3 ms·

T2D diagnosis is labeled as something awful a few times in the article, e.g. >If Kay wanted to continue to lose weight, live pain-free, and stave off a dreaded

by Groxx 4y ago

T2D diagnosis is labeled as something awful a few times in the article, e.g. >If Kay wanted to continue to lose weight, live pain-free, and stave off a dreaded diabetes diagnosis... Not having anyone close with diabetes, so I'm quite unfamiliar with that landscape: why is being diagnosed with type-2 "dreaded"? If it's a valid diagnosis, and it would solve many of your problems, it feels like a fairly obvious choice... I'm sure there are social stigmas around it, but is that all? Or are there some severe insurance implications or something?

ryeights 4y ago
I interpreted that to mean that she is pre-diabetic and will soon develop diabetes without the assistance of the drug to alter her eating habits.
- Groxx 4y ago
  Surely that would have been true three months ago as well? $25/month is absurdly affordable for preventing that and that'd have been a truly awesome option... but unless it has increased her diabetes symptoms, she has likely been close to but resisting that diagnosis for years. Or is it more that they're worried about developing "full" type-2 in a few years if nothing else changes? But if that's the case, trying to get diagnosed with it ASAP seems like a reasonable route, not dreading it. --- Edit: correction, ignore the below. Rogers here is a diagnosed diabetic who had to stop using it due to shortages. --- >Due to shortages, Rogers had to stop taking Mounjaro for three weeks. “I was a wreck over it and full of despair,” said the 58-year-old. “I gained several pounds back, but I was surprised at how badly I felt when my [blood glucose] numbers got out of control again. It was a wakeup call to me to realize how sick diabetes makes you.” Tbh that sounds like resisting diagnosis, not worrying about a future health decline.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
woodruffw 4y ago
I think you're distinguishing between having T2D and being diagnosed with it, when the article is using the latter as an idiom for the former. The implication is that she doesn't currently have T2D.

by Groxx 4y ago

ryeights 4y ago

I interpreted that to mean that she is pre-diabetic and will soon develop diabetes without the assistance of the drug to alter her eating habits.

Groxx 4y ago
Surely that would have been true three months ago as well? $25/month is absurdly affordable for preventing that and that'd have been a truly awesome option... but unless it has increased her diabetes symptoms, she has likely been close to but resisting that diagnosis for years. Or is it more that they're worried about developing "full" type-2 in a few years if nothing else changes? But if that's the case, trying to get diagnosed with it ASAP seems like a reasonable route, not dreading it. --- Edit: correction, ignore the below. Rogers here is a diagnosed diabetic who had to stop using it due to shortages. --- >Due to shortages, Rogers had to stop taking Mounjaro for three weeks. “I was a wreck over it and full of despair,” said the 58-year-old. “I gained several pounds back, but I was surprised at how badly I felt when my [blood glucose] numbers got out of control again. It was a wakeup call to me to realize how sick diabetes makes you.” Tbh that sounds like resisting diagnosis, not worrying about a future health decline.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

woodruffw 4y ago

I think you're distinguishing between having T2D and being diagnosed with it, when the article is using the latter as an idiom for the former. The implication is that she doesn't currently have T2D.