Anyone Else Suffering Menopause Dental Bone Loss?

Went to the dentist Wednesday and got the usual lecture about going to
a periodontist, along with a warning about bone loss. I didn't start
hearing about that till a year or so ago, a couple years postmeno. I
searched around and found various statistics, i.e. 44 percent of women
over 55 have dental bone loss and 94 percent of women over 65 have
it.
I knew menopause was prime time for gum problems, and now there's this
double whammy. I'm wondering too if one can have dental bone loss
despite having good bones elsewhere in the body. I haven't had a bone
density test for three years, but it was stellar then. Hard to
understand how things could go downhill so fast, but anything's
possible at this time of life! Cholesterol numbers often degrade
postmeno as well--definitely my experience. For me at least, taking
hormones may only help hot flashes.
Les

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:39:02 -0800 (PST), sage hen
<desertnymph@cwo.com> wrote:

>I knew menopause was prime time for gum problems, and now there's this
>double whammy. I'm wondering too if one can have dental bone loss
>despite having good bones elsewhere in the body.

Dental bone loss is usually from peridontal disease. Better get it
checked out or you will regret what happens down the road. Been there
done that, wish I could have a redo.

Dana

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

"Dana©" <AneeBear@ownmail.com> wrote in message
news01lp3tl1ibhhdg0ehcmdd0k4del0oe6ro@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:39:02 -0800 (PST), sage hen
> <desertnymph@cwo.com> wrote:
>
>>I knew menopause was prime time for gum problems, and now there's this
>>double whammy. I'm wondering too if one can have dental bone loss
>>despite having good bones elsewhere in the body.
>
> Dental bone loss is usually from peridontal disease. Better get it
> checked out or you will regret what happens down the road. Been there
> done that, wish I could have a redo.

I recently read (where??) that periodontal disease is often linked with
diabetes. I don't know the relationship - cause & effect, etc., but did
notice the headline. (An IRL friend is diabetic & has gum disease.)

Cathy


>
> Dana
>
> Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
> for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:04:46 -0500, "Cathy F."
<clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:

>I recently read (where??) that periodontal disease is often linked with
>diabetes. I don't know the relationship - cause & effect, etc., but did
>notice the headline. (An IRL friend is diabetic & has gum disease.)


Well, gingivitis is linked to diabetes, but peridontal disease is what
happens down the road if untreated. I developed peridontal disease
way back before I had diabetes. The lesson I learned was to not use a
water pic like dental floss and when its time to have your dental
xrays, do it. I listened to the pin heads at the time saying dental
xrays were unnecessary and could cause cancer. I went about 8 years
with beautiful strong teeth that were developing peridontal disease
below the surface where an xray would have shown it. I didn't catch
it in time and I am paying for it everyday. Right now I have lost half
of my teeth, I have cosmetic dentistry all over my mouth and my front
teeth are held together with bonding. My teeth look good, but it is an
illusion. I have very little jaw bone holding them in.

I think water pics should be band. I used mine like dental floss, but
I was pushing plaque under the gum line and packing it in. I developed
peridontal disease from all the plaque and then didn't get xrays to
warn me. It was all my fault.

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

x-no-archive: yes

Dana© wrote:

> Well, gingivitis is linked to diabetes, but peridontal disease is what
> happens down the road if untreated. I developed peridontal disease
> way back before I had diabetes.

Dana, that's probably not the case. Most type 2 DMs have been diabetic
for many years prior to diagnosis, particularly if fasting blood glucose
is the screen.

70% of women over 50 aren't diagnosed by it as compared to a 2 hour post
meal test. At one hour post meal, that would no doubt be closer to 100%
undiagnosed.

Susan

On Jan 25, 4:39 pm, sage hen <desertny...@cwo.com> wrote:
> Went to the dentist Wednesday and got the usual lecture about going to
> a periodontist, along with a warning about bone loss. I didn't start
> hearing about that till a year or so ago, a couple years postmeno. I
> searched around and found various statistics, i.e. 44 percent of women
> over 55 have dental bone loss and 94 percent of women over 65 have
> it.
> I knew menopause was prime time for gum problems, and now there's this
> double whammy. I'm wondering too if one can have dental bone loss
> despite having good bones elsewhere in the body. I haven't had a bone
> density test for three years, but it was stellar then. Hard to
> understand how things could go downhill so fast, but anything's
> possible at this time of life! Cholesterol numbers often degrade
> postmeno as well--definitely my experience. For me at least, taking
> hormones may only help hot flashes.
> Les

les,

sorry to hear about this. i remember reading that this was a possible
postmeno problem, but know nothing more. good luck & let us know what
happens.

