Anybody have an opinion on the truth of this? When our daughter was diagnosed, we were told proper blood suger management would prevent almost all of the nasty effects. Many of the problems like blindness, bad limbs and heart problems were mostly associated with type 2 patients that went around with 500 blood sugar for 10 years.
Good treatment can minimize damage. Still, even under the best control you are not going to have normal sugar levels. There will be some complications, although hopefully not severe. I get checked out every year (blood tests, eye capillaries, check for nerve damage, etc.). So far, so good. But one day they will find something. That's just the way it is. I've had Type 1 for 13 years.
I'd like to believe this story is true. But I don't. probably just angling for a grant. We'll see.
My mother was diagnosed at age 18 with Type 1 diabetes, and died a few years ago at age 59 from the effects of the disease. By the end, her entire metabolism was way out of whack, her sugar nearly uncontrollable, her digestion dysfunctional, and she was suffering from hypertension.
The good news for you is 1) Mom still had her feet and toes, 2) Mom could still see as well as ever (she was awfully nearsighted from youth), and 3) Mom was a drinker and smoker who didn't eat right, didn't control her weight, and didn't exercise.
Your daughter ought to be able to do far better than my mother did, if she even gives it half an attempt.
There's certainly an increased risk of ill effects, but the evidence is overwhelming that if one can keep reasonable control the chances are greatly reduced.
The research is interesting, but this kind of "very exciting, five years away from a cure" thing has been around since I first got sick.
Ironically, insulin itself was first isolated in Toronto.
My doctor suggested that I was "pre-diabetic" over ten years ago due to an abnormal glucose tolerance test. At that time I read up in order to know what might be in store.
At that time the thinking seemed to be that proper control of blood sugar levels would eliminate the symptoms.
Unfortunately, the study found that virtually all diabetics were "out of control", even those who were most diligent and disciplined. The problem seems to be that the high blood sugar levels which occur are almost symptomless. Too much insulin can cause immediate life-threatening effects. Too little can go undetected.
At the time of my reading, much hope was being expressed for insulin pumps, but at the time the dosage would still have to be set based on too infrequent measures of blood sugar and anticipation of meals. If the technology has advanced since then so that the pumps could be driven off of "real time" blood sugar monitoring, then I think that they might be quite effective.
Another problem I vaguely recall had to do with the fact that the insulin supplied for diabetics might have effects other than what one's own insulin would have. Perhaps this was related to how the insulin was created, whether from scratch in a factory, or harvested from animals. I don't know what the state of that is now.
I have copied Freeper toast, who works at a company which makes insulin pumps for possible updates on the "state-of-the-art".
Be sure to read posts #137 and #144. The technology of monitoring blood glucose and automatically administering insuling has advanced quite a bit.
You just do the best you can do. Eventually it catches up, however.