4 ms·
Most of them got there for lack of interest in dietary change, so pushing a cure they have repeatedly rejected is not likely to be successful. We see this with
by throwawaysleep 2y ago
Most of them got there for lack of interest in dietary change, so pushing a cure they have repeatedly rejected is not likely to be successful.
We see this with obesity. "Diet and exercise" has been the standard offering for decades. On a population level, it is worthless. You could say the same about Ozempic, but Ozempic is the only thing that has led to any meaningful weight loss on a population level besides famine.
American hospitals are frankly full of people who can't even use their insulin.
- hilux 2y ago> Most of them got there for lack of interest in dietary change, so pushing a cure they have repeatedly rejected is not likely to be successful. That's not true for everyone - at least not for me. For years I happily drank "green smoothies" that were undoing much of the benefit of running marathons. Most people grew up thinking that our diet should be based on a foundation of carbs, because that's what we were told. And that is false. I agree with you that many people cannot or will not change, but it makes no sense to say "don't even give people the information that can change their lives, but instead continue to lie to them."
- s1artibartfast 2y agoI agree that something is wrong if someone gets to the point of diabetes without encountering the idea of cutting carbs from their diet. Once you get there, it is a tougher decision than that. Then you have to decide to prescribe insulin or advocate for a low carb treatment that very few patients succeed at. That said, I'm for presenting the options, and their tradeoffs, even if it means worse outcomes for patients on average. Medicine should not take away agency or informed consent, even if it produces better outcomes.
- m463 2y agoWell, we now have ozempic/etc which means compliance might be ok.