ellen

We also have to remember the cut off number for diagnoses was much higher
than it is today. Back in the early to mid 80's my number was 179..the cut
off was 180 then. All my Dr said was watch your sugar or you might become a
diabetic...duh...by today's standards I already was..and today if I was just
one or two numbers off I would have been treated for it...and of course it
wasn't just the sugar it was all of the carbs and that was the time when
pasta was considered a healthy food. So I was walking around with diabetes
for years before I was actually diagnosed..and the only reason they tested
me was because I had a yeast infection under my breasts and in my underarms
and my sister the RN suggested I had the test done because of the yeast
infections I kept on getting, not to mention boils. I was diagnosed in the
mid 90's.


"Susan" <nevermind@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:600vfnF1ofd2rU1@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Dana© wrote:
>
>> Well, gingivitis is linked to diabetes, but peridontal disease is what
>> happens down the road if untreated. I developed peridontal disease
>> way back before I had diabetes.
>
> Dana, that's probably not the case. Most type 2 DMs have been diabetic
> for many years prior to diagnosis, particularly if fasting blood glucose
> is the screen.
>
> 70% of women over 50 aren't diagnosed by it as compared to a 2 hour post
> meal test. At one hour post meal, that would no doubt be closer to 100%
> undiagnosed.
>
> Susan

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 09:47:20 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
wrote:

>Dana, that's probably not the case. Most type 2 DMs have been diabetic
>for many years prior to diagnosis, particularly if fasting blood glucose
>is the screen.

No, I know my case. I wasn't diabetic 20 years before I was diagnosed.
There's no way. I have had peridontal disease over 30 years. I know
for a fact I was diabetic long before I was diagnosed, but not back
when I started having trouble with my teeth.

>
>70% of women over 50 aren't diagnosed by it as compared to a 2 hour post
>meal test. At one hour post meal, that would no doubt be closer to 100%
>undiagnosed.

Yes, I know. That's how my diagnosis was missed, they only did the
finger prick and just happened to catch it one morning when I had
eaten a high carb breakfast before my appt.

Dana

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

x-no-archive: yes

Dana© wrote:

> No, I know my case. I wasn't diabetic 20 years before I was diagnosed.
> There's no way. I have had peridontal disease over 30 years. I know
> for a fact I was diabetic long before I was diagnosed, but not back
> when I started having trouble with my teeth.

You mean you had an OGTT based upon today's diagnostic ranges? One of
the other issues is that even today, many folks with alleged "pre
diabetes" have kidney, retinal and nerve damage.


> Yes, I know. That's how my diagnosis was missed, they only did the
> finger prick and just happened to catch it one morning when I had
> eaten a high carb breakfast before my appt.

Lucky you! Never happened in my case til I did it myself.

Susan

x-no-archive: yes

jacquie wrote:
> We also have to remember the cut off number for diagnoses was much higher
> than it is today. Back in the early to mid 80's my number was 179..the cut
> off was 180 then. All my Dr said was watch your sugar or you might become a
> diabetic...duh...by today's standards I already was..and today if I was just
> one or two numbers off I would have been treated for it...and of course it
> wasn't just the sugar it was all of the carbs and that was the time when
> pasta was considered a healthy food. So I was walking around with diabetes
> for years before I was actually diagnosed..and the only reason they tested
> me was because I had a yeast infection under my breasts and in my underarms
> and my sister the RN suggested I had the test done because of the yeast
> infections I kept on getting, not to mention boils. I was diagnosed in the
> mid 90's.

That's true, but even with lower diagnostic ranges, that very high
percentage is going undiagnosed even today. One reason is that fasting
glucose does not begin to rise much until folks have been DM for many
years; it's that first hour post meal that goes up first, and it's not
employed as a screen.

I had an a1c of 6.9% a decade ago, when 7% was considered normal, had
severe peripheral neuropathies and went undiagnosed until I bought my
own meter and tested after meals at home. I, too, had constant vaginal
and oral yeast infections back then, haven't had any since, even when on
high dose antibiotics for protracted periods of time. I, too, was
eating a very low fat, high carb diet at the time, in fact, that's what
triggered my PCOS and abandoning it is what cure it overnight, literally.

