else cocktail of medication. Quite sad, really



That was the sad thing on this programme Rosie.  The lady who lost her leg was only 56!


----------



## Ruth k (Oct 3, 2016)

I missed the first part of the programme but the rest started to annoy me. Yes , it Is OK to look at the potential life threatening side of  T2 diabetes but there should have been more on the preventative and control side. For example the importance of monitoring , what levels to aim at , types of medication and the most important, low carb diet. It focused on being overweight and needing stomach operations. Vague talk by doctor of vegetables and fruit. In the modern age why not mention the various apps to help like carb counting, fitness pal and my Sugr. Even the promotion stall the nurse focused on fats as a cause and I caught a glimpse of the dreaded food plate! What would have been a great balance for the programme would have been seeing people control their diabetes with testing and carb counting. It would have given people hope and not despair and anxiety about the complications and how much it cost the NHS.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 3, 2016)

Owen said:


> Nothing to do with eating that much carb on just one meal. Sorry this guy is not helping himself and comes across as if it is the fault of a high stress job  Bollards



I agree that the guy's diet may have been sub-optimal, but I stand fast by my assertion that, for T2s taking insulin, insulin resistance is often in play.

T2 is a very complex condition and rarely arising from one cause/trigger or having a single solution any more than simplistically just taking a shot of insulin is the solution to T1.  For several T1s I have observed, I would wager lifestyle as being involved in some (yes, I repeat, and will embolden *some*) of their issues.

It was a horrid programme in more ways than I care to consider.

I would be very interested to hear DUK's response to it, as DUK was mentioned.  I wonder if @Northerner could garner any feedback.


----------



## Owen (Oct 3, 2016)

AndBreathe said:


> I agree that the guy's diet may have been sub-optimal, but I stand fast by my assertion that, for T2s taking insulin, insulin resistance is often in play.
> 
> T2 is a very complex condition and rarely arising from one cause/trigger or having a single solution any more than simplistically just taking a shot of insulin is the solution to T1.  For several T1s I have observed, I would wager lifestyle as being involved in some (yes, I repeat, and will embolden *some*) of their issues.
> 
> ...


In fairness I just zoned in on this guy, and that is what the program wanted. As you can see from previous posts, I do get the complexities of T2 and have first hand knowledge is out of control T1's


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 3, 2016)

Matt Cycle said:


> It was mentioned in the programme that 9 out of 10 are overweight or obese.  They didn't say it was anyone's fault but allowed people to tell their own story.


whether they allowed people to tell their own story or not...there was so little that was positive about the programme...they didn't say it was anyone's fault directly...however...there was an undertone I didn't like...the subjects chosen for the programme...their lifestyle...wanting gastric surgery...the amputations...where was the balanced view...what about those who are managing their diabetes...who do get to come off medication ..I witnessed none of that...people need to be told there can be a positive outcome...education is one of the keys...perhaps as a type 2 diabetic who is working hard to manage their condition I have a different slant on what I watched...and as a result it made me angry...I do not want to be labelled by such narrow parameters...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Ruth k said:


> I missed the first part of the programme but the rest started to annoy me. Yes , it Is OK to look at the potential life threatening side of  T2 diabetes but there should have been more on the preventative and control side. For example the importance of monitoring , what levels to aim at , types of medication and the most important, low carb diet. It focused on being overweight and needing stomach operations. Vague talk by doctor of vegetables and fruit. In the modern age why not mention the various apps to help like carb counting, fitness pal and my Sugr. Even the promotion stall the nurse focused on fats as a cause and I caught a glimpse of the dreaded food plate! What would have been a great balance for the programme would have been seeing people control their diabetes with testing and carb counting. It would have given people hope and not despair and anxiety about the complications and how much it cost the NHS.


Well said Ruth k...absolutely spot on...


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> whether they allowed people to tell their own story or not...there was so little that was positive about the programme...they didn't say it was anyone's fault directly...however...there was an undertone I didn't like...the subjects chosen for the programme...their lifestyle...wanting gastric surgery...the amputations...where was the balanced view...what about those who are managing their diabetes...who do get to come off medication ..I witnessed none of that...people need to be told there can be a positive outcome...education is one of the keys...perhaps as a type 2 diabetic who is working hard to manage their condition I have a different slant on what I watched...and as a result it made me angry...I do not want to be labelled by such narrow parameters...



This sort of labeling is the very reason I have told very few of my diagnosis virtually 3 years ago.

Shortly before I was diagnosed, I encountered a neighbour along the road from me who was talking about someone I didn't know.  The blank look on my face gave the clues, I think.  Anyway her way of trying to clarify for me was:  "You know.  Doris (not her name) the Diabetic lady."

I neither know anyone called Doris, nor had I any clue anyone was diabetic.  (Long road, not toooo many houses.)

I was horrified by her description, so when I was diagnosed, her words rang in my ears.  I never wanted to be identified as "..., the diabetic lady".  There are a thousand claims to fame, or notoriety, I'd rather be known for.

Labels rarely do anyone favours, in my view.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> Well said Ruth k...absolutely spot on...



Communication is key:  






It's very brief and quite rushed, but a strong message I think.  No?


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

This programme's intention and remit was to show the cost to the NHS that the epidemic of T2 is causing. There would be little point in showing a load of patients who were managing their condition in textbook manner. That's all that the doctors talked about- the strain on the system. That was the thrust of the voice commentary. So they had to show extremes of the condition that caused this huge expense. 

It wasn't unbalanced within its terms of reference, and succeeded in what its aims were rather effectively, I thought. It wasn't part of the remit to lecture people on how to avoid these complications; I think the patients shown demonstrated how they had got where they were - the commentary made no comment about the four weetabix and Frosties for breakfast. Maybe this is my one objection- it might have been politic to mention that most T2s don't eat suicidal amounts of carbs.

One thing vividly demonstrated was that supplying T2s with testing devices isn't necessarily the easy answer to better control, though it should be. And that aspect of the programme may well influence any decision on the supply of testing kits.  If you could accuse the programme of careless irresponsibility, then this is the point I would highlight.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

I forgot to apoligise for intruding on this tsunami of T2 indignation.


----------



## Redkite (Oct 4, 2016)

I thought the programme did a good job of highlighting how serious type 2 diabetes is, since all too often it's seen as "the less serious kind".  But it would have been good to have also featured a type 2 patient who was managing their condition well.  Some constructive advice, instead of just "lose some weight", would also have been good.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

Redkite said:


> I thought the programme did a good job of highlighting how serious type 2 diabetes is, since all too often it's seen as "the less serious kind".  But it would have been good to have also featured a type 2 patient who was managing their condition well.  Some constructive advice, instead of just "lose some weight", would also have been good.


It wasn't the programme's aim to show that T2 was a serious disease. It's aim was to show how much this was costing the NHS. It had no reason to show a well controlled T2, though it actually did in the case of the old cricketer. Not, perhaps, the best example.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 4, 2016)

I have not watched this yet I  noticed it is on again Friday, so have set to record then.
Diabetes UK were tweeting yesterday that they will be fielding questions today on the programme. 
Type 2 Diabetes rise is not just in the UK it is global!


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 4, 2016)

One thing that would be interesting to understand is that they mention that European countries average out as doing over 5 times per capita the number of bariatric surgeries that we do, but does that actually reduce their percentage of Type 2 diabetes compared to ours?

Equally though, I have a friend who I only recently found out he was diabetic (he was in hospital after a heart attack, which interrupted his cancer treatment - not a great combination), and he didn't really manage it too well, but commented that the food provided in the hospital actually had his levels worse in the hospital than they were at home.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 4, 2016)

Superheavy said:


> One thing that would be interesting to understand is that they mention that European countries average out as doing over 5 times per capita the number of bariatric surgeries that we do, but does that actually reduce their percentage of Type 2 diabetes compared to ours?
> 
> Equally though, I have a friend who I only recently found out he was diabetic (he was in hospital after a heart attack, which interrupted his cancer treatment - not a great combination), and he didn't really manage it too well, but commented that the food provided in the hospital actually had his levels worse in the hospital than they were at home.


Alot of people on here who have been in hospital , have reported similar experiences!


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Having Mody, "the type you are born with". Oops, actually it is a genetic possibility not something anyone was born with, oh isn't type 2, also more likely to occur if you have close relatives that also have diabetes?
The program had an objective, to shock. It achieved this? The second objective was to highlight the cost and how these selfless T2's were causing the current NHS targets. Was the agenda also to create peer pressure by highlighting to the rest of the nation that if you see a fat diabetic then give them some tough love, because they are filling your NHS beds and causing delays for every other deserving citizen. If that was not intended, then there are enough small minded people out there!
Had anyone pointed out the absurdity of the "Weetabix Man's" breakfast? No.
Was the program balanced and fair? No.
Did it appear to be endorsed by Diabetes UK? Sadly yes.

Just a more considered reflection, now that I am over the initial shock.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> Having Mody, "the type you are born with". Oops, actually it is a genetic possibility not something anyone was born with, oh isn't type 2, also more likely to occur if you have close relatives that also have diabetes?
> The program had an objective, to shock. It achieved this? The second objective was to highlight the cost and how these selfless T2's were causing the current NHS targets. Was the agenda also to create peer pressure by highlighting to the rest of the nation that if you see a fat diabetic then give them some tough love, because they are filling your NHS beds and causing delays for every other deserving citizen. If that was not intended, then there are enough small minded people out there!
> Had anyone pointed out the absurdity of the "Weetabix Man's" breakfast? No.
> Was the program balanced and fair? No.
> ...


AGREE Owen...


----------



## Mark Parrott (Oct 4, 2016)

I didn't watch the programme & don't think i'll bother. In my line of work, l come in contact with hundreds of diabetics (type 1's & 2's) I take to hospital appointments.  Very few are in control but l suppose that's why they are going to hospital. Some quite openly talk about their condition & in a lot of cases they seem to think their complications are what happens with diabetes & nothing can be done about it. They are just following the advice of their doctors.  And the majority think it's only sugar they must avoid. I do sometimes mention that l am type 2 on diet & exercise & the response us quite remarkable. I get 'you can't have proper diabetes' or 'it's not possible to control diabetes on diet only'. Then they may talk about what they are having for dinner tonight, & I'm quite shocked when it involves so many carbs. When l say l don't eat potatoes, rice, bread or pasta, the response is usually 'what the hell do you eat then?'.


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Mark Parrott said:


> I didn't watch the programme & don't think i'll bother. In my line of work, l come in contact with hundreds of diabetics (type 1's & 2's) I take to hospital appointments.  Very few are in control but l suppose that's why they are going to hospital. Some quite openly talk about their condition & in a lot of cases they seem to think their complications are what happens with diabetes & nothing can be done about it. They are just following the advice of their doctors.  And the majority think it's only sugar they must avoid. I do sometimes mention that l am type 2 on diet & exercise & the response us quite remarkable. I get 'you can't have proper diabetes' or 'it's not possible to control diabetes on diet only'. Then they may talk about what they are having for dinner tonight, & I'm quite shocked when it involves so many carbs. When l say l don't eat potatoes, rice, bread or pasta, the response is usually 'what the hell do you eat then?'.


It is not easy though, and people like easy.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

I haven't watched the programme yet, but from the comments here I get the jist  I've said it before and I'll say it again, the real scandal is not that so many people are becoming Type 2 diabetic, but that the response to their diagnosis is largely inadequate, with poor education, advice and support - and yes, monitoring too, with so many people not getting their proper full checks (pateint apathy also at play there, of course). The scandal is not that so much is being spent, but that the money is being spent fire-fighting the consequences rather than providing the 'smoke alarms' that would prevent the fires in the first place. Something like 80% spent on treating complications, and 80% of those are largely unavoidable - that's why it's costing so much!  

