If someone said that smoking increased your chances of developing lung cancer, would you give up smoking or would you only give up smoking if you knew exactly what that risk was?
Do you think most people who gave up smoking as they knew it caused lung cancer knew what the actual risk was?
1 Like
Most probably not only one in a million⌠
1 Like
Actually, the correct statement is
â11% of the population are diagnosed with type 2â
but as youâll know the condition often goes undiagnosed for many years. Type 2 usually takes years or decades to develop.
An additional 20% are believed to have the condition but donât know, thatâs 30% with type 2. Says the CDC, not some obscure no-name outlet that aims to generate clicks. And another 98 million adults, or more than one in three, have pre-diabetes i.e. developing type 2, almost all of whom are unaware.
Together thatâs about two thirds of the US adults. And roughly the same rate as the overweight (no the match isnât perfect, but yes itâll be very high).
https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/library/socialmedia/infographics.html
2 Likes
However they do not have diabetes and may never develop diabetes.
According to an ADA expert panel, up to 70% of individuals with prediabetes will eventually develop diabetes.
Treatment for prediabetes uses metformin (Glumetza).
Anyway, the CDC prediabetes numbers do not make sense, they claim 30% with type 2 including 20% who are believed to have the condition but donât track the prediabetes predictions.
However the overweight + obese percentages for the overall US population are reaching 39.4% in 1997 , 44.5% in 2004, 56.6% in 2007, 63.8% (adults) and 17% (children) in 2008.
Consequently, many more prediabetes people should now have diabetes.
You are again analysing a leaf while failing to notice the forest. The doctor quoted by OP most probably exaggerated for effect, but was broadly right that waist circumference increase is generally a BAD thing.
1 Like
What is a healthy waist size?
Several organizations, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Heart Association and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, define abdominal obesity as anything above the following waist circumference measurements:
Men: Greater than 102 cm (40 inches)
Women: Greater than 88 cm (35 inches)
There isnât a defined âhealthyâ waist size, per se. Instead, the focus is on keeping it less than 40 inches for men and 35 inches for women.
Looking into it further, I think the doctor quoted originally was saying that being obese wasnât necessarily the problem but having a lot of visceral fat around the liver and other organs gave a greater risk of type II diabetes.
You could be pretty skinny but with a bit of a belly and be at risk.
You could be a bit bigger all round but be at less of a risk with lower visceral fat, especially if you were otherwise active.
But, itâs like BMI, far from ideal but better than nothing for most people.
2 Likes
Unlike T1D, pre-diabetes and T2D can be reversed or treated.
Untreated these conditions are known to cause
- Damage to Heart and Blood Vessels
- Kidney Disease
- Eye Damage
- Slow Wound Healing
- Peripheral Neuropathy
- Other Neuropathies
- Skin Conditions
- Oral Health Problems
- Depression
Heart attacks, strokes, partial or complete blindness, amputations, tooth loss just to name a few. All of which are very expensive to treat and manage.
So, perhaps, drugs which suppress hunger are actually a good thing.
Exactly this. He talked about the risks, not that everyone will get diabetes in the end. People have a hard time understanding this. And he mentioned the body mass your body frame is fit to carry, which of course varies from one individual to another, hence not an ideal number for your waist or weight, rather your own best variables which could have been at 21 or not. Chances are most people were more fit or healthier in their twenties, but of course this doesnât apply to everyone.
AndâŚof course this is not the only factor, there are other factors at play - not in the least genetics, predisposition. But this one seems like one factor that could or should be more easily to control.
Iâm glad it was a bit of a food for thought, however clickbait-ish it may look. (and the guy is a professor at Newcastle University, donât know why people always bring up the USA first thing first)
Again, the professor was speaking at a diabetes conference for medical professionals. It cannot be click-bait for a wider audience if he said it in this conference.
People often use hyperbole at the beginning and end of conference speeches - it gets peoplesâ attention. He was making a point. Maybe the other conference attendees understood that he probably didnât mean it literally.