Susan

On Jan 26, 6:26*am, Dana© <AneeB...@ownmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:04:46 -0500, "Cathy F."
>
> <clfrc...@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
> >I recently read (where??) that periodontal disease is often linked with
> >diabetes. *I don't know the relationship - cause & effect, etc., but did
> >notice the headline. *(An IRL friend is diabetic & has gum disease.)
>
> Well, gingivitis is linked to diabetes, but peridontal disease is what
> happens down the road if untreated. *I developed peridontal disease
> way back before I had diabetes. The lesson I learned was to not use a
> water pic like dental floss and when its time to have your dental
> xrays, do it. I listened to the pin heads at the time saying dental
> xrays were unnecessary and could cause cancer. I went about 8 years
> with beautiful strong teeth that were developing peridontal disease
> below the surface where an xray would have shown it. *I didn't catch
> it in time and I am paying for it everyday. Right now I have lost half
> of my teeth, I have cosmetic dentistry all over my mouth and my front
> teeth are held together with bonding. My teeth look good, but it is an
> illusion. I have very little jaw bone holding them in.
>
> I think water pics should be band. I used mine like dental floss, but
> I was pushing plaque under the gum line and packing it in. I developed
> peridontal disease from all the plaque and then didn't get xrays to
> warn me. It was all my fault.
>
> Dana
> Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
> for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

I don't have gingivitis, my gums never bleed, I don't have deep gum
pockets, and I keep up religiously with all dental work, X-rays, and
getting my teeth cleaned every three months. The last time I had my
blood sugar checked it was 75. But I do have this postmeno bone
loss. Considering the absence of periodontal disease, I wonder if
anything can be done about that.
Les

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:27:56 -0800 (PST), sage hen
<desertnymph@cwo.com> wrote:

>I don't have gingivitis, my gums never bleed, I don't have deep gum
>pockets, and I keep up religiously with all dental work, X-rays, and
>getting my teeth cleaned every three months. The last time I had my
>blood sugar checked it was 75. But I do have this postmeno bone
>loss. Considering the absence of periodontal disease, I wonder if
>anything can be done about that.


Wow, I don't know. Do you mean the bone loss is in your jaw bone? I
was thinking bone loss like disappearing bone around teeth as in
peridontal disease. Are you saying that your jaw bone is losing
density, like osteoporosis?

If that is the case I guess the only treatment is the same thing that
corrects osteoporosis in the rest of the body, right?

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:54:47 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
wrote:

>You mean you had an OGTT based upon today's diagnostic ranges? One of
>the other issues is that even today, many folks with alleged "pre
>diabetes" have kidney, retinal and nerve damage.


No, I am saying that all the symptoms that I "now" know for a fact are
related to diabetes....numbness in my feet, peeing all the time, yeast
infections, etc didn't start for 15-17 years AFTER I had my first
surgery on my teeth. My diagnosis for diabetes was a result of a OGTT
reading of 387, which is way over the top on any diagnostic range.
That test was a result of a finger prick of 195, which is also over
the top.

My peridontal disease was of my own making, not caused by diabetes, I
know my own body. I think sometimes we tend to blame everything on
the illnesses we have and not look outside the box. I can't blame
everything that is wrong with me on diabetes. But, I have to take
responsibility for the diabetes as well, I did that to myself too.

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

x-no-archive: yes

sage hen wrote:

> I don't have gingivitis, my gums never bleed, I don't have deep gum
> pockets, and I keep up religiously with all dental work, X-rays, and
> getting my teeth cleaned every three months. The last time I had my
> blood sugar checked it was 75. But I do have this postmeno bone
> loss. Considering the absence of periodontal disease, I wonder if
> anything can be done about that.
> Les

Possibly very high dose vitamin D3 gel cap supplementation? Like 10,000
iu a few times per week for a week or two, then 2000 iu per day?

Susan

x-no-archive: yes

Dana© wrote:

> No, I am saying that all the symptoms that I "now" know for a fact are
> related to diabetes....numbness in my feet, peeing all the time, yeast
> infections, etc didn't start for 15-17 years AFTER I had my first
> surgery on my teeth. My diagnosis for diabetes was a result of a OGTT
> reading of 387, which is way over the top on any diagnostic range.
> That test was a result of a finger prick of 195, which is also over
> the top.

