[jacobsam622]

Okay question of the day

How good a job do you think the ADA and other groups are doing in the fight against diabetes.

Me personnally I think that the ADA pretty much writes us(type 2) off as we get older. I have been reading a book written payed for and published by The ADA Called 1001 tips for living well with diabetes. The book for the most part has some good information about diabetes but when it come to type 2 they either think we dont care or are not willing to make an effort. If I read one more time how being over weight s causes diadbetes I am going to scream, Or how people with type 2 should not worry about tight control, or how we should be concern as much with testing.

So what do you think

[JediSkipdogg]

I think they all suck. Straight and forward suck. There's worse language I'd use but I don't want to get banned. LOL

For an advocacy group you never hear of them fighting for anything. Why are test strips still $1 a piece? Where are they in the cause to lower diabetes drug prices? Why is insulin increasing more than the cost of living yet they claim the largest part of a new drug is R&D? Last I checked Humalog has been out a while and the R&D has long been covered and I haven't heard of them researching for any new insulins. Last I checked Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and like companies are profiting billions.

They are also doing little to help in the cause for changes in insurance coverage. I'm just not sure where their money goes anymore.

When I was young I use to be a huge advocate for the JDRF. However, they have lost the R and now the R should go towards money dumped into other companies for treatment.

Dr. Denise L. Faustman whom is widely known for the closest to the best treatment method (where the body controls insulin production itself) was denied funding by the JDRF and ADA. Every scientist in a cure is looking towards her, so why are the two diabetes foundations looking the other way when it comes to supporting her but they have no problem supporting MM or Lifescan.

My opinion is they have long failed. My above comments are centered towards type 1s since we have the largest restrictions and they have done nothing for us.

[Alice]

They don't take advantage of their "branding"...I think, along with JDRF, they are more conservative than pro-active in improving the lives of diabetics. I think more education of the general public as to what causes diabetes would be helpful in the workplace, school and overall improvement of stereotypes. (I'm really tired of the "eating sugar causes diabetes" mentality that permeates this country)

Yes, add insurance discrimination, job discrimination and negative attitudes of the medical field...they have their work cut out. JDRF are pro's at raising money (thanks to the mothers of the world) but little is done for education.

Same with ADA. When is the last time you heard a doctor discuss diabetes on TV in an interview at depth...like forms of cancer, lupus & such are discussed? The spokesman has always been Mary Tyler Moore...whether she likes it or not. They haven't updated that PR practice in years.

[xMenace]

I almost totally agree with Kev. They all suck. Or at least they mostly do.

I was always told to donate to the CDA because the JDF wasted too much money. Ha! To me it looks the other way around.

The JDRF at least has some advocacy groups, is starting an outreach program, and is beginning to try and count heads. But all groups still have a long way to go. IMO they have to lose the cover-my-*** mentality before they can inflict any real change.

[Mich]

Here's my take on it. (And I've watched them grow since the beginning.)

ADA? Cutting-edge they aren't. They do an OK job of keeping 1992 Diabetes knowledge out there. It does help the newly diagnosed--it's agood place to start. Unfortunately, they take so long to change their judgement of treatments, meds, etc that they JUSY NOW decided to endorse a low-carb diet. And only temporarily to lose weight. Who the heck decides these things, Martians who just landed on earth?

ADA has backed legislation to remove discrimination from the workplace and forced schools to deal with previously ignored diabetic children. They took up our cause after 9-11 so that we could take our supplies aboard a plane.

That said, I will NEVER forgive them for not supporting Denise Faustman.

JDRF--Previously JDF. I was thrilled at the beginning, Stood up strongly for stem cell research, backed pump technology and meter research including CGMS. Kept Diabetes fund-raising in the forefront. Mary Tyler Moore, a popular actress admitted publicly to being diabetic. That was a big step in those days.

But along with that came HEAVY politics. Invested in Pump and meter companies-- supposedly for research you understand.. Still backing stem cell research as the best answer. What do you think happened when Faustman's promising research came along based on something already approved? It wasn't a big money maker... This particular thing she was researching had nothing to do with stem cells. If it worked (!) all it would do is actually cure the root cause of diabetes, even in people who had been diabetic for years.

No money? Not an "approved" channel of research? NO INTEREST. In fact, the opposite. Just google JDRF and Faustman.

I haven't given them a penny since that time. I've encouraged my friends to either support Faustmanlabs.com directly or the more broadly-based Iacocca Foundation. Even if Denise Faustman doesn't cure diabetes, she should have been recognized and backed as a strong possibility.

I wish it wasn't so, but in spite of my efforts to resist sounding like a conspiricy theorist, I do believe our country is more run by corporations now than conscience. There are very few Jonas Salks left. Bless his heart for what he did for all of us who are here today, ridding us of Polio.

Just my opinion, you understand. Because you asked.

[fgummett]

Sadly I have to agree... it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that the big pharmaceuticals are working to rid us all of sickness and disease; thus making the World a better place, but in reality they all answer to their shareholders... bottom line is the almighty dollar.

[Scrabblechick]

I agree the ADA is a good place to start, but don't read the recent research news! Instead of promoting Dr. Faustman's work, there's an article about diabetics being more likely to suffer from Alzheimer's Disease! WHO THE BLAZES WANTS TO READ ABOUT THAT??!!! Not me, that's for sure. That's counterproductive, IMHO. I mean, how many newly DX diabetics might see that article and think, "Well, I'm going to be a senile wreck in a few years, so might as well do what I want to!" I shudder to think.