There is so much that could be done to reduce costs (and impact on quality of life) but it appears from what I have read here, this wasn't deemed worthy of mention. I'll try and get to watch it so I can form my own opinion, but I suspect it's going to be similar to those expressed


----------



## Sally71 (Oct 4, 2016)

I agree with a lot of these comments, but would like to add my 10p worth...

Yes the point of the programme was to scare people about how bad T2 can be and how much it's costing the nhs, but what's the point of doing that if you don't then talk about how you could help to lessen your chances of getting it and therefore reducing the strain on the nhs?  They very briefly stated that most cases were preventable, but then didn't elaborate how; the whole programme rather implied that the only "cure" for T2 is bariatric surgery!  As well as lots of huge people having gangrenous feet chopped off and the guy with the ridiculous breakfast who also stole all his kids' chocolate and then wondered why his blood sugar was 14, could they not also have shown someone who was not massively overweight who has worked hard at trying to keep their blood sugars down? Then at least any newly diagnosed T2s watching that might realise that it's not inevitable that they will end up like these extreme cases and that they do have choices.  As the programme stood, if I'd just been diagnosed when I watched that all I'd take away from it is that I'd be doomed and that there isn't anything else I could do!

Of course we know that obesity is not the only cause, and that weight loss is not easy, and that there are probably many T2s who would do a lot more to manage their conditions if only they were given the tools and taught how (and probably some that woudn't too).  No mention of any of this at all - would it not have been more helpful to give the whole picture of what the problems are?

Oh and the other thing that bugged me - "type 1 diabetes, the type that you are born with, is nothing to do with diet."  Correct it's nothing to do with diet, but you aren't BORN with it, you can develop it at any age!


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

Northerner said:


> I haven't watched the programme yet, but from the comments here I get the jist  I've said it before and I'll say it again, the real scandal is not that so many people are becoming Type 2 diabetic, but that the response to their diagnosis is largely inadequate, with poor education, advice and support - and yes, monitoring too, with so many people not getting their proper full checks (pateint apathy also at play there, of course). The scandal is not that so much is being spent, but that the money is being spent fire-fighting the consequences rather than providing the 'smoke alarms' that would prevent the fires in the first place. Something like 80% spent on treating complications, and 80% of those are largely unavoidable - that's why it's costing so much!
> 
> There is so much that could be done to reduce costs (and impact on quality of life) but it appears from what I have read here, this wasn't deemed worthy of mention. I'll try and get to watch it so I can form my own opinion, but I suspect it's going to be similar to those expressed



Northerner, bearing in mind DUK were featured in the programme, doing their Risk roadshows, could you ask how "they" felt about the general portrayal of the programme and T2 in particular.

I must say, in their shoes (unless their collective thinking is less advanced than I have given credit for), I might feel like someone who had been mystery shopped, and edited.

I will try to keep an eye on Twitter today, but I have a few things I have to get done too.


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Sally71 said:


> Oh and the other thing that bugged me - "type 1 diabetes, the type that you are born with, is nothing to do with diet." Correct it's nothing to do with diet, but you aren't BORN with it, you can develop it at any age!


You can also improve your management with balanced eating. I am just glad that T1's never get any of these complications, always have excellent control and only cost the NHS a small amount of money for insulin. Is this correct?


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

AndBreathe said:


> Northerner, bearing in mind DUK were featured in the programme, doing their Risk roadshows, could you ask how "they" felt about the general portrayal of the programme and T2 in particular.
> 
> I must say, in their shoes (unless their collective thinking is less advanced than I have given credit for), I might feel like someone who had been mystery shopped, and edited.
> 
> I will try to keep an eye on Twitter today, but I have a few things I have to get done too.


I've asked Hannah if DUK have a response, so hopefully we will hear something from them


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

Northerner said:


> I've asked Hannah if DUK have a response, so hopefully we will hear something from them



Thank you.  It might take a little careful scribing.  Ahem.


----------



## pottersusan (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> You can also improve your management with balanced eating. I am just glad that T1's never get any of these complications, always have excellent control and only cost the NHS a small amount of money for insulin. Is this correct?


absolutely how could you think anything else


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

Sally71 said:


> Oh and the other thing that bugged me - "type 1 diabetes, the type that you are born with, is nothing to do with diet." Correct it's nothing to do with diet, but you aren't BORN with it, you can develop it at any age!


Oh dear! So, for me, life began at 49, it seems - quite a shock for my Mum!  Actually, I dislike statements like this also because of the implied blame - you can't avoid Type 1, but you can avoid Type 2, so it's your own fault. I would imagine that, whilst we all watch programmes like this because of personal experiences, most people won't watch it, so won't hear the 'scary' message it is designed to deliver - all they will hear is second-hand snippets about how diabetics are destroying the NHS with their selfishness


----------



## Sally71 (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> You can also improve your management with balanced eating. I am just glad that T1's never get any of these complications, always have excellent control and only cost the NHS a small amount of money for insulin. Is this correct?


The cause of T1 is nothing to do with diet.  The management is, correct, although with insulin you can get away with being not quite so strict as to an extent you can balance what you eat with your insulin dose.  Again some people will work harder at it than others.  T1s are rare by comparison though, I guess they were concentrating on T2 because that's the one that more people have?  But what that guy was eating every day isn't good for anyone, whether they have any form of diabetes or not!

So perhaps they should have said with sensible diet and exercise that anyone can REDUCE their chances of developing T2 or having heart attacks or strokes etc, but that not all diabetes is caused by obesity so if you are still unlucky enough to get any type then you can still do lots to prevent complications.  There was no mention of any of that at all though, it was all just doom, gloom, look how much the nhs is suffering, but not a word about what can be done by anyone (doctors included) to reduce it


----------



## Amigo (Oct 4, 2016)

Feels to me like type 2 diabetes has become a political theme used as a metaphor to demonstrate all that's wrong with lack of personal responsibility. In times of tight resources, a scapegoat is sought and here we had examples of 'personal failure to control weight' wheeled out to show the public that this example will be the financial undoing of the health service.

Of course there's an underlying truth that a carb stuffed, guzzling, sedentary lifestyle can cause diabetes as well as a host of other nasties but somehow the British public don't seem to respond well to shock tactics. It generates anger and shame amongst people who perhaps are struggling to dig themselves out of their over indulgent hole anyway (for a whole host of reasons I refuse to be judgemental about). So it was a fatalistic message seemingly without balance.

It's interesting that in programmes about cancer, the programme makers seek the good news stories...the survivors. In diabetes, even in adverts, they'll home in on the biggest stomach they can find.

Balance, stories of success of control without medication with an educative element would have been so much more useful. Most newly diagnosed type 2's are left floundering within a paternalistic health care system that refuses them the ability to even test at home.

This probably just scared those in dangerous denial into hiding behind the sofa with a large bar of chocolate clutching their feet and refusing to believe there was any point because all is doomed anyway!!


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Northerner said:


> I haven't watched the programme yet, but from the comments here I get the jist  I've said it before and I'll say it again, the real scandal is not that so many people are becoming Type 2 diabetic, but that the response to their diagnosis is largely inadequate, with poor education, advice and support - and yes, monitoring too, with so many people not getting their proper full checks (pateint apathy also at play there, of course). The scandal is not that so much is being spent, but that the money is being spent fire-fighting the consequences rather than providing the 'smoke alarms' that would prevent the fires in the first place. Something like 80% spent on treating complications, and 80% of those are largely unavoidable - that's why it's costing so much!
> 
> There is so much that could be done to reduce costs (and impact on quality of life) but it appears from what I have read here, this wasn't deemed worthy of mention. I'll try and get to watch it so I can form my own opinion, but I suspect it's going to be similar to those expressed



Like you if I'd seen that at the time of my diagnosis...would have thought pointless whatever I do...that is how I will end up...sat back and waited for it to happen...whereas ironically since diagnosis I am feeling better than I have done for many years (obviously had 'Betty' for some time before then...no idea had it )...ditched the carb laden food I used to eat...I test regularly...getting to understand what foods best for me... stunned at first...however now I am positive I can manage...hoping to get off medication...and avoid complications...and much more active than I used to be...rather not have 'Betty' but now she is here need to make sure it's a short visit...well said Northerner...


----------



## Carina1962 (Oct 4, 2016)

Peapod87 said:


> Omg this programme is scaring me


Yes, it scared me too, I felt very down after watching it :-(


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Amigo said:


> Feels to me like type 2 diabetes has become a political theme used as a metaphor to demonstrate all that's wrong with lack of personal responsibility. In times of tight resources, a scapegoat is sought and here we had examples of 'personal failure to control weight' wheeled out to show the public that this example will be the financial undoing of the health service.
> 
> Of course there's an underlying truth that a carb stuffed, guzzling, sedentary lifestyle can cause diabetes as well as a host of other nasties but somehow the British public don't seem to respond well to shock tactics. It generates anger and shame amongst people who perhaps are struggling to dig themselves out of their over indulgent hole anyway (for a whole host of reasons I refuse to be judgemental about). So it was a fatalistic message seemingly without balance.
> 
> ...





Amigo said:


> Feels to me like type 2 diabetes has become a political theme used as a metaphor to demonstrate all that's wrong with lack of personal responsibility. In times of tight resources, a scapegoat is sought and here we had examples of 'personal failure to control weight' wheeled out to show the public that this example will be the financial undoing of the health service.
> 
> Of course there's an underlying truth that a carb stuffed, guzzling, sedentary lifestyle can cause diabetes as well as a host of other nasties but somehow the British public don't seem to respond well to shock tactics. It generates anger and shame amongst people who perhaps are struggling to dig themselves out of their over indulgent hole anyway (for a whole host of reasons I refuse to be judgemental about). So it was a fatalistic message seemingly without balance.
> 
> ...


I feel pretty much the same as you Amigo...the response from my GP practice when diagnosed was minimal...meds and recommended a book...then book yourself on this course...no need to test...just regular blood tests...every quarter...diagnosed end of July...course booked for November...four months after diagnosis...I haven't spoken to any health care professionals at all...my GP is not a specialist...and I am not even sure if there is a DN at the practice...if it wasn't for this forum... I would have been absolutely lost...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Amigo said:


> Feels to me like type 2 diabetes has become a political theme used as a metaphor to demonstrate all that's wrong with lack of personal responsibility. In times of tight resources, a scapegoat is sought and here we had examples of 'personal failure to control weight' wheeled out to show the public that this example will be the financial undoing of the health service.
> 
> Of course there's an underlying truth that a carb stuffed, guzzling, sedentary lifestyle can cause diabetes as well as a host of other nasties but somehow the British public don't seem to respond well to shock tactics. It generates anger and shame amongst people who perhaps are struggling to dig themselves out of their over indulgent hole anyway (for a whole host of reasons I refuse to be judgemental about). So it was a fatalistic message seemingly without balance.
> 
> ...