Dana, those aren't symptoms of early diabetes, they develop over the
course of years of high bg, quite a few years, of elevated blood glucose.

Susan

On Jan 27, 8:44*am, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> sage hen wrote:
> > I don't have gingivitis, my gums never bleed, I don't have deep gum
> > pockets, and I keep up religiously with all dental work, X-rays, and
> > getting my teeth cleaned every three months. *The last time I had my
> > blood sugar checked it was 75. *But I do have this postmeno bone
> > loss. *Considering the absence of periodontal disease, I wonder if
> > anything can be done about that.
> > Les
>
> Possibly very high dose vitamin D3 gel cap supplementation? *Like 10,000
> iu a few times per week for a week or two, then 2000 iu per day?
>
> Susan

Thanks Susan, Dana, and Ellen for the feedback. The bone loss is in
the roots of my teeth. I thought of Vitamin D too, and will get more
of that. I remember reading that winter is a good time to take extra
D, because bone loses density faster then. Also, I've been seeing
this toothpaste and mouthwash that claims to make tooth enamel
stronger. I wonder if it really works, and could possibly help bone
below the gums?
I guess it's time to double up on calcium and magnesium as well, from
the 500/250 pills I've been taking. Perhaps it's also time to start
taking boron. I had the impression that because I was taking
estradiol (albeit only half the normal dose), I didn't have to worry
so much about postmeno bone loss. Indeed my doctor told me this. But
this dental problem makes me wonder.
Les

x-no-archive: yes

sage hen wrote:

> Thanks Susan, Dana, and Ellen for the feedback. The bone loss is in
> the roots of my teeth. I thought of Vitamin D too, and will get more
> of that. I remember reading that winter is a good time to take extra
> D, because bone loses density faster then. Also, I've been seeing
> this toothpaste and mouthwash that claims to make tooth enamel
> stronger. I wonder if it really works, and could possibly help bone
> below the gums?

It may well work on tooth enamel, but bone is an endocrine issue, and
vitamind D, for instance, is a hormone, a type of steroid, actually,
that regulates bone metabolism among other important things.

A family physician I know now routinely tests all their patients for vit
D levels, and finds that over 60%, IIRC, of the older ones are deficient
enough to warrant supplementing.

My endo treats deficiency with weekly dosing of 50,000 iu, the standard
practice, but I found 10,000 iu a few times for two weeks, then stopping
to all but cure my years long sinus infection.

Susan

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:45:28 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
wrote:

>Dana, those aren't symptoms of early diabetes, they develop over the
>course of years of high bg, quite a few years, of elevated blood glucose.

I know that. And I didn't have those or any other symptoms of elevated
blood glucose when I had my first surgery on my teeth. You can keep
telling me what you think, Susan, but I know for a fact that I did not
have high glucose or even pre-diabetes in my late 20's when I first
started having trouble with my teeth.

Not that it matters a rats ass now, but I don't like you trying to
tell me you believe you know what was going on in my body better than
I did. I was livin' in it at the time!

Not every friggin illness can be blamed on diabetes either before or
after diagnosis.

Dana
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

x-no-archive: yes

Dana© wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:45:28 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Dana, those aren't symptoms of early diabetes, they develop over the
>>course of years of high bg, quite a few years, of elevated blood glucose.
>
>
> I know that. And I didn't have those or any other symptoms of elevated
> blood glucose when I had my first surgery on my teeth. You can keep
> telling me what you think, Susan, but I know for a fact that I did not
> have high glucose or even pre-diabetes in my late 20's when I first
> started having trouble with my teeth.

Dana, I don't KNOW if you had high bg or not, but if you weren't using a
meter, neither do you.

>
> Not that it matters a rats ass now, but I don't like you trying to
> tell me you believe you know what was going on in my body better than
> I did. I was livin' in it at the time!

That's NOT what I'm telling you. I'm telling you that DM is a
symptomless disease for a great many years in most people. I have no
idea what was going on in your body at that time or now, nor have I said
I do.

>
> Not every friggin illness can be blamed on diabetes either before or
> after diagnosis.

Dana, don't come bitching about me because you have a reading
comprehension problem.

You've been talking about your psychic insights to your body, I
responded with information generally about DM and diagnostic research
statistics not specific to you, but true in general. Don't twist it
into my invasion of your personal body space, a place I'd just as soon
never visit. I neither know nor care what the fu*k is happening in your
body, I can barely keep track of my own!

