1. You're right on the mark Diane!!
I have been a long Advocate for changing the nomenclature.
Type 1 Diabetes should remain T1DM or Diabetes.
Type 2 Diabetes should be re-named IRD or Insulin Resistant Disease, which it is.
These are 2 Different Diseases with Different Etiologies, Treatment and Prognosis.
Most people in Healthcare would rather sit and do nothing about this.
It reminds me of people who like to identify with their Illness by calling themselves their particular Disease........such as Diabetic. A person is more than their Illness and as such should not be referred to it by that name.

Posted at 11:20PM on Aug 19th 2007 by BetterCell

2. Hi Diane & BetterCell,

The fact is that type 1, type 2 & type 3 diabetes are all manifestations of the same cure ... for a the disease of "relative HYPOglycaemia" all of which types [of diabetes] are currently being treated with GM insulin ... a HYPOglycaemic substance.

Type 1, type 2 & type 3 diabetes could / should all be graded as to the Diabetic's degree of CARBOHYDRATE resistance [rather than insulin resistance] eg the amount of carbohydrate a Person can consume before glucose overflows into their urine [because the CARBOHYDRATE is being RESISTED].

Human Beings, including 'Diabetics' have ZERO requirement for CARBOHYDRATES and certain Human Beings, especially "type 1 Diabetics" actively demonstrate this with substantial "CARBOHYDRATE RESISTANCE".

All 'Diabetics' have a carbohydrate 'allergy' [aka carbohydrate resistance] to a greater or lesser degree because the CARBOPHILIA fashion is to continue to eat carbohydrates too often ie too often to be processed by a 'Diabetic's LIVER' that is already 'overflowing' with glycogen / glucose stores.

Diabetes aka HYPERglycaemia is a protective physiological response to the extraordinary dangers of relative HYPOglycaemia.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0F-4684HBY-2&_user=10&_coverDate=08%2F02%2F2002&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=2bdaaa088ad4b1036e1bce55328e63f0

Relative HYPOglycaemia diseases [associated with 'diabetes mellitus'] start when 'treatments' including ignoring/fighting carbohydrate RESISTANCE continue/increase [such as those treatments which exclude eating less often].
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17659530&ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

WHAT PREVENTS HYPERglycaemia...

Eat Less Often ... specifically ... Eat JUST clean water [zero % carbohydrate] between meals & eat ONLY when your blood glucose level, following your previous eat, has NATURALLY reduced to your chosen baseline blood glucose level [eg as related to the relative fuel demands of your particular activity level] and maintaining this habit, of 'supply & demand' glucose control, makes your prevention, of diabetes mellitus, sustainable.

...Warm thanks; Nick Dynes Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian c/o www.TheDiabetesBlog.com @ 17:32hrs MON.20.AUG.2007.

ps... Diabetes Is Caused By Food And Or Drug Administration Too Much And Or Too Often.

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/04/19/no-food-no-problem

pps... FOR MORE related info please follow the links via...

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/07/25/early-prevention-of-type-1-diabetes-human-trials/1#c6436217

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/05/25/tv-causes-elevated-glucose-in-children/1#c6581479

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/05/13/a-leaf-extract-lowers-insulin-requirements-in-iddm/1#c6604117

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/08/14/complicated-gene-can-aggravate-diabetes/1#c6717344

www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/08/16/diabetes-trending-like-a-shrimping-net/1#c6756500

http://www.thediabetesblog.com/2007/08/16/diabetes-trending-like-a-shrimping-net/1#c6782067

ppps... Diabetes is NOT a disease ... diabetes is the CURE [for relative HYPOglycaemia].

Posted at 1:23PM on Aug 20th 2007 by Nicholas Dynes Gracey

3. I will make a point of posting a comment on the editorial you refer to, Diane. We were having a very interesting discussion about this same topic as early as last week in TuDiabetes:
http://tudiabetes.com/forum/topic/show?id=583967%3ATopic%3A27101

Posted at 1:36PM on Aug 21st 2007 by Manny Hernandez

4. Thanks, readers, for these awesome comments.
Better Cell: you are so right on both counts. As for the "diabetic" thing, I agree. We don't call a cancer patient a "canceritic." On the other hand, I must sheepishly confess, in case you haven't notice, that I do use the word "diabetic." It's a convenience thing, I guess. But I'm changing my behavior, I swear.
Manny: thanks so much.

Posted at 2:27PM on Aug 21st 2007 by Diane Rixon

5. After our 16-year-old son was diagnosed with Type 1 last September, my husband and I felt (along with the usual litany of emotions) a huge sense of frustration. Not only did our kid have an incurable disease, but everywhere we turned, we met ignorance and misinformation. We are both journalists. We realized that although we couldn't cure Sam's Type 1 diabetes, we could take it upon ourselves to help educate people about this disease--and specifically about how it differs from the more widespread, less insidious Type 2. We have been in communication with editors at some of this country's major publications. On Monday of this week (Aug. 20), we felt a small ripple of triumph when a front-page story in the New York Times (my husband's alma mater) mentioned Type 2 diabetes in the first sentence. That was one of the papers we targetted, in often contentious communication with editors, reporters and science specialists. Most of them said, "diabetes is diabetes, right?" And these were smart, well-educated people! I've also been in touch with the Pulitzer-Prize winning science writer at the Boston Globe, who told me in an e-mail: "You Type 1 people are so judgmental about Type 2!" An editor at Vogue magazine wrote me a note of apology after I complained about an article that said readers could "get diabetes" by eating too much candy. I have had less success with my own alma mater, the Los Angeles Times. But I will keep trying. Ditto the Wall Street Journal, where neither editors nor reporters have deigned to reply to e-mails--I guess they're just too important to be corrected. But this has become a crusade for us. Stay tuned.

Posted at 8:06PM on Aug 21st 2007 by elizabeth mehren

6. Elizabeth Mehren........People can be well-educated and smart as you say, however they can still be completely ignorant and brain-washed by the same media who they work for regarding Diabetes, or anything else for that matter,
As for Sam, I would suggest that he learn "everything" about T1DM, since he will become his own best Doctor within a loving family.
If anyone, especially within heathcare asks this common question, "how long has he been Diabetic?"
The correct answer would be and should be, "Oh, he is not Diabetic, he has Diabetes." If they then ask, "well what's the difference?"
The answer is and always will be, "he is not his Illness, but he has one."
If they cannot figure it out, then you should not be associating with them.
Stupidity amongst Lemmings is virulent!!

Posted at 9:44PM on Aug 21st 2007 by BetterCell