There's always got to be a 'whipping boy' for the under funding of our NHS...and the systems failure to deliver the services people need...i.e education and support...perhaps if management weren't so top heavy and didn't procrastinate so much...more could be diverted to providing what is needed...this month obese carb guzzling type 2's popular targets...no doubt next week some other selfish 'burdens' on our NHS will be denounced...good post...enjoyed reading it...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Sally71 said:


> The cause of T1 is nothing to do with diet.  The management is, correct, although with insulin you can get away with being not quite so strict as to an extent you can balance what you eat with your insulin dose.  Again some people will work harder at it than others.  T1s are rare by comparison though, I guess they were concentrating on T2 because that's the one that more people have?  But what that guy was eating every day isn't good for anyone, whether they have any form of diabetes or not!
> 
> So perhaps they should have said with sensible diet and exercise that anyone can REDUCE their chances of developing T2 or having heart attacks or strokes etc, but that not all diabetes is caused by obesity so if you are still unlucky enough to get any type then you can still do lots to prevent complications.  There was no mention of any of that at all though, it was all just doom, gloom, look how much the nhs is suffering, but not a word about what can be done by anyone (doctors included) to reduce it


Fairly ignorant on Type 1 Sally71...so can't comment on the treatment for it...but so disappointed by what I saw last night...and my Doctors response to my diagnosis was poor to say the least...


----------



## Haggis8716 (Oct 4, 2016)

As a relitivly newly diagnosed T2 I was shocked by the content of the program, thinking what have I got to look forward to. The examples that they gave such as Mr 4 weetabix and frosties do show what it can be like if you do not attempt to control it. 

I have 3 colleuges at work that are T2 and I know they are not looking afterthem self in the way that they should, I only hope that they saw this it might give them a kick in the right direction.

I was disapointed in the way it was presented, however I am not surprised as it is the way of the media in these times, No longer do they report a factual story, they Hype and sensationlis it to the point it dose not resemble the original point that they set out to make, all in the name of TV ratings.

I think the way the point was presented will deter people from getting themself checked for high BG levels as they would probably want to live in ignorance than face the prospect of what was shown. which was not (I belive) a true picture/example of someone with T2.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

Can I just repeat that this programmme wasn't intended as an education for folk with T2, or a "guide" on how to manage it. You can't criticise it for not including these elements, because that wasn't the intent of the program. It was simply telling the story of how this is becoming a huge cost to the NHS, which is true whichever way you slice it.


----------



## Stitch147 (Oct 4, 2016)

Ive not watched it yet. Ive downloaded it from iplayer and will probably watch it on my way home from work.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> Can I just repeat that this programmme wasn't intended as an education for folk with T2, or a "guide" on how to manage it. You can't criticise it for not including these elements, because that wasn't the intent of the program. It was simply telling the story of how this is becoming a huge cost to the NHS, which is true whichever way you slice it.



How do you know what the exact intent of the programme was...and  why would you tell anyone they cannot criticise it?...everyone is entitled to an opinion...and if it's critical that's their choice...you are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to mine...and some of that huge cost you mention could be reduced by giving the support and assistance people need and deserve at the start of their diagnosis...so they can avoid complications for as long as possible...I include myself among that number...and your  apology for intruding on the tsunami of indignation from Type 2's...what  on earth did you mean by that...please don't tell me how I should view or interpret that programme...I am type 2...I am able to manage that condition...not with the help of The NHS...which has been lack lustre to say the least...but with the help of a charity...Diabetes UK...???


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

I know what the intent of the programme was because they repeated it at every opportunity. Or didn't you notice? Every single doctor mentioned costs. The voice over mentioned costs. This is not my "opinion", it's what was shown. It's not an interpretation.

And what is is thread but a tsunami of indignation?


----------



## Sally71 (Oct 4, 2016)

Yes but what's the point of just telling us what the cost is to the nhs?  Wouldn't it be more useful to tell you how you can help to reduce the cost (maybe)?  There's no point complaining about something if you aren't going to offer a solution.  People will just sit there, think yes that's really bad but it's got nothing to do with me and even if it had there's nothing that can be done about it.  And then they will just get on with whatever they were doing. Which makes it a total waste of a programme.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> I know what the intent of the programme was because they repeated it at every opportunity. Or didn't you notice? Every single doctor mentioned costs. The voice over mentioned costs. This is not my "opinion", it's what was shown. It's not an interpretation.
> 
> And what is is thread but a tsunami of indignation?


Still haven't seen it, but any subject that presents a single viewpoint of a complex topic is bound to create indignation. Cancer costs a lot of money to treat and is often a consequence of poor diet and lifestyle, as well as many other factors, yet it's rarely portrayed as something that is bleeding the NHS dry.


----------



## Robin (Oct 4, 2016)

As Mike said. Yes, the programme fulfilled its brief. The next question therefore has to be, Who commissioned it, and why did they think it would be helpful to broadcast a programme which didn't address any of the problems raised? And did they think it through, in terms of being responsible for fuelling the misconception that all Diabetics are a drain on society? Or is that what the editor him/herself thinks?


----------



## Jonsi (Oct 4, 2016)

I didn't watch the programme but I do have it recorded. From what I'm reading here though I may probably just erase it. I understand that Type 2 is a growing problem and I understand that there are lifestyle choices behind it's growth. I am probably guilty of some of those choices but, in my defence, I didn't choose to become diabetic, that is a consequence of me living. If I had eaten more healthily, exercised more, consumed less I may well not have developed diabetes to the extent that I have but equally, at the end of the day I will surely die, whether from complications brought on by diabetes or, perversely, from eating well and living healthily.

I know that the present administration would love to see a private Health Service where customers (they don't like the word patients) pay directly for their own treatment. Are we to expect then that the NHS will only treat people whose illnesses come about through non-lifestyle choices? If that's the case, anyone involved in an RTA wouldn't get treated (nobody is forced to drive a car), sports injuries wouldn't get treated (nobody is obliged to play sport) and there would be no maternity units (no-one forces women to get pregnant) and so on until the NHS only functions as Geriatric care and T1s?

It would appear from what I'm reading that this programme was all about where to lay the blame for rising costs to the NHS; that is...firmly at the nerve impaired feet of T2's, and that being T2 is a distinct lifestyle choice and is *only* a lifestyle choice. It is bad enough feeling the way I feel as it is without having a TV programme condemn me and those like me for making ill-informed choices years earlier. I do not need more guilt heaped on top of that which I have heaped on myself.

Oh, I nearly forgot ...we live in a litigious society ...who do I sue for not giving me the knowledge 30 years ago that in 30 years time I would be injecting insulin as a result of what I was eating back then?


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

Interesting points, Jonsi. The programme made no judgemental statements at all. And about laying blame? One of the doctors said this was costing the NHS more than the three commonest cancers. There was no blame, it was just a statement of fact.

One of reasons for the diabetes epidemic in modern times that is hardly ever mentioned is that this is a condition which is at least partially genetically determined. In the past, a lot of people died from the condition before they could get around to breeding.


----------



## Haggis8716 (Oct 4, 2016)

I think one of the things that I found offensive about the program was that it gave the impression that Mr Weetabix & Frostise was the typical T2 diabetic which I think is far from the truth.


----------



## Hazel (Oct 4, 2016)

Haggis8716 said:


> I think one of the things that I found offensive about the program was that it gave the impression that Mr Weetabix & Frostise was the typical T2 diabetic which I think is far from the truth.


Exactly - I mean, Frosties for goodness sake!!!!

Plus no mentio of the tens of thousands of well controlled T2s


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Exactly - I mean, Frosties for goodness sake!!!!
> 
> Plus no mentio of the tens of thousands of well controlled T2s


Should have been crunchy nut. Surely? A much better choice having honey instead of sugar


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 4, 2016)

OK, so if the intent of the program was to show how much T2 is costing the NHS then surely there needs to be a balance to the reporting by showing how much can be "saved" by solid advice & education. Understood that people need to be motivated to achieve control. From what I am reading the program did show the downside of uncontrolled diabetes yet made no attempt to show the positive affects of good control (which IMHO would act as a huge motivation for those who are not already seeking to control their D)


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Personally I think the program was disgustingly biased, period.
The issues are simple. The NHS needs more cash, more human resources and improved Management.
We don't need a deterrent that can never be used. We don't need to keep funding inflated ministerial expenses. I am sure there are other ways of finding savings. If the average person managed their finances the way governments do, they would end up in dire straits.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> show the positive affects of good control (which IMHO would act as a huge motivation for those who are not already seeking to control their D)


Maybe they are worried about the huge numbers beating a path to their doctor's door having realised there IS something they can do about it, and overwhelming the system!   I remember Tony Copperfield (a blogging GP) saying that the big problem with the NHS these days is that people aren't dying soon enough any more (tongue in cheek, I think!  )


----------



## Amigo (Oct 4, 2016)

If it's brief was to be sensational and accusational in content, it clearly achieved its brief. If it's intention was to explore solutions to reduce societal and fiscal pressures, it failed. Seems like it simply engendered fear to a large extent and a wholly inaccurate sense of it being a hopeless condition without possibility of reversal/management.

I'm sure it gave plenty of tut-tutting opportunities for the morally indignant but perhaps the balance was lost and more importantly, the hope it could have given to those presently at risk.


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Northerner said:


> Maybe they are worried about the huge numbers beating a path to their doctor's door having realised there IS something they can do about it, and overwhelming the system!   I remember Tony Copperfield (a blogging GP) saying that the big problem with the NHS these days is that people aren't dying soon enough any more (tongue in cheek, I think!  )


Logans Run would solve the problems quickly


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> Logans Run would solve the problems quickly


Errr..... Bad Acting?


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

How can the programme be disgustingly biased? Against what? It showed how much T2 is costing the NHS, period. It wasn't called "How to best control diabetes", it wasn't called "How can we stop this happening". That's a whole other programme. With an almost guaranteed 4 million viewers, I'm surprised no one has thought to make it.


----------



## Pine Marten (Oct 4, 2016)

Yikes! I've just watched the first half hour and was so appalled by the guillotine amputation, the 4-weetabix plus frosties nurse, and 15 year old Ameer whose BG reading was 18, that I turned it off and did half hour of aerobics....my reading before exercise was 4.4. 

I note what people here say about the rest of it, and will watch with interest and, no doubt, rising anger and frustration


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> How can the programme be disgustingly biased? Against what? It showed how much T2 is costing the NHS, period. It wasn't called "How to best control diabetes", it wasn't called "How can we stop this happening". That's a whole other programme. With an almost guaranteed 4 million viewers, I'm surprised no one has thought to make it.


It was called Diabetes the Silent Killer, not how much diabetes costs the NHS.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> "How can we stop this happening". That's a whole other programme. With an almost guaranteed 4 million viewers, I'm surprised no one has thought to make it.


No drama... 'Panorama Special: People learn to manage their diabetes'...


----------



## Amigo (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> How can the programme be disgustingly biased? Against what? It showed how much T2 is costing the NHS, period. It wasn't called "How to best control diabetes", it wasn't called "How can we stop this happening". That's a whole other programme. With an almost guaranteed 4 million viewers, I'm surprised no one has thought to make it.



It may not have been biased (that's questionable) but what's the purpose of presenting an issue without exploring possible solutions? Surely the issue and resultant cost must be set in the context of what we can do about it. The two are inextricably linked. 
If it wasn't largely biased around obesity and fecklessness, it would have raised the point you made in your earlier post;

'One of reasons for the diabetes epidemic in modern times that is hardly ever mentioned is that this is a condition which is at least partially genetically determined.'


----------



## Flower (Oct 4, 2016)

I found it really difficult viewing, but not so different to the comings and goings on a diabetes ward .

