I'm having a blonde moment. The headline reads: cases of undiagnosed diabetes drop sharply. As if this is good news. The article continues - the number of men in the United States with undiagnosed diabetes has declined sharply over the past 25 years. Like I said, I'm blonde. Maybe somebody can help me correlate this to good news for us diabetics.

I have a larger than life question mark looming over my head. A recent news story alluded to the fact that the death toll for women over the last 30 years shows little to no improvement over diabetic men. I think I get it now. The net continues to harvest whole, healthy bodies. Shrimp caught in nets are complete animals. Only once they are dumped onto the boat (let's call the boat "diabetes") are their heads removed (i.e., no turning back to the sea now) Good old Charleston summers! Well diabetics are not shrimps, but as the holes in the net get smaller -- more shrimp are being caught.

So what's does this look like? The number of diabetes diagnosis is on the rise. The long-term complications are on the rise. The cost of treatment (you guessed it) is on the rise. U.S. sales of diabetes drugs reached $9.8 billion in 2005. Sadly, all this money isn't yielding better outcomes for the growing diabetes patient population. So where's the success in this story? Well, if you're in the business of diabetes - it's a jackpot. You didn't let too many get away.

Last month Bev addressed a news article that found high tech diabetes management did not equate to better diabetes care. Doctors felt that electronic care is only as good as the patient willing to participate beyond office visits. However, another service is trying to evolve the preconceived notions with a more developed system - and a bigger bang for the buck. How does $14.5 billion sound?

Information technology enabled diabetes management (ITDM) was found to be beneficial in avoiding diabetic complications - MILLIONS of cases. This is an overzealous finding - considering the word prevent is permanent and should probably be replaced with delayed. Even the DCCT knew that much. However, the study was conducted over a period exclusive to the program, and not the lifespan of diabetics in the study. However patient compliance did grow from less than 50% to approximately 80%. That would evoke a few halleluiahs from doctors. Another reason in support of ITDM is the fact that an electronic diabetes registry offers Medicare and other payers the ability to save quite a bit. Over 10 years, the overall net savings is estimated to be $14.5 billion. Does that figure include COLA - cost of long-term diabetes complications adjustment? The complications that did not occur in 2008 saved Medicare and payers $1.45 billion. Score! What is the inflation adjusted cost of those delayed complications occurring in 2013?

The headcount standing at 20 million diabetics, at a savings of $1.45 billion per year - I asked for clarification on that figure. The savings is speculative because the company is anticipating saving costs on preventing diabetic complications. That's optimistic but not entirely realistic.