You've gotta talk about complications, no doubt, but you also have to include the success stories, too. People have to have some hope.

[Holly]

It isn't just diabetes. The medical industrial complex is indeed very, very strong. All other medically driven diseases face the same issues. Compare diabetes with cancer and you will see similar frustrations. The public and corporate donations support a high percentage of administrative costs. Both diseases support a medically driven industry that really can't "afford" and really isn't motivated to hang themselves by finding a cure unless it has economic potential.

[Scrabblechick]

Agreed Holly, but cancer victims (except for heavy smokers) are generally universally pitied and cancer is very much in the public eye. There are so many foundations and organizations dedicated to stamping it out. Celebrities stump for cancer cures. Who advocates for us? Pretty much Mary Tyler Moore, bless her. Mind you, I'm all for all the cancer research available and I totally support people helping cancer victims as much as they can.

Diabetics, however, are often seen as pariahs, particularly those of us who just "let our weight get out of control" and "did it to ourselves." We're in the same category as the heavy smokers who get lung cancer. It doesn't matter that my dad, his identical twin, their younger brother, my paternal grandfather, three of his sisters, my first cousin and my sister all have/had the D. It's quite obviously in the family. My dad wasn't obese, and never had been, and never was, when he was DX. His top weight was about 220, and he was six feet tall and coached basketball at that time. Certainly, he got plenty of exercise.

The only thing anyone sees is the fact that I am significantly overweight. Which is precisely why my boss does not, and if I can keep it that way, will NEVER know I am a Type 2. He hates fat people anyway, and I'd never have a minute's peace if he ever saw me eating anything, knowing I have the D. Nothing I can do about it, though, since Alabama is an "at will" work state. That means I don't have to give a reason for leaving, but it also means I can be fired for good reason, bad reason or none at all, and if I'm not within a defined discrimination group, I'm TSOL.

I'd love to see the ADA get real about some of those issues.

[DarthDiabetes]

I think they all suck too! And from my point of view, limited, seems especially the ADA is totally geared towards Type 2. I have only been this involved of course for a few months, but I already see that there is zero money in a cure for type 1 and probably no more for type 2.

[Deltagirl1976]

It seems like to me everything is geared for the type 1 diabetic. Everything I read about type 2's is all about loseing weight or having weight loss srugery. Its so irratateing having dr's throw weight loss surgery when they come across a overweight type 2.

[Spock]

... and then how about people like me who need to gain weight?

[Hammer]

It's interesting to see that others share in my "conspiracy" theory about pharmaceutical companies. It is a conspiracy of sorts, it's just a somewhat different sort of conspiracy.

The pharmaceutical industry is no different than any other industry in that it's main function is to make money. Every industry exists to make money. Regardless of what that industry manufactures, their product isn't their focus....money is.

I don't know anything about the diabetes industry, but like any other disease driven industry, it's the money that determines it's survival.

I once had to service an office machine in an office at the one of the large cancer foundations. While I was there I noticed some things that seemed odd. The office was plush with nice carpeting on the floor, nice artwork on the walls, a fancy desk, and there was a full bar in the office that was cloaked by folding doors. I asked why there was a bar in a business office. The executive who worked there told me it was for clients....they'd come in and discuss how to raise money and have a few drinks. Your donations to this foundation went for things like this bar, the office, and for the executive who plied the clients with booze. Their whole operation was geared toward making money, not in using the money for research.

There's no question in my mind that if the established foundations have a say in it, they will never find a cure for diabetes, cancer, the common cold, and any other high profit diseases out there. There's too much money at stake.

Think about it....how much money do the drug companies make off of cold remedies? You know, the over the counter, totally useless medicines that don't cure anything. Each year they rake in billions of dollars for these do-nothing cold medications. Now suppose some scientist working in the Amazon rain forest discovers an herb that totally cures the common cold, and this herb can be made into a pill that requires you to take one, and the next day your cold is completely cured. Let's say this pill cost 15¢ to produce, with an on the shelf price of $1. How much money do you think the drug companies would lose if they marketed this pill? What do you think would happen to the cure? It would disappear.

The same thing would happen to any other "cure" that might come about. The only way a cure will be found and reach the people is if it's discovered by a small private research company working alone. A small research company has no interest in the existing drug market, so whatever they discover would be their mainstay...their big seller, so it would benefit them to market it.

Drug companies think we're all stupid....that we're blind to what they're doing, but we see it every day. The over priced test strips, insulin, pills, etc. They tell us the money was for the development of these products. That's bull. If it cost them so much to develop these products, then why are they making billions a year in profits? Wouldn't they be breaking even or just making a small profit, since these development costs would be lowering their profits?

These companies aren't about me and you, they're about making the shareholders happy, and if they help us in the process, that's just a side benefit.

[Deltagirl1976]

I just dont see how dr's can say that gasteric bypass and lapband are the cure all of type 2 diabeties, IF that was the case then youd think that would be the stadard of care. BOOM your diagnosed as type 2 lets have surgery vs giving a personal all these meds. I wonder what happend to eating senceable and exerciseing. Seems like dr's are too quick to do surgery vs just dealing with the issue at hand.

[Holly]

It's not always about weight. My twin is heavier than I am and does not have diabetes. Sigh......she has an aggressive form of breast cancer.