How ever do you begin to redress the massive imbalance of costs with 20% on treatment versus 80% on complications when the numbers on both sides of that equation are ever growing. It will take a seismic shift in finances  to start to give people better 'treatment' than a box of Metformin and a blood test every 6 months. Taking pills or injections is the easy bit. It is the sustained hard work and self management that fills the other 99.9% of the time with changes to diet and managing blood sugar through thick and thin that needs investment with home testing, education courses and group support in person or online.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

@Northerner , have you had any response from Hannah at all?


----------



## Northerner (Oct 4, 2016)

AndBreathe said:


> @Northerner , have you had any response from Hannah at all?


Not as yet. They moved offices over the past week or so, so may be very busy sorting everything out


----------



## Lindarose (Oct 4, 2016)

I've watched half the programmed so far as had to go out. Very hard viewing as although I'm already aware of the complications it's upsetting actually seeing people going through those things. 
It really does leave a feeling of 'there's not much point' because it doesn't show how much we can try to do to help ourselves. Very scary to many people.


----------



## eggyg (Oct 4, 2016)

Just caught up with programme. Wow! Brutal! Firstly, I would like to say I am not laying blame on anyone; The UK public, BBC, NHS, DUK, Uncle Tom Cobbley. I have an obese daughter and granddaughter and I worry about them so much, every Monday they start a diet and it's done by Tuesday. My opinion is we need to educate those with Type 2 diabetes first and foremost. Most non diabetics won't ever believe they'll become diabetic so probably will mostly ignore any educational leaflets or stands in the town centre manned by DUK.We need to educate the type 2s NOW! The GPs admit they haven't the time or resources and we've all come across the dyed in the wool DSNs who still advocate low fat high carb diets. The 4 Weetabix topped with Frosties man is testament to that. I feel like volunteering my services to try and help, with all our experience, especially the Type 2s on here who have very successfully changed their lives round. How would we go about that? It's so, so frustrating and no amount of sugar tax is going to help, people still smoke and drink although the government taxes those.


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 4, 2016)

eggyg said:


> How would we go about that?


#1 - educate people about healthy eating, balance the ratios of macronutrients in our meals..... It's not rocket science, our parents & grandparents did that daily..... It's only when the establishment stepped in that things went askew


----------



## eggyg (Oct 4, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> #1 - educate people about healthy eating, balance the ratios of macronutrients in our meals..... It's not rocket science, our parents & grandparents did that daily..... It's only when the establishment stepped in that things went askew


That's fair enough but how do we implement it without the resources, it's a viscious circle.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> I know what the intent of the programme was because they repeated it at every opportunity. Or didn't you notice? Every single doctor mentioned costs. The voice over mentioned costs. This is not my "opinion", it's what was shown. It's not an interpretation.
> 
> And what is is thread but a tsunami of indignation?


Very selective reply...however...I couldn't have made my own point better than you have...it was all about the cost...every single doctor mentioned it


Jonsi said:


> I didn't watch the programme but I do have it recorded. From what I'm reading here though I may probably just erase it. I understand that Type 2 is a growing problem and I understand that there are lifestyle choices behind it's growth. I am probably guilty of some of those choices but, in my defence, I didn't choose to become diabetic, that is a consequence of me living. If I had eaten more healthily, exercised more, consumed less I may well not have developed diabetes to the extent that I have but equally, at the end of the day I will surely die, whether from complications brought on by diabetes or, perversely, from eating well and living healthily.
> 
> I know that the present administration would love to see a private Health Service where customers (they don't like the word patients) pay directly for their own treatment. Are we to expect then that the NHS will only treat people whose illnesses come about through non-lifestyle choices? If that's the case, anyone involved in an RTA wouldn't get treated (nobody is forced to drive a car), sports injuries wouldn't get treated (nobody is obliged to play sport) and there would be no maternity units (no-one forces women to get pregnant) and so on until the NHS only functions as Geriatric care and T1s?
> 
> ...



Good points Owen...programme just about the cost...cost...cost...hate being labelled as a burden on the NHS...


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

In answer and to support my argument of bias. Habituation bias, in that several commentators repeated the emphasis on cost without rebuttals, also the repetition of obesity and lifestyle without any reference to genetic disposition, also the fleeting remark regarding T1 being a condition you are born with. Confirmation bias, only testimony that supported the producers hypothesis was presented, again no testimony was offered to balance any of those represented. By all the omitted data and research.


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

•The current cost of direct patient care (treatment, intervention and complications) for those living with diabetes is estimated at £9.8 billion (£1 billion for type 1 diabetes and £8.8 billion for type 2 diabetes).
So that would suggest that the cost of type 2 per capita is less than that of type 1


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> type 2 per capita is less than that of type 1


You guys are costing the NHS a fortune!!!! Must be all those test strips.....


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

It is also interesting that the data relied on is stated to a guesstimate by the source. But is considered to be better than nothing, all of this is openly declared as part of the efficacy in the primary research paper. Plus the 10% cost to the NHS in the research included ALL types of diabetes so was incorrectly represented by Panorama which in simple terms is shameful.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> It is also interesting that the data relied on is stated to a guesstimate by the source. But is considered to be better than nothing, all of this is openly declared as part of the efficacy in the primary research paper. Plus the 10% cost to the NHS in the research included ALL types of diabetes so was incorrectly represented by Panorama which in simple terms is shameful.


Surely not Owen...shocked they would present such unreliable statistics...not the good ol' BBC...that bastion of honesty...truth and reliability...and to think I actually disagreed with one of our members...who said...'How can the programme be disgustingly biased? Against what? It showed how much T2 is costing the NHS, period'...so not just those grossly obese...Weetabix guzzling T2's proving a huge financial burden on the NHS...


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 4, 2016)

Or you could look at absolute costs rather than per capita. Inpatient T1 costs are £1.007bn, for T2 8.038bn. That's how the NHS bean counters look at it. But they don't want to spend the money on education, they're looking for ways of making people pay, because of the "it's their own fault" mentality. Same with smokers. I'm just glad I live in Scotland.


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> •The current cost of direct patient care (treatment, intervention and complications) for those living with diabetes is estimated at £9.8 billion (£1 billion for type 1 diabetes and £8.8 billion for type 2 diabetes).
> So that would suggest that the cost of type 2 per capita is less than that of type 1



The average age of diagnosis for T1 is 14.  For T2 I don't know but it must be 40's/50's?  It's hardly surprising therefore that T1 would cost more per capita when they are likely to be living with diabetes for far longer.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

Owen said:


> •The current cost of direct patient care (treatment, intervention and complications) for those living with diabetes is estimated at £9.8 billion (£1 billion for type 1 diabetes and £8.8 billion for type 2 diabetes).
> So that would suggest that the cost of type 2 per capita is less than that of type 1



Well, my diabetes treatment isn't, and never had been much of a drain on the NHS.  No meds.  No meters.  No strips.  3 x retinopathy scans.  1 foot check.  1 x face to face review with nurse at 4mths in (the one and only time I have been weighed, but never measured), and 7 sets of bloods - only two panels have been comprehensive (i.e. including Vat D and Vit 12, for example), in almost exactly 3 years.

Who's having my share then?.


----------



## Owen (Oct 4, 2016)

Matt Cycle said:


> The average age of diagnosis for T1 is 14.  For T2 I don't know but it must be 40's/50's?  It's hardly surprising therefore that T1 would cost more per capita when they are likely to be living with diabetes for far longer.


This cost per capita for one year snapshot.


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 4, 2016)

As I understand it those billions are per annum, not over a lifetime, so age at diagnosis is likely irrelevant, but if wrong, I would be content to be corrected.


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 4, 2016)

Well....I'm sure the BBC would be chuffed to read that we are all debating the programme with gusto, and I doubt they are too concerned that we think they didn't provide a balanced view of the condition. I imagine their justification will probably be along the lines that they put up one of those BBC helpline blurbs at the end of the show so that people affected by the issues can call up. Didn't stay until after the credits so not 100% sure though.


----------



## Andy HB (Oct 5, 2016)

Haggis8716 said:


> I think one of the things that I found offensive about the program was that it gave the impression that Mr Weetabix & Frostise was the typical T2 diabetic which I think is far from the truth.



Given the comment my consultant made to me when I was finally able to wave goodbye to him, I'm not entirely sure that it is necessarily far from the truth. In his experience, very few people with T2 on his books were able to get control of their symptoms. Granted that this is anecdotal, but I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary either. Given the microcosm that this forum is, I don't think the people on it are indicative of the general public, unfortunately. It seems to me that those on here are well educated on the subject of diabetes and generally have much better control as a consequence (I know that this is not universally true, I am generalising).

I also remain utterly flummoxed by this perceived 'blame' culture. I have never experienced anything like that. I received a diagnosis, told what I needed to do (and attended a well run Diabetes Xpert course) and just got on with losing weight, eating more regularly and cutting down on the carbs. I started doing this the day after I was released from hospital. I remember feeling very scared the first night. But the very next day I resolved to get myself sorted and was lucky to be able to. I am aware that not everyone has nice places to walk (but there are other options, I'm sure). Nor do they necessarily have the time (but I think that is often just an excuse for some).

But, just in case anyone watched that programme and are worried or scared about what may happen. Just read the posts of people on this forum who have turned their lives around. It IS possible to live almost symptom free and without medication. It takes some effort, but I can thoroughly recommend that people make that effort. Even when I stopped being quite so focussed and my weight increased again, it still gave me the knowledge that losing that weight is possible (and I am doing it again). I also, even when heavier, remained medication free and still in decent(ish) shape seven years after being diagnosed.

Andy


----------



## macabee (Oct 5, 2016)

The Beeb at it's best [or worst] 'Shock and Awe' I watched the programme it seemed to me the implication was, that all these T2's are fat git's costing the nation shed loads of money because they are to lazy to eat properly or exercise. 

Nothing was really said about T2's who have the misfortune to be genetically predisposed because of a parent with diabetes, in my case my mother, when I was diagnosed [2011] at the age of 64, my BMI was within the normal range as was my BP, I remember the first words of the doctor at my first diabetic clinic appointment "this is not your fault"

Now five years later my blood's are under control, as my weight, BP etc. To me complications are not inevitable, as long as I can manage my condition with help and a lot of common sense on my part, I try to eat sensibly and exercise regularly.

As far as I am concerned the programme was totally negative and just ended up stereotyping all diabetics.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 5, 2016)

Just thinking about it - and I take @mikeyB 's point about the limited remit of the programme - what a huge missed opportunity to have a really interesting and thought-provoking programme  It could have started by showing the 'sharp end' of diabetes, the complications and their consequences, the relentless increase in problems and costs etc.....then they could have contrasted all that with a forward-looking surgery who give their patients good education and advice, and the tools and support they need to get their diabetes under control, with some examples of successful management on minimum medication. The costs of one against the other could then have been compared - this is what is happening versus this is what could happen. As it stands, the programme is pretty pointless and could have got its point across in less than 5 minutes. Surely this would be a better aim for their 'investigative journalism'? 