The fact is, that I don't know how long I've been diabetic for sure, and
without post meal or OGTT testing, neither do YOU or anyone else, for
that matter.

I suppose if you were a really gifted psychic, that would be an exception.

Susan

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:23:52 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
wrote:

>>>Dana, those aren't symptoms of early diabetes, they develop over the
>>>course of years of high bg, quite a few years, of elevated blood glucose.
>>
>>
>> I know that. And I didn't have those or any other symptoms of elevated
>> blood glucose when I had my first surgery on my teeth. You can keep
>> telling me what you think, Susan, but I know for a fact that I did not
>> have high glucose or even pre-diabetes in my late 20's when I first
>> started having trouble with my teeth.
>
>Dana, I don't KNOW if you had high bg or not, but if you weren't using a
>meter, neither do you.

Exactly. That's my point, you don't know. So I can be as right as you
seem to think you are....

>
>>
>> Not that it matters a rats ass now, but I don't like you trying to
>> tell me you believe you know what was going on in my body better than
>> I did. I was livin' in it at the time!
>
>That's NOT what I'm telling you. I'm telling you that DM is a
>symptomless disease for a great many years in most people. I have no
>idea what was going on in your body at that time or now, nor have I said
>I do.

I know that DM is symptomless. I have lived with it longer than you
have I imagine.You have insinuated that I probably had DM and didn't
know it. I am saying, at the time frame I am talking about I know I
didn't.
>>
>> Not every friggin illness can be blamed on diabetes either before or
>> after diagnosis.
>
>Dana, don't come bitching about me because you have a reading
>comprehension problem.

Reading comprehension....excuse me but you seem to have an eyesight
problem and are not reading what I am writing. Another symptom of DM,
better get it checked out.

>
>You've been talking about your psychic insights to your body,
WTF does that mean? Don't you know what's going on in your body? You
don't have to be psychic, just aware. Aren't you aware of the messages
your body sends you?

>responded with information generally about DM and diagnostic research
>statistics not specific to you, but true in general. Don't twist it
>into my invasion of your personal body space, a place I'd just as soon
>never visit.

Well, that's good! I wouldn't let you in!


> I neither know nor care what the fu*k is happening in your
>body, I can barely keep track of my own!

Great! I kinda figured as much.

>
>The fact is, that I don't know how long I've been diabetic for sure, and
>without post meal or OGTT testing, neither do YOU or anyone else, for
>that matter.

That's true and that includes YOU so give it a rest will ya?
>
>I suppose if you were a really gifted psychic, that would be an exception.

I don't know where you got the psychic shit from, but I do pay
attention to my body and how I feel, and you don't have to be psychic
to do that.

Dana is finished with this stupid conversation!

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

x-no-archive: yes

Dana© wrote:

> Exactly. That's my point, you don't know. So I can be as right as you
> seem to think you are....

There's that reading problem again. Sure you may be right, I never said
you couldn't.

I said you can't be *sure*.


> I know that DM is symptomless. I have lived with it longer than you
> have I imagine.

How do you know? Seriously, that's the problem, innit?


You have insinuated that I probably had DM and didn't
> know it. I am saying, at the time frame I am talking about I know I
> didn't.

Uh, NO. I said it was impossible to know if you did or didn't because
the standard ranges used to be higher, and none of the screening tests
catch it til it's very well advanced. I cited a study done in Rancho
Bernardo that found that fbg missed 48% of male DMs and 70% of women
compared to 2 hour post meal tests. Because two hour insulin release
degrades long after 1 hour post meal does, that means those numbers are
likely much higher for missed diagnoses. That's far from diagnosing you
or telling you when you became diabetic, which neither of us has any way
of knowing, actually, whether living in the corpus or at a safe distance
from it.

>
>>> Not every friggin illness can be blamed on diabetes either before or
>>>after diagnosis.
>>
>>Dana, don't come bitching about me because you have a reading
>>comprehension problem.
>
>
> Reading comprehension....excuse me but you seem to have an eyesight
> problem and are not reading what I am writing. Another symptom of DM,
> better get it checked out.

I know exactly what I've written, and I never told you I knew what was
going on in your body. You've made unfounded assertions and then
launched an angry attack based upon what exists only in your imagination.

>
>
>>You've been talking about your psychic insights to your body,
>
> WTF does that mean? Don't you know what's going on in your body? You
> don't have to be psychic, just aware. Aren't you aware of the messages
> your body sends you?

