![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
KQED's Forum had a good segment on the rise in diagnoses of diabetes this morning - I caught some of it as I was driving to work this morning. (I think there will eventually be audio available at that link, but it's not there now.)
The show generally did a good job of covering a complicated and contentious topic. But I winced a bit when they opened the lines for calls, because there was a particular subject that I just knew was going to come up. And it did: multiple calls from people who have, or whose children have, type I diabetes, pleading with the presenters to carefully distinguish between type I and type II diabetes, because they're tired of people assuming that they (or their children) are fat, or lazy, or ate too much sugar.
Now, I genuinely have all the sympathy in the world for type I diabetics, who have a crummy condition that isn't their fault.
But I can't help but wonder why it never seems to occur to anyone that rather than asking the general public to learn to distinguish between a biochemical breakdown in which the body stops producing insulin and a biochemical breakdown in which the body fails to efficiently use insulin, we could just stop being nasty and judgmental towards people about their biochemical breakdowns. Which would help people with type I diabetes, and type II diabetes, and mental illness, and all sorts of conditions, and no one would have to learn any endocrinology. Sounds like win/win to me.
The show generally did a good job of covering a complicated and contentious topic. But I winced a bit when they opened the lines for calls, because there was a particular subject that I just knew was going to come up. And it did: multiple calls from people who have, or whose children have, type I diabetes, pleading with the presenters to carefully distinguish between type I and type II diabetes, because they're tired of people assuming that they (or their children) are fat, or lazy, or ate too much sugar.
Now, I genuinely have all the sympathy in the world for type I diabetics, who have a crummy condition that isn't their fault.
But I can't help but wonder why it never seems to occur to anyone that rather than asking the general public to learn to distinguish between a biochemical breakdown in which the body stops producing insulin and a biochemical breakdown in which the body fails to efficiently use insulin, we could just stop being nasty and judgmental towards people about their biochemical breakdowns. Which would help people with type I diabetes, and type II diabetes, and mental illness, and all sorts of conditions, and no one would have to learn any endocrinology. Sounds like win/win to me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-11 03:26 pm (UTC)Diabetes is really complicated. I'm sure that when we actually understand the causes on a molecular level, we'll find that there are a lot more than two types.