There's definitely a tendency these days to provide lots of 'drama' in documentaries and ask what may be important questions, but not reaching any sort of conclusion - Horizon went this way many years ago, I used to enjoy it, but nowadays it's usually very light on content and heavy on dramatic voiceovers and music with CGI and snazzy camera angles. Do we have a rise in Media Studies graduates in the past generation to blame? They seem so formulaic and dumbed down


----------



## AndBreathe (Oct 5, 2016)

Northerner said:


> Just thinking about it - and I take @mikeyB 's point about the limited remit of the programme - what a huge missed opportunity to have a really interesting and thought-provoking programme  It could have started by showing the 'sharp end' of diabetes, the complications and their consequences, the relentless increase in problems and costs etc.....then they could have contrasted all that with a forward-looking surgery who give their patients good education and advice, and the tools and support they need to get their diabetes under control, with some examples of successful management on minimum medication. The costs of one against the other could then have been compared - this is what is happening versus this is what could happen. As it stands, the programme is pretty pointless and could have got its point across in less than 5 minutes. Surely this would be a better aim for their 'investigative journalism'?
> 
> There's definitely a tendency these days to provide lots of 'drama' in documentaries and ask what may be important questions, but not reaching any sort of conclusion - Horizon went this way many years ago, I used to enjoy it, but nowadays it's usually very light on content and heavy on dramatic voiceovers and music with CGI and snazzy camera angles. Do we have a rise in Media Studies graduates in the past generation to blame? They seem so formulaic and dumbed down



What enraged me was the total lack of thought for how anyone newly diagnosed might feel on seeing that.  I can imagine a certain percentage watching that and just heading for their nearest Gregs for an iced cream bun whilst they could still walk the High St and choose their favourite colour.

Lacking balance and devoid of hope.


----------



## graj0 (Oct 5, 2016)

May I suggest everyone does what I've just done, write to the producers at the BBC. They'll not know what they've done wrong unless we tell them. Even the messages on their facebook page are a bit tame when discussing this program and the answer, LC.

eMail: panorama.reply@bbc.co.uk

Address: BBC Panorama, Zone D, 4th Floor, BBC Broadcasting House, Portland Place, London, UK, W1A 1AA

The more the better! I'm all for moaning, just in the right direction, it doesn't achieve much among ourselves.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 5, 2016)

I have just been and read the comments on the Panorma Facebook page! 
There are a few positive comments, but lots of angry ones from parents of Type 1 children!


----------



## trophywench (Oct 5, 2016)

Many T1 people and parents of T1 children - neither of whom infest this forum or DSF - DO think that T2 is solely caused by what people stuff in their gobs and don't do with their legs.

However the educated elite - ie all of us and some more people - cos we are defo a tiny minority - know damn well that it is possible to be obese (dunno about full blown 'morbid' obesity) without also being diabetic.  And the entirely stupid thing is - we are all 'born with it' because if it's genetic even partially genetic whether it manifests itself as T1 or T2, T1.5, LADA or MODY - then we can't change that, can we!

And TBH I thought for many years that it was an affliction solely attributable to old age cos I didn't know anyone younger than retirement age with it.

As a T1 I deny that until recently I cost the NHS very little.  Never had DKA or anything else to cause me to be admitted (I had fibroids and a hysterectomy but BUPA paid for 98% of that!) and still haven't.  However my cataracts did gather speed very quickly which apparently is much more likely with D, and I have had one eye done.  So, I don't feel in the slightest guilty that I now have a pump and so cost the NHS shedloads LOL  It all helps keep me from needing to be a ruddy in-patient, doesn't it!

You would think they'd try harder to find a ruddy cure instead of treating it at all, wouldn't you!


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 5, 2016)

Welcome back Jenny ! We've missed your biting comments. Are you time served now, or on parole?


----------



## Diabetes UK (Oct 5, 2016)

Sorry for my delay, I've been unwell and out of the loop so just trying to catch up.

This programme has sparked so much discussion, both here on the forum and elswhere. It's really good for us to get an understanding of the different opinions about the programme and the way, as we have experienced mixed feelings from supporters. It seems Panorama was clearly looking to expose the scale of the problem and the human cost, as well as the cost to the NHS. We do know and recognise that many people manage their condition well and manage to control their diabetes successfully but unfortunately this is not the reality for some. In order for things to improve, programmes such as this may shine a light on the current situation and motivate some individuals to engage and take control of their diabetes. We thought the programme was truthful about the extent of the crisis and in general we were happy with the content as we felt it did highlight the scale of the problem and the impact the condition can have on people’s lives. We appreciate that this does not reflect the whole picture.


----------



## Carol F (Oct 5, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> I feel pretty much the same as you Amigo...the response from my GP practice when diagnosed was minimal...meds and recommended a book...then book yourself on this course...no need to test...just regular blood tests...every quarter...diagnosed end of July...course booked for November...four months after diagnosis...I haven't spoken to any health care professionals at all...my GP is not a specialist...and I am not even sure if there is a DN at the practice...if it wasn't for this forum... I would have been absolutely lost...


----------



## Carol F (Oct 5, 2016)

Jeez oh... contact your local hospital for an appointment with the diabetes team or ask you G.P to refer you.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 5, 2016)

Carol F said:


> Jeez oh... contact your local hospital for an appointment with the diabetes team or ask you G.P to refer you.


Not many Type 2 are refereed to hospital Diabetic clinics or services!


----------



## Carol F (Oct 5, 2016)

grovesy said:


> Not many Type 2 are refereed to hospital Diabetic clinics or services!


Why on earth not...they have a medical condition and deserve as much help as possible to improve their situation.


----------



## Sally71 (Oct 5, 2016)

Carol F said:


> Why on earth not...they have a medical condition and deserve as much help as possible to improve their situation.


Sadly a lot of GPs don't seem to have much clue about diabetes and think that it's perfectly ok just to prescribe Metformin and see them again in 3 months.  Many T2s are told that they don't need to test and are given all sorts of ridiculous reasons why, e.g."it will cause too much anxiety" or "you won't understand the results" (yes these are real excuses given to people on this forum) when actually the real reason is "we don't want to prescribe test strips because they are too expensive". They are only bothered about saving money now and don't see the long term savings, I.e. Give a person testing equipment now and teach them how to control their diabetes properly and then they are far less likely to need expensive amputations and so on in the future.

Yes that is a very simplistic view, and there are some good doctors out there, not enough though sadly and the care that people receive for diabetes varies horrendously


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 5, 2016)

It's not just the doctors, it's the diabetes nurses who are at the coalface of seeing T2s, and their training seems to be woefully out of date. And as we saw in the programme, you can give these people testing kits, and they proceed to ignore results, or appear unwilling to respond to them. You can say this is due to poor education in diabetes, though I think it is (self) denial that this is potentially a high morbidity illness, and refuse to conform to advice received.

 It's not just the fault of the doctors or nurses. Diabetes, above any other chronic disease, is an illness dependent on self control without any apparent benefit. Smoking and drinking alcohol are different - the benefit of stopping is evident from the start. Without that immediate obvious benefit, close control is a very hard sell. Yes, you feel better when your glucose levels are normal, but these people shown on the program are used to feeling the way they do. They don't know any different. This problem is not unique to T2s, of course.

It's a multifactorial problem without any simple solution, but it's a two way street, never forget that. And never forget that half of the population is, by definition, of below average intelligence, and that applies to people with diabetes, unfortunately.


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 5, 2016)

The weetabix and frosties man (yep, him again) as well as taking a shed load of medication, was testing.  He knew what he needed to do but chose to ignore what the meter was telling him and carried on regardless.  He struck me as a fairly intelligent man but seemingly was unwilling or unable to change.  If it was down to a lack of willpower then he miraculously managed to find it to complete his low calorie diet prior to the bariatric surgery.


----------



## Superheavy (Oct 6, 2016)

Come on Mikey....are we dismissing half of the population because they are stupid and don't deserve treatment and guidance? We wouldn't dismiss anyone with lung cancer because the medical establishment thought they were too thick to quit smoking. We've also got to be aware that in some cases, eating healthily as a diabetic is not as affordable as eating for the least amount of money possible. I know in my case my shopping is at least 50% higher than it was pre-diabetes, even though I was eating a lot more food, both in terms of calories and volume. 

You and I probably both assume that we are in the upper 50%, but we can't get everyone to quit everything that is bad for them, and in so many more conditions than diabetes, there will be people who are to an extent suffering from a self-inflicted illness, and we shouldn't abandon them.


----------



## Owen (Oct 6, 2016)

Matt Cycle said:


> The weetabix and frosties man (yep, him again) as well as taking a shed load of medication, was testing.  He knew what he needed to do but chose to ignore what the meter was telling him and carried on regardless.  He struck me as a fairly intelligent man but seemingly was unwilling or unable to change.  If it was down to a lack of willpower then he miraculously managed to find it to complete his low calorie diet prior to the bariatric surgery.


Did he work for the NHS?


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 6, 2016)

I wasn't dismissing them, I was including that factor as at least part of the problem. I certainly don't think we should abandon them, but as a factor it can't be dismissed.


----------



## Hazel (Oct 6, 2016)

Owen said:


> Did he work for the NHS?



Yes he did


----------



## Owen (Oct 6, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Yes he did


I am sure in that case that he was not persuaded by his employers to help add drama. That would be too cynical even for me.


----------



## Owen (Oct 6, 2016)

Matt Cycle said:


> The weetabix and frosties man (yep, him again) as well as taking a shed load of medication, was testing.  He knew what he needed to do but chose to ignore what the meter was telling him and carried on regardless.  He struck me as a fairly intelligent man but seemingly was unwilling or unable to change.  If it was down to a lack of willpower then he miraculously managed to find it to complete his low calorie diet prior to the bariatric surgery.


That's what I could not understand, also he was so blasé about his condition. Then suddenly he wanted bariatric surgery. Seemed to have shifted in a bipolar manner.


----------



## Greyhound Gal (Oct 6, 2016)

Just a thought - may be daft, but best I can do at this time in the morning , should it be compulsory for newly diagnosed or those struggling to control their BG through denial, to go on some sort of course where they meet BOTH people who are worst case scenario and have lost their sight and/or limbs PLUS people who are managing their diabetes well and are keeping it under control. This would show them that with persistence and hard work they can lead perfectly normal lives. I know this would cost money etc, but maybe DUK could ask it's members if they would be willing to attend voluntarily to show good control. I'm sure DUK also probably know some who have not had such a good time. Just a thought, and something similar could be done for the docs and nurses. Education is the key.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 6, 2016)

I think what always strikes me is when highly-motivated people are refused test strips on <whatever> grounds - if motivated people are being refused, then the message that testing achieves nothing will be even stronger felt by those less motivated, who are happy to hear that they don't need to stab their fingers. How many of these people, if testing (including discussion of results and supplementary support, perhaps mentoring by fellow T2s) were seen as an essential part of treatment, as much as medication, would discover the benefits? If they are instantly put off, they'll never know unless they research it themselves. Also at fault are those healthcare professionals who talk about 'degrees of diabetes' i.e 'mild diabetes' through to 'severe diabetes' - those who are told their diabetes is 'mild' may feel that the pills will solve all their problems  Regarding what @mikeyB says about nurses, I'm sure this is a big problem, as I understand that the training a practice nurse gets in diabetes is laughable (given that I've been doing this every day for 8 years and I'm still learning! ). Coupled with this peremptory education, the nurse then relies on his/her own observations - thus when she sees someone with an HbA1c of (say) 75 mmol/mol (9%) they think that is brilliant, as most of their patients are well above that level (in part due to the lack of education etc.!).

It is massively complicated when you are talking about a complex condition like diabetes (we are all aware of how individual it can be, even when we understand how to manage it) that is being experienced by 4m people. I do feel, however, that patients are not treated as individuals, due to constraints on resources, and that initial advice and treatment is largely inadequate and/or inappropriate  Maybe you wouldn't convince a lot of people and they'd just find it impossible to change, but surely a different approach would mean many, many individual lives would become healthier and happier instead of desperately unhappy and painful?

Don't leave people with a box of metformin and an Eatwell plate, then send them away for 3 months - start engaging them immediately on a clearly-defined programme of education, testing, mentoring and reviews. Make them realise that there can be a positive outcome - don't, for heaven's sake, tell them that it's 'progressive' and complications are more or less inevitable, killing any hope they may have right at the start.