Uh, yeah, to the degree possible. But can I tell you my bg is 111 before
I test it? No, and neither can you tell me what yours is. I had a
shockingly high 186 a week ago due to high cortisol, and I didn't feel
different at all. I'm very rarely much above 110 to 120 even one hour
after meals. You saying you can FEEL your bg rise to a specific number?
That's ALL we're talking about here, so don't make it more general.

>
>
>>responded with information generally about DM and diagnostic research
>>statistics not specific to you, but true in general. Don't twist it
>>into my invasion of your personal body space, a place I'd just as soon
>>never visit.
>
>
> Well, that's good! I wouldn't let you in!

Finally we agree.

>
>
>
>>I neither know nor care what the fu*k is happening in your
>>body, I can barely keep track of my own!
>
>
> Great! I kinda figured as much.

Just so we understand each other.

>
>
>>The fact is, that I don't know how long I've been diabetic for sure, and
>>without post meal or OGTT testing, neither do YOU or anyone else, for
>>that matter.
>
>
> That's true and that includes YOU so give it a rest will ya?

Give what a rest???? I never said or did what you've accused me of, so
there's nothing for me to give rest to.

>
>>I suppose if you were a really gifted psychic, that would be an exception.
>
>
> I don't know where you got the psychic shit from, but I do pay
> attention to my body and how I feel, and you don't have to be psychic
> to do that.

See above.

Susan

"Susan" <nevermind@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:604imqF1opesrU1@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
> ....it was impossible to know if you did or didn't [have diabetes] because
> the standard ranges used to be higher, and none of the screening tests
> catch it til it's very well advanced. I cited a study done in Rancho
> Bernardo that found that fbg missed 48% of male DMs and 70% of women
> compared to 2 hour post meal tests.
---------------
Haven't followed this "stupid conversation" closely, but these 2 sentences
caught my eye. If "2 hour post meal tests" are more effective than "fbg"
(fasting blood glucose, is that?), then why aren't they the standard? Are
they more expensive or something?
Eva

x-no-archive: yes

Eva wrote:

> ---------------
> Haven't followed this "stupid conversation" closely, but these 2 sentences
> caught my eye. If "2 hour post meal tests" are more effective than "fbg"
> (fasting blood glucose, is that?), then why aren't they the standard? Are
> they more expensive or something?

Nope. You can do it at home for almost free.

If you read the site at www.phlaunt.com/diabetes, Jenny has a document
from the 70s where fbg and the diagnostic ranges were decided to
deliberately avoid diagnosing type 2 DM. Before you think it's a
wildass conspiracy theory, it actually addressed a big problem back
then; DMs were progressively ill, got CVD and kidney disease,
amputations and there were no home glucose monitors or much in the way
of treatment to control it. The concern was that employers and health
insurers would end up refusing jobs and benefits or policies to a huge
number of people.

Now, all these years later, when home glucose monitoring makes this a
very controllable and even reversible disease in many ways, the fasting
glucose screen is a bad habit never revisited and revised by the ADA.
Even worse, many docs are using HbA1c, a DM monitoring test that isn't
diagnostic, to rule DM in or out.

Fasting numbers don't go up til most folks have been DM for years,
neither does the two hour post prandial. That one hour post meal test,
if responded to with carb control could fell a lot of drug makers by itself.

The ADA is funded predominantly by grain, sugar, soft drink and drug
companies, and it shows.

Susan

On Jan 27, 4:53*pm, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Eva wrote:
> > ---------------
> > Haven't followed this "stupid conversation" closely, but these 2 sentences
> > caught my eye. *If "2 hour post meal tests" are more effective than "fbg"
> > (fasting blood glucose, is that?), then why aren't they the standard? *Are
> > they more expensive or something?
>
> Nope. *You can do it at home for almost free.
>
> If you read the site atwww.phlaunt.com/diabetes, Jenny has a document
> from the 70s where fbg and the diagnostic ranges were decided to
> deliberately avoid diagnosing type 2 DM. *Before you think it's a
> wildass conspiracy theory, it actually addressed a big problem back
> then; DMs were progressively ill, got CVD and kidney disease,
> amputations and there were no home glucose monitors or much in the way
> of treatment to control it. *The concern was that employers and health
> insurers would end up refusing jobs and benefits or policies to a huge
> number of people.
>
> Now, all these years later, when home glucose monitoring makes this a
> very controllable and even reversible disease in many ways, the fasting
> glucose screen is a bad habit never revisited and revised by the ADA.
> Even worse, many docs are using HbA1c, a DM monitoring test that isn't
> diagnostic, to rule DM in or out.
>
> Fasting numbers don't go up til most folks have been DM for years,
> neither does the two hour post prandial. *That one hour post meal test,
> if responded to with carb control could fell a lot of drug makers by itself.
>
> The ADA is funded predominantly by grain, sugar, soft drink and drug
> companies, and it shows.
>
> Susan