The article was originally published by Rachel Moss in the Huffington Post (and American magazine) but in their UK edition. She is their Lifestyle editor and nor a medical professional. She got the reaction she wanted.
1 Like
I know, it was my side comment on someone elseâs here comment about clickbait articles.
1 Like
Sure, T2D is not certain, but with something like 70% risk I donât see the value in the distinction, especially given that this is an estimate in the first place. Also, tracking of the undiagnosed cases canât be done given that theyâre undiagnosed.
Yes, treatmentâs available. But that requires a proper diagnose which generally doesnât happen until very late, if at all.
Unless at 21 one was already obese as 17% (US children) were in 2008.
@marton
Again, youâre taking as reference point the USA. I was the opposite of obese at 21. I worked part-time while being a student too and hardly had any time to have proper meals.
I agree, but only under specific circumstances i.e. more serious cases.
I was always cautious about the side effects of any medicines, thatâs why I preferred plant based medicines when available. (which are known to have less side effects)
There was a debate on EF about some âmagicâ stuff (ozempic is solicited by both people who need it and people who donât btw) - I donât believe in it. One has to understand their bad eating behaviour and patterns first. For instance both OH and I have gained weight during the pandemic. We both spent most of the time at home and it was easy to over-eat and under-exercise. Yes we had some fitness equipments at home but didnât really use them as we should have.
When I mentioned I started again to go to gym as soon as it was possible some people jumped to comment that you donât need gym to get fitter. Well perhaps some donât, but I do. I get inspired by other people.
When I mentioned we started IF to lose weight some people jumped to comment how stupid this is etc. Well, it worked. Iâm not on my best yet but thatâs another issue.
3 Likes
The US publishes lots of useful statistics that are easily accessed so I do use them a lot.
1 Like
If something stupid works, then perhaps its not stupid. Well done on staying fit, whatever model youve chosen
2 Likes
I think this is the crux of it, but it also is highly individual. I recall as a child that there was quite a trend among my classmates that at home they had to âclear their plateâ before they were allowed to leave the table (or risk getting the same plate for breakfast 
). Consistently eating all the food youâve been given under duress instead of all the food you can manage requires you to over-ride the full feeling you get that tells you to stop eating.
If you do this for long enough you no longer know when you are full. I guess this is where the semi glutide therapies take up the slack and give you some control or some kind of benchmark again.
It makes sense in a way; people trying to give up smoking use nicotine patches to ease the uncontrolled addiction so why not restore some control to people where willpower is just not enough. At the point they need these therapies, itâs clear they are desperate and need help.
That may have been me. It wasnât to try and stop people going to the gym but more as a point that people donât need to go to the gym to take exercise as there are hundreds of exercises one can do at home with no, or minimal equipment.
This was for people who may have not have had time or money to go to the gym or perhaps didnât like the peacocking which can go on there.
So do I - even if they are imaginary.
The first time I used a sports watch for running. it told me I was doing well and I was keeping up with my ârunning partnerâ. I looked around but no one was there.
My ârunning partnerâ overtook me on a hill (maybe they cheated).
There was a zombie version of this too - an app for a smart phone where âzombiesâ chase you.
Same if Iâm cycling up a hill and I see cyclists further up - I sometimes try and catch them up.
If they are lower down I try and go faster so they donât catch me. Double points if I get to the top before them and they are on ebikes (which admitted only happened once).
They give me motivation to push myself but they never find out.
1 Like
Actually I was pretty lucky from this point of view, not because my parents didnât try, but because they always gave in⌠
My mom recalls a period when I made her filter the soups for me, eating only specific meat parts, I mean ridiculous stuff Iâm still embarrassed I did ask⌠(at least I always felt like I would be highly hypocritical if I asked that from my kids)
1 Like
My kids donât need to eat everything on their plate when their food is served to them.
They donât get portions that they canât finish either - I think that encourages both over-eating and food wastage.
However, if they want seconds (or thirds, or more) then I expect them to eat what they have asked for, or helped themselves too themselves.
Seems to work.
2 Likes