----------



## Jonsi (Oct 6, 2016)

I still haven't watched this programme but...from the conversations I read...is it not the case (as has been mentioned here several times) that once the individuals learn of their condition they do not know what the next step is or should be and are pretty much left to work it out for themselves? All well and good being told to "change your diet" but to what? Easy to say "do some exercise" but, being on the large side, I know just how bad it feels to walk into a gym or swimming pool to exercise when the last time you did anything like that was at school. It does your self-confidence no good whatsoever.
Yes, 50% of the population may be below average intelligence but they're not totally stupid, just under-informed. Also, there's years of ill-informed knowledge to counter. Fruit is good for you therefore fruit juice must be good for you? Wholegrain bread is better than processed white bread therefore if I eat more of it I must be doing myself more good? The logic may be incorrect but it does follow a 'normal' progression. Let's not criticise people for not knowing. They may know they should do something but not know what or how.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 6, 2016)

Carol F said:


> Why on earth not...they have a medical condition and deserve as much help as possible to improve their situation.


Even when some of the people posting on here have asked and been referred by the GP the hospital have turned down or reffered them back to GP care! I suspect the hospitals have not got the resources to manage all Type 2 ! I believe that even some of our Type 1 forum members are under GP care and not hospital!


----------



## grovesy (Oct 6, 2016)

Northerner said:


> I think what always strikes me is when highly-motivated people are refused test strips on <whatever> grounds - if motivated people are being refused, then the message that testing achieves nothing will be even stronger felt by those less motivated, who are happy to hear that they don't need to stab their fingers. How many of these people, if testing (including discussion of results and supplementary support, perhaps mentoring by fellow T2s) were seen as an essential part of treatment, as much as medication, would discover the benefits? If they are instantly put off, they'll never know unless they research it themselves. Also at fault are those healthcare professionals who talk about 'degrees of diabetes' i.e 'mild diabetes' through to 'severe diabetes' - those who are told their diabetes is 'mild' may feel that the pills will solve all their problems  Regarding what @mikeyB says about nurses, I'm sure this is a big problem, as I understand that the training a practice nurse gets in diabetes is laughable (given that I've been doing this every day for 8 years and I'm still learning! ). Coupled with this peremptory education, the nurse then relies on his/her own observations - thus when she sees someone with an HbA1c of (say) 75 mmol/mol (9%) they think that is brilliant, as most of their patients are well above that level (in part due to the lack of education etc.!).
> 
> It is massively complicated when you are talking about a complex condition like diabetes (we are all aware of how individual it can be, even when we understand how to manage it) that is being experienced by 4m people. I do feel, however, that patients are not treated as individuals, due to constraints on resources, and that initial advice and treatment is largely inadequate and/or inappropriate  Maybe you wouldn't convince a lot of people and they'd just find it impossible to change, but surely a different approach would mean many, many individual lives would become healthier and happier instead of desperately unhappy and painful?
> 
> Don't leave people with a box of metformin and an Eatwell plate, then send them away for 3 months - start engaging them immediately on a clearly-defined programme of education, testing, mentoring and reviews. Make them realise that there can be a positive outcome - don't, for heaven's sake, tell them that it's 'progressive' and complications are more or less inevitable, killing any hope they may have right at the start.


My now retired Diabetic Nurse who was part time told me she was struggling to keep up to date with all the changes! I suspect some don't get updates as often as they should because of budget restraints! I know having worked in the NHS that when money is tight training is often one the things cut unless it is a statutory training!


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 6, 2016)

In all I thought the program was quite good at what it aimed to do - shock and make a political statement. But I was appalled at the guy on very high doses and levemir and victoza an metformin.  I got my GP to stop my levemir insulin because it was getting so high ( i think I got to 80 units am and 80 units pm) and put me back on metformin and victoza only.  Clearly his GP didn't have a clue as to what the medicine was doing to him and how to control his diabetes ( was that the same guy who had the weetabix?  you can only blame him for that). 

I was also interested to see that the people who were having amputations were not all that obese.  If this is all down to diabetes how come some people require amputations but do not appear to have retinopathy problems?  Is it really down to diabetes killing off the nerves or is it poor circulation caused by plaque build up?


----------



## Robin (Oct 6, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> I was also interested to see that the people who were having amputations were not all that obese. If this is all down to diabetes how come some people require amputations but do not appear to have retinopathy problems? Is it really down to diabetes killing off the nerves or is it poor circulation caused by plaque build up?


That point occurred to me. Because people with diabetes seem to be public enemy number one, commissioning editors can get away with a programme like that. They don't seem to produce documentaries showing the consequences and cost to the NHS of, for example, heart attacks and strokes being caused by bad diet and lack of exercise. ( Which would quite rightly upset all those who have hereditary or chance strokes/heart attacks not caused by lifestyle, just as it upsets people who have diabetes for reasons other than lifestyle.)


----------



## graj0 (Oct 6, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> If this is all down to diabetes how come some people require amputations but do not appear to have retinopathy problems?  Is it really down to diabetes killing off the nerves or is it poor circulation caused by plaque build up?



That's a good question, my dad has both, so probably just one of those things. Is Diabetes *the* problem? or is diabetes and very *poor BG control* the problem. I notice they didn't mention smoking which is obviously something else which can lead to poor circulation and amputations. The NHS website (http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Gangrene/Pages/Causes.aspx) states that people with diabetes have an increased risk of developing gangrene *because* the *high blood sugar levels* associated with the condition can damage your nerves, particularly those in your feet, which can make it easy to injure yourself without realising.* High blood sugar* can also damage your blood vessels, restricting the blood supply to your feet. Less blood means your feet will also receive fewer infection-fighting cells, so wounds will take longer to heal and are more likely to become infected. So although I guess the chances are always there, you're much more likely to lose bits of your feet or legs if you don't control your BG levels.


----------



## Amigo (Oct 6, 2016)

I find myself becoming increasingly irked about this programme and frankly don't care what their intention was and whether they achieved it. It's effect seems to have been to engender a fear and sense of fatalistic hopelessness about type 2 diabetes. A kind of 'Abandon all hope and accept your fate fatso' set to a theme tune of public disdain that type 2's will bring down the Health Service under the weight of their feckless gluttony.

Forget hope, options, motivation and education....it was judgemental tele and no doubt played nicely into the stereotypical preconceptions of the alleged 50% of better educated who should know better. Must have been the day they gave migrants a day off from their predictable verbal flogging.

I'm highly motivated and trying to buck the trend but programmes like this drain the motivation and fill me with fear of pointlessness. I notice newbies starting to post who have absorbed a similar depressing message.


----------



## Jonsi (Oct 6, 2016)

Amigo said:


> ...the alleged 50% of better educated who should know better.


Whilst I agree with your sentiments, I'd just want to clarify that intelligence has little to do with education (though application of education requires some intelligence). The average IQ (on the Cattell 'B' scale) is 100. I know some incredibly intelligent people who have little in the way of a 'classic education' and have also encountered some very highly educated,but thoroughly stupid, people


----------



## graj0 (Oct 6, 2016)

Greyhound Gal said:


> . . . . . . where they meet BOTH people who are worst case scenario and have lost their sight and/or limbs PLUS people who are managing their diabetes well and are keeping it under control.



Maybe not at the same time. I wouldn't want to wave my arms and legs at an amputee who may have lost a limb through bad BG control. That's too cruel!


----------



## Owen (Oct 6, 2016)

Amigo said:


> A kind of 'Abandon all hope and accept your fate fatso' set to a theme tune


You can't fight fate, but you can give it a damned good bloody nose


----------



## Amigo (Oct 6, 2016)

Jonsi said:


> Whilst I agree with your sentiments, I'd just want to clarify that intelligence has little to do with education (though application of education requires some intelligence). The average IQ (on the Cattell 'B' scale) is 100. I know some incredibly intelligent people who have little in the way of a 'classic education' and have also encountered some very highly educated,but thoroughly stupid, people



Couldn't agree more Jonsi. I was referring to those supposedly educated about diabetes to a more enlightened degree though there's been a general theme in this debate referring to the 'educated'. Jenny referred to the 'supposed educated elite'. 
I've always believed that there are too many variables to intelligence to accurately plot IQ on the prescribed tests. Emotional intelligence being a vital one. I've too known many very well educated and supposedly intelligent people who are thick as bricks in the ways of the world. They lack what my husband calls, 'common dog' (a Naval term).


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 6, 2016)

Amigo said:


> programmes like this drain the motivation and fill me with fear of pointlessness


I quite agree, IMHO it is quite irresponsible to portray the complications from D as something that is inevitable & cannot be avoided; also quite irresponsible to completely gloss over the fact that we can live long and healthy lives just by making a few adjustments to our lifestyle.
Of course I don't want to be diabetic for the rest of my life but alas I will be.... The irony is that without D I wouldn't be as healthy as I am today, there was just not enough motivation!!!


----------



## trophywench (Oct 6, 2016)

A lot of assumptions are made and always will be made, by the NHS.

If I go out and play in the traffic and get run over by a 38ton artic or stick my foot under a working chainsaw and need an amputation, will I subsequently be admitted to UHCW's Orthopaedic Ward or the Diabetic Ward ?  Would I therefore become a Diabetes Amputation Statistic, quite wrongly?  After all one of my big toes is exactly half dead (well the half that's dead is also not completely dead cos I've only almost killed one nerve and Yes! - I do get stabbing pains in it occasionally and tell it to make it's mind up whether to heal or die LOL) and they ALL wanted to ignore the INJURY I did to cause it and kept saying it was Neuropathy.  I challenged my consultant and asked 'How may cases of totally isolated, unilateral diabetic neuropathy have you ever seen during your career in a healthy otherwise active person my age, where after another 8 years the other side hasn't joined in?'  Funnily enough - he hadn't ever seen one!  whereas he was aware that after injury, 'other' people got such things.

So am I a Diabetic neuropathy statistic or not?

Pete's just said I'd actually be admitted to whatever Ward happened to have a bed! - and I think he's right !


----------



## Hazel (Oct 6, 2016)

Jenny, thought you may be interested to know, I was talking to my DSN this morning and we got chatting about 'that programme'.

Apparently the whole Diabetic wing thought the Panorama was very negative, but it has sparked a lot of debate AND a lot of calls to make appts to see DSN....


----------



## grovesy (Oct 6, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Jenny, thought you may be interested to know, I was talking to my DSN this morning and we got chatting about 'that programme'.
> 
> Apparently the whole Diabetic wing thought the Panorama was very negative, but it has sparked a lot of debate AND a lot of calls to make appts to see DSN....


That does not suprise me!


----------



## Maz2 (Oct 6, 2016)

I watched it too.  They did concentrate on the worse case scenarios although these things do happen to some people.  What irritated me a little though was the constant talk about chocolate.  Yes, OK, if you eat loads of it that is not good but they did not mention much about carbs.  What about cereals and toast at breakfast, fruit juice, pasta, potatoes, sandwiches etc.  When I was told recently that I was at high risk I had not realised that eating this kind of diet day in and day out plus dried fruit plus around 6-7 pieces of fruit of every day was actually a disaster rather than a good diet.  

A friend of mine was diagnosed a couple of years ago and went on a course about it to learn about diet and exercise.  She told me that they told her that a medium jacket potato had a carb equivalent of 16 teaspoons of sugar.  I was absolutely horrified.  I always picked the biggest ones I could find. I would have them on my days off from work, at weekends and whenever I went out anywhere.