I bet the ADA gets money from the meat and dairy industries as well.
Makes it harder to curb Hublet's love of junk food. I recently strong-
armed him to the clinic for a fasting blood test. Anyway, Hub had
okay glucose and cholesterol numbers except the alarming 224 for
triglycerides. Has anyone out there taken gemfibrozil or some other
drug for reducing triglycerides? I'll be lucky to get him back in to
see about a prescription, and want to make it count.
Les

x-no-archive: yes

sage hen wrote:

> I bet the ADA gets money from the meat and dairy industries as well.

Nuh uh, not hardly. Not in the recent past, anyway, when I last read
their reports. Honestly, how else do you think sugar as up to 10% of
daily calories made it into their recommendations?? Sheesh. I wish the
meat and dairy folks *would* pay up!

> Makes it harder to curb Hublet's love of junk food. I recently strong-
> armed him to the clinic for a fasting blood test. Anyway, Hub had
> okay glucose and cholesterol numbers except the alarming 224 for
> triglycerides. Has anyone out there taken gemfibrozil or some other
> drug for reducing triglycerides? I'll be lucky to get him back in to
> see about a prescription, and want to make it count.

You don't need a drug to lower triglycerides rapidly, just less starch.
If he won't do that, there is milk thistle, (silymarin) which lowered
mine to the 60s, whereas diet only got them close to 100 or so, and
alpha lipoic acid is a great insulin sensitizer, especially time
released. Also, pantethine raises HDL and may lower TGLs some.

Drugs are no subsitute for bad habits, but if it's someone else's
habit... what is, is. :-/

Susan

On Jan 28, 1:08*pm, Susan <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> sage hen wrote:
> > I bet the ADA gets money from the meat and dairy industries as well.
>
> Nuh uh, not hardly. *Not in the recent past, anyway, when I last read
> their reports. *Honestly, how else do you think sugar as up to 10% of
> daily calories made it into their recommendations?? *Sheesh. *I wish the
> meat and dairy folks *would* pay up!
>
> > Makes it harder to curb Hublet's love of junk food. I recently strong-
> > armed him to the clinic for a fasting blood test. *Anyway, Hub had
> > okay glucose and cholesterol numbers except the alarming 224 for
> > triglycerides. *Has anyone out there taken gemfibrozil or some other
> > drug for reducing triglycerides? *I'll be lucky to get him back in to
> > see about a prescription, and want to make it count.
>
> You don't need a drug to lower triglycerides rapidly, just less starch.
> If he won't do that, there is milk thistle, (silymarin) which lowered
> mine to the 60s, whereas diet only got them close to 100 or so, and
> alpha lipoic acid is a great insulin sensitizer, especially time
> released. *Also, pantethine raises HDL and may lower TGLs some.
>
> Drugs are no subsitute for bad habits, but if it's someone else's
> habit... what is, is. * :-/
>
> Susan

Thanks for the suggestions, Susan. Milk thistle is a great idea.
Hublet is already cutting down on sugar and white starch, and I'll
crack the whip for the natural approach instead of a prescription.
Wish us luck...I can't believe how little the average man cares about
his health!
Les

x-no-archive: yes

sage hen wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestions, Susan. Milk thistle is a great idea.
> Hublet is already cutting down on sugar and white starch, and I'll
> crack the whip for the natural approach instead of a prescription.

He may find that starches, period, are a bad idea, the triglycerides
will really tell the tale. HDL should rise, too, the more he cuts them
and sugar.

> Wish us luck...I can't believe how little the average man cares about
> his health!
> Les

I do wish you luck! Not all men are careless about their health. I'm
happy to say that my husband *finally* quit smoking last June and began
low carbing at the same time. He's finally realized that both are
permanent life style changes to make sure his parts last however long he
does; he doesn't have any health problems and he wants to keep it that way.

I hope he does.

Susan