Also, they did not say much about the rubbish that is available when you are out and about.  I was travelling back and forth to Southampton recently to join a cruise and when my husband and I went to any of the motorway service stations it was nearly all McDonalds, potatoes, chips, cookies, cakes, sandwiches etc and very little that you would call healthy.  I am not, of course, suggesting that no one should eat a potato or a sandwich but most of the time that is all that is available when you are out anywhere.  I think the programme could have touched on that although I appreciate it was more the cost to the NHS.


----------



## Maz2 (Oct 6, 2016)

Haggis8716 said:


> As a relitivly newly diagnosed T2 I was shocked by the content of the program, thinking what have I got to look forward to. The examples that they gave such as Mr 4 weetabix and frosties do show what it can be like if you do not attempt to control it.
> 
> I have 3 colleuges at work that are T2 and I know they are not looking afterthem self in the way that they should, I only hope that they saw this it might give them a kick in the right direction.
> 
> ...



You may not necessarily have those problems.  I didn't think it was inevitable but, rather, if you did not look after yourself after diagnosis.  I do not mean this comment to upset anyone and I am not suggesting that if anyone gets complications it is their fault, but I just thought that most people were OK provided they looked after themselves.  I suppose there will always be exceptions though.


----------



## Maz2 (Oct 6, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Jenny, thought you may be interested to know, I was talking to my DSN this morning and we got chatting about 'that programme'.
> 
> Apparently the whole Diabetic wing thought the Panorama was very negative, but it has sparked a lot of debate AND a lot of calls to make appts to see DSN....


I must admit I thought it was very negative too but then I suppose that is the point of the media to show the worse cases in everything.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 7, 2016)

Maz2 said:


> You may not necessarily have those problems.  I didn't think it was inevitable but, rather, if you did not look after yourself after diagnosis.  I do not mean this comment to upset anyone and I am not suggesting that if anyone gets complications it is their fault, but I just thought that most people were OK provided they looked after themselves.  I suppose there will always be exceptions though.


One of the problems with Type 2 is that sometimes blood sugar levels may have been high for a number of years before help is sought, and it's possible that complications may have already started when diagnosed. However, learning how to manage things after diagnosis can significantly reduce the impact of any complications, and the likelihood of any further ones developing. Another problem can be that, even when a problem is detected early and help sought, the care is insufficient e.g. a foot infection is not treated aggressively enough, with poor knowledge on the healthcare professional's part of the added danger to a person with diabetes - the infection gets worse and worse, whereas the right level of care could have healed it


----------



## Marsbartoastie (Oct 7, 2016)

Given the debate it's prompted I decided to watch the programme.  I'm not terribly squeamish, but I only got to 1:17 before deciding it wasn't for me.  The sight of a bloodied bone saw was enough to remind me that the risks are serious and this thing therefore requires my serious attention...at all times.  After a lengthy haitus I'm going to test my BG for a week to make sure I'm maintaining decent control.


----------



## graj0 (Oct 7, 2016)

Owen said:


> I stand up for many people, but this guy is a nurse!


On another forum I suggested that he needed a good slapping. It was pointed out that he had an eating disorder and surgery was cheaper than psychiatric treatment which one might get as an anorexic. I know that the evaluation process for gastric surgery will include a chat to a psychiatrist and a dietician. You would have thought the dietician would have said something about his high carb diet. I had to go through this process, not because I wanted surgery, I can and have cut my intake to 1200 calories without surgery, but before they would investigate my weight problem, they had to investigate my eating habits. All I got was a letter saying that I had a weight problem not an eating problem . . . . . . and a broken metabolism, no cure.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 7, 2016)

I am watching this now, I recorded the repeat. 
Some of the voice over I think is quite subtle they did mention too much carbohydrate and sugar, but did not take it further!
 I think could have been a bit more balanced!
I


----------



## MarkT (Oct 8, 2016)

My ass hurts this morning.... I think someone was giving me a good booting last night after watching the documentary!!!


----------



## Andy HB (Oct 9, 2016)

MarkT said:


> My ass hurts this morning.... I think someone was giving me a good booting last night after watching the documentary!!!


I'd report them to the DPL, if I were you (the donkey protection league).

Andy (we call it arse in this country) HB


----------



## grovesy (Oct 10, 2016)

This was featured on Points of View yesterday, though the criticism it featured was the miss  information on Type 1 Diabetes! The producer did admit that they were wrong to say you were born with it!


----------



## Owen (Oct 10, 2016)

grovesy said:


> This was featured on Points of View yesterday, though the criticism it featured was the miss  information on Type 1 Diabetes! The producer did admit that they were wrong to say you were born with it!


Quite right how dare they offend T1's when are plenty of other people to pick on


----------



## Maz2 (Oct 10, 2016)

Northerner said:


> One of the problems with Type 2 is that sometimes blood sugar levels may have been high for a number of years before help is sought, and it's possible that complications may have already started when diagnosed. However, learning how to manage things after diagnosis can significantly reduce the impact of any complications, and the likelihood of any further ones developing. Another problem can be that, even when a problem is detected early and help sought, the care is insufficient e.g. a foot infection is not treated aggressively enough, with poor knowledge on the healthcare professional's part of the added danger to a person with diabetes - the infection gets worse and worse, whereas the right level of care could have healed it



I must admit I did not think of the point about the care being inefficient.  That is terrible considering the amount of diabetes in the population.  Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## MarkT (Oct 10, 2016)

Andy HB said:


> I'd report them to the DPL, if I were you (the donkey protection league).
> 
> Andy (we call it arse in this country) HB


"I was trying to be polite!"


----------



## graj0 (Oct 11, 2016)

grovesy said:


> The producer did admit that they were wrong to say you were born with it!


I'm only playing with semantics here, but when I heard them say that you were born with it I thought they meant genetically. So while at birth you would have a fully working pancreas, there was going to be a time when it would stop working because of genetics and possibly environmental issues.


----------



## Owen (Oct 11, 2016)

graj0 said:


> I'm only playing with semantics here, but when I heard them say that you were born with it I thought they meant genetically. So while at birth you would have a fully working pancreas, there was going to be a time when it would stop working because of genetics and possibly environmental issues.


Is that not the case for all types of diabetes and other illnesses?


----------



## Northerner (Oct 11, 2016)

Owen said:


> Is that not the case for all types of diabetes and other illnesses?


Quite. They don't know the 'cause' of Type 2, since it may have a variety of possible causes, but being born genetically predisposed to it is certainly an important factor, otherwise everyone who became overweight would have it, whereas most overweight people don't. 

Personally, I don't even like the 'clarification' as it firmly implies that Type 2 is wholly avoidable! Here is what Diabetes UK have said:

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/About_us/News/-BBC1-Panorama-team-apologises/


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Northerner said:


> Quite. They don't know the 'cause' of Type 2, since it may have a variety of possible causes, but being born genetically predisposed to it is certainly an important factor, otherwise everyone who became overweight would have it, whereas most overweight people don't.
> 
> Personally, I don't even like the 'clarification' as it firmly implies that Type 2 is wholly avoidable! Here is what Diabetes UK have said:
> 
> https://www.diabetes.org.uk/About_us/News/-BBC1-Panorama-team-apologises/


Just read the link... to qualify it as lame & lack lustre would be an understatement...disappointing...


----------



## Jonsi (Oct 11, 2016)

I just read that piece ...I thought DUK was a Campaigning Organisation ...just going to let all their T2 members be blamed for the NHS overspend are they? Not going to try and clarify the whole issue? ...and actually support their members? Why not come right out and state that the entire programme was wrong because it distorted the cause of T2 (_there's just the one cause then ???_) and wrong in how it portrayed T2's themselves.
Not good enough...must try harder.


----------



## Hazel (Oct 11, 2016)

I agree, DUK missed a great opportunity to tell Panorama that in T2s there can be lots of different reasons.

I know a few T2s who are skinny, exercise daily, so not the 'normal' T2s.

In Scotland there is no carb training for T2s who are prescribed insulin.    Yes there is a great book, Carbs and Cals, but surely nowhere near as helpful as say the T1 type course DAFNE.

Poor, poor show Panorama, and DUK


----------



## Owen (Oct 11, 2016)

Jonsi said:


> I just read that piece ...I thought DUK was a Campaigning Organisation ...just going to let all their T2 members be blamed for the NHS overspend are they? Not going to try and clarify the whole issue? ...and actually support their members? Why not come right out and state that the entire programme was wrong because it distorted the cause of T2 (_there's just the one cause then ???_) and wrong in how it portrayed T2's themselves.
> Not good enough...must try harder.


T2 isn't that the one you were born with?  BOHICA


----------



## grovesy (Oct 11, 2016)

The problem was the Points view only took up the Type 1 criticism, which surprised me as there was quite a bit on Panorma's Facebook page!


----------



## Northerner (Oct 11, 2016)

grovesy said:


> The problem was the Points view only took up the Type 1 criticism, which surprised me as there was quite a bit on Panorma's Facebook page!


The thing that tends to irk me about Type 1 'statements' is that they usually say it's a childhood thing, or at most under 40. I was 49 and there are loads and loads of members here who were diagnosed over 40. Or misdiagnosed as Type 2 because even many in the medical profession believe that it's a 'childhood' thing!  I'd also add that, by always suggesting it's a childhood thing, they often reinforce the myth that you 'grow out of it' 

Sigh! I don't suppose we will ever see a programme where they get everything right!


----------



## graj0 (Oct 11, 2016)

Owen said:


> Is that not the case for all types of diabetes and other illnesses?



Quite possibly.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 11, 2016)

I'll repeat myself a bit here, but the only thing the programme got wrong was that statement about T1. The rest of the programme showed some of the examples of why this is a huge cost to the NHS. The fact that this is a huge cost is true, whichever way you slice it. Don't take it is a personal affront. 

Now we await the programme that tells folk how to not end up like those patients.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> I'll repeat myself a bit here, but the only thing the programme got wrong was that statement about T1. The rest of the programme showed some of the examples of why this is a huge cost to the NHS. The fact that this is a huge cost is true, whichever way you slice it. Don't take it is a personal affront.
> 
> Now we await the programme that tells folk how to not end up like those patients.


Apart from the 'Weetabix' man...I don't recall hearing how those individuals discovered they were diabetic...or when they were diagnosed...or whether they were a long way 'down the line' by the time their condition revealed itself and complications were inevitable...whether or not they got the right treatment...tired of hearing its all about the cost...where does the other 90% of the NHS budget go?...I do and have taken it personally...as have many others...I'll repeat myself here...I do not care to be labelled as an obese sloth who got type 2 diabetes entirely through her own fault...I felt offended by the examples shown...biased...narrow remit...part of the blame culture prevalent in sensational journalism nowadays...


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 11, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> Now we await the programme that tells folk how to not end up like those patients


Where is the sensationalism in that story...... Though I absolutely think it would be a very important story


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 11, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> I do not care to be labelled as an obese sloth who got type 2 diabetes entirely through her own fault


Amen!!!! Though a little overweight I was a fairly active person; fully involved in emergency services when not doing my day job.....


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> Amen!!!! Though a little overweight I was a fairly active person; fully involved in emergency services when not doing my day job.....


Thank you Martin...tired of the stereotypical label that was applied to T2...and I know how that programme made me feel...I have a brother who is diabetic...clearly there is a pre-disposition in our family...were we born with it?...who knows...


----------



## Owen (Oct 11, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> Apart from the 'Weetabix' man...I don't recall hearing how those individuals discovered they were diabetic...or when they were diagnosed...or whether they were a long way 'down the line' by the time their condition revealed itself and complications were inevitable...whether or not they got the right treatment...tired of hearing its all about the cost...where does the other 90% of the NHS budget go?...I do and have taken it personally...as have many others...I'll repeat myself here...I do not care to be labelled as an obese sloth who got type 2 diabetes entirely through her own fault...I felt offended by the examples shown...biased...narrow remit...part of the blame culture prevalent in sensational journalism nowadays...


I believe that the largest cost is mental health followed by circulation then cancer.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 11, 2016)

Owen said:


> I believe that the largest cost is mental health followed by circulation then cancer.


Though one of the doctors in the programme said the cost of dabetes was greater than the top three cancers put together.

And how else could they demonstrate the cause of this expense but by showing these cases? There was no bias. If you recall, they did show the stick thin old cricketer who had well controlled T2, but whose kidneys were failing. Or did everyone miss that bit?


----------



## Owen (Oct 11, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> Though one of the doctors in the programme said the cost of dabetes was greater than the top three cancers put together.


Just quoting these figures from the Nuffield Trust.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> Though one of the doctors in the programme said the cost of dabetes was greater than the top three cancers put together.


And of course we can all believe what 'one of the doctors said'...the information that 'type 1's are born with it'  no doubt came from the same source...and we know how true that is...ultimately we are all fighting the same battle...diabetes...no distinction in that respect...no one  needing treatment should be singled out irrespective of the cost...shamed...embarrassed....scared...used as some sort of medieval whipping boy...disgraceful.


----------



## mikeyB (Oct 11, 2016)

Ah yes, the don't believe the experts argument. The commentator said type 1s are born with it, not a doctor. Why is there no doubt it came from the same source? Because you think it did.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Martin Canty said:


> Where is the sensationalism in that story...... Though I absolutely think it would be a very important story


Good question Martin...simple answer...none...no doubt such a programme wouldn't warrant a second thought for Panorama producers.


----------



## Owen (Oct 11, 2016)

From the 2014-2015 NHS top ten priorities

4. Tackling obesity and preventing diabetes NHS England will continue to support interventions to help change the health-related behaviour of patients and staff, in line with NICE guidance, for smoking, alcohol, obesity and physical activity. It will have the new NHS Diabetes Prevention programme up and running and available to 10,000 at risk individuals, and will develop a plan to roll it out more widely in 2016-17, in partnership with Public Health England and Diabetes UK. It will work with the NHS and other employers to promote healthier workplaces and support staff health and wellbeing


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> Ah yes, the don't believe the experts argument. The commentator said type 1s are born with it, not a doctor. Why is there no doubt it came from the same source? Because you think it did.


Disagree with me by all means mikey...but don't patronise me...I know how that programme made me and many others feel...don't try to diminish my reaction to it...I have made my point...you do not have to agree...I respect your right to do that...why not reciprocate...


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Owen said:


> From the 2014-2015 NHS top ten priorities
> 
> 4. Tackling obesity and preventing diabetes NHS England will continue to support interventions to help change the health-related behaviour of patients and staff, in line with NICE guidance, for smoking, alcohol, obesity and physical activity. It will have the new NHS Diabetes Prevention programme up and running and available to 10,000 at risk individuals, and will develop a plan to roll it out more widely in 2016-17, in partnership with Public Health England and Diabetes UK. It will work with the NHS and other employers to promote healthier workplaces and support staff health and wellbeing


Good to hear that Owen...lets hope it happens...


----------



## Hazel (Oct 11, 2016)

Phew this thread still provokes controversy.

Apart from the blatant T1s are all born with it, neither Panorama or DUK picked up that not all T2s are overweight and eat rubbish, I know a couple of skinny, well controlled T2s.

I still maintain there is a complete lack of education, pre and post diagnosis.   I believe I had T2 a good 2 years before GP relented and told me I was diabetic.     What damage could have been done in that 2 year period.    Her advice to me was to read up on the internet.

Diabetes is, whether T1 or T2, is a complex condition and I genuinely believe Panorama and DUK mislead everyone in their protrayal of it.

I came into Diabetes, near the end of being told to have a good portion of carbs with every meal.    I am 62.     Look at the age of the amputees, are they still living their live on outdated information........


----------



## grovesy (Oct 11, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Phew this thread still provokes controversy.
> 
> Apart from the blatant T1s are all born with it, neither Panorama or DUK picked up that not all T2s are overweight and eat rubbish, I know a couple of skinny, well controlled T2s.
> 
> ...


Yeah and some experts say people can have had for up to 10 years before diagnosis! 
Also researchers keep finding more genes implicated in Type 2!


----------



## Greyhound Gal (Oct 11, 2016)

I agree with points form both sides of this debate. We all agree there should be better education of both joe public and health professionals. However, 'arguing' amongst ourselves does not solve anything. Why not put that energy into trying to redress the issue. There is nothing to stop members of this forum producing a video or something similar and posting it on social media to properly explain diabetes. Why not put the energy from complaining into doing something


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

[


Greyhound Gal said:


> I agree with points form both sides of this debate. We all agree there should be better education of both joe public and health professionals. However, 'arguing' amongst ourselves does not solve anything. Why not put that energy into trying to redress the issue. There is nothing to stop members of this forum producing a video or something similar and posting it on social media to properly explain diabetes. Why not put the energy from complaining into doing something


I don't consider it arguing GG...healthy discussion is always needed...BOTH sides need to be heard.


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Phew this thread still provokes controversy.
> 
> Apart from the blatant T1s are all born with it, neither Panorama or DUK picked up that not all T2s are overweight and eat rubbish, I know a couple of skinny, well controlled T2s.
> 
> ...


Agree with you entirely Hazel


----------



## Greyhound Gal (Oct 11, 2016)

That was why it was in inverted commas


----------



## Bubbsie (Oct 11, 2016)

Bubbsie said:


> [
> 
> I don't consider it arguing GG...healthy discussion is always needed...BOTH sides need to be heard.


Ok GG...take your point...didn't notice the commas...that'll teach me to pay attention...


----------



## graj0 (Oct 12, 2016)

Hazel said:


> Her advice to me was to read up on the internet.



This is just an observation Hazel. I was diagnosed in June 1997 after a routine urine test for an insurance, no symptoms but struggling with weight that didn't respond to the low fat, reduced calorie, increased exercise regime. I was seen by an endocrinologist in November 1997 and he very much took the "You're overweight, it's your fault" line, he even said that he was fed up with obese people coming to him because they were diagnosed with diabetes. I can't repeat the words I would have liked to have called him in this forum, although the blue theme would be suitable. I hadn't been lazy in that 5 months, using the internet to see what it was all about. My father was type II and for some reason I wasn't in shock at the diagnosis but the way this so called professional medic had treated me. I mentioned my efforts to find out more about diabetes and reducing carbs. He said that I shouldn't believe everything I read on the net and not to reduce carbs, a statement backed up by a GP some years later. 

It's very difficult to get across the steps to take with regards to reducing carbs because of the advice given by GPs (no choice, NICE guidelines) and the NHS in general. Even in Sweden where they admit that they have the empirical evidence to show that we should be eating more fat and less carbs, that the old less fat more carbs is wrong, still haven't changed their official guidelines (when I last looked anyway). We keep chipping away but I'm now finding it difficult to try and tell people, even my own wife who is very active but suddenly gaining weight (recent prescription change for BP Meds?) will not be told that she should cut carbs. One day.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 12, 2016)

graj0 said:


> This is just an observation Hazel. I was diagnosed in June 1997 after a routine urine test for an insurance, no symptoms but struggling with weight that didn't respond to the low fat, reduced calorie, increased exercise regime. I was seen by an endocrinologist in November 1997 and he very much took the "You're overweight, it's your fault" line, he even said that he was fed up with obese people coming to him because they were diagnosed with diabetes. I can't repeat the words I would have liked to have called him in this forum, although the blue theme would be suitable. I hadn't been lazy in that 5 months, using the internet to see what it was all about. My father was type II and for some reason I wasn't in shock at the diagnosis but the way this so called professional medic had treated me. I mentioned my efforts to find out more about diabetes and reducing carbs. He said that I shouldn't believe everything I read on the net and not to reduce carbs, a statement backed up by a GP some years later.
> 
> It's very difficult to get across the steps to take with regards to reducing carbs because of the advice given by GPs (no choice, NICE guidelines) and the NHS in general. Even in Sweden where they admit that they have the empirical evidence to show that we should be eating more fat and less carbs, that the old less fat more carbs is wrong, still haven't changed their official guidelines (when I last looked anyway). We keep chipping away but I'm now finding it difficult to try and tell people, even my own wife who is very active but suddenly gaining weight (recent prescription change for BP Meds?) will not be told that she should cut carbs. One day.


I was a study session on Diabetes and pregnancy back in the 90's and I asked the Diabetic consultant running the session what were risks of developing Type 2 if family members had and he said around 50%! So it was know then!


----------



## MikeTurin (Oct 18, 2016)

Mark Parrott said:


> Some quite openly talk about their condition & in a lot of cases they seem to think their complications are what happens with diabetes & nothing can be done about it. They are just following the advice of their doctors.  And the majority think it's only sugar they must avoid. I do sometimes mention that l am type 2 on diet & exercise & the response us quite remarkable. I get 'you can't have proper diabetes' or 'it's not possible to control diabetes on diet only'. Then they may talk about what they are having for dinner tonight, & I'm quite shocked when it involves so many carbs. When l say l don't eat potatoes, rice, bread or pasta, the response is usually 'what the hell do you eat then?'.


I have an engineering degree, and one of the thighs I had to learn at the university and for the graduation thesis was to search informations in books and in Internet and make a synthesis. So the first thing I've done when I was diagnosed with T2 was to borrow books on diabetes at the public library. I think I've gathered some useful informations, especially how the correct diet is a key factor on all the diabetes variants. 
I've also got a diet from a dietician, that I followed with great attention, also using an app to track calories and carbs, tracked my weight and got all in control.
I think that having an university degree, or be a library mice, must not be a prerequisite for a successful diabetes control, bus if I were to follow the advices from my GP and diabetes specialist I was only with a bunch of photocopies and a two hour course on diabetes basics.
I still have some problems to follow a steady diet and control my weight and I feel that on these things I will not recieve useful informations from my GP and that anyway she will not send me to a specialist unless it's too late, when some complication shows up...


----------



## MikeTurin (Oct 18, 2016)

mikeyB said:


> It's not just the doctors, it's the diabetes nurses who are at the coalface of seeing T2s, and their training seems to be woefully out of date. And as we saw in the programme, you can give these people testing kits, and they proceed to ignore results, or appear unwilling to respond to them. You can say this is due to poor education in diabetes, though I think it is (self) denial that this is potentially a high morbidity illness, and refuse to conform to advice received.
> 
> It's not just the fault of the doctors or nurses. Diabetes, above any other chronic disease, is an illness dependent on self control without any apparent benefit. Smoking and drinking alcohol are different - the benefit of stopping is evident from the start.


I think the problem is quite complex, but my personal idea is that the public health must educate people to follow an healthy lifestyle in order to avoid chronic illinesses, and when one becomes a diabetic this education must be detailed and stronger.
If one gets confusing information from a doctor and doesn't know better is easy to think that one gets confused. If the information is that diabetes is progressive, one have to take a lot of medication and eat some starchy food then one will follow the guidelines given and if the condition worsen, that's inevitable...


----------

