Replies

This is a rant I wrote a while back...it is somewhat relevant to this topic.

First of all, let me say that I'm angry. I may even let a few four-letter words fly, so if that's a problem, you may not want to read any more of this f***ing rant. I'm angry because a few months ago my daughter was diagnosed with diabetes and it has turned her life upside-down. It has also caused considerable stress in our family.

I will readily admit that prior to her diagnosis, I probably thought about diabetes for a total of about an hour in my whole life. For that, I am truly sorry. I am sorry because I have been unaware and insensitive to the plight of diabetics. And I'm talking about Type 1, juvenile-onset, or whatever you want to call it. Not Type 2 or adult-onset. I now have great compassion for anyone with diabetes, but it is for the children that I weep. I'm sorry that there is such a lack of awareness or "publicity", if you will, in our nation. In the back of my mind, I assumed that diabetics had insulin, and that was all they needed. My father-in-law became diabetic later in life with Type 2. His lifestyle practically begged for diabetes. Even still, no one deserves diabetes, but it is the children that are truly innocent. They cannot "prevent" diabetes as an adult might. They did nothing to cause it. Who will speak for them?

It seems that diabetes is not a favored disease. This is not to belittle the many dedicated scientists and researchers who are working diligently for a cure. Godspeed to them. As a woman says on a diabetes list-serv I belong to, "where's the &*?#*!! cure?" Well, let me be a little more blunt. Where is the f***ing cure?

I am certainly not a scientist or biologist, but it seems to me that a great nation with vast resources like ours, that has cured smallpox, whooping cough, polio, etc. should be able to cure diabetes. We are told how lucky we are. There have been so many advances in diabetes care in the last few years. But I'm thinking, when insulin was first discovered in the 1920's or whatever, they injected it with needles into the lucky diabetics. Granted this was a huge improvement over death, but I can't see how things have changed that much in the subsequent 80 years. My daughter is still injecting her insulin via needle. Yes, we have better insulins, and we can monitor her blood glucose eight times a day if we want, but when it comes right down to it, diabetes is still a crapshoot. We try to give her the proper dose, but half the time we are wrong. So then we have to correct the next dose, and so on. Or we can get her an insulin pump. She can carry it around like a beeper, strapped to her body, with a semi-permanent I.V. tube dripping insulin into her body. And believe it or not, that is state-of-the-art.

Three months ago, I was the type of parent who was paranoid about giving my kids children's Tylenol. I would always give them a conservative dose, probably to their detriment. Now I'm drawing out insulin (or supervising) in a syringe, with life-or-death implications three times a day.

Let me tell you what happens when she gets too much insulin. Hypoglycemia, or low blood sugar, sets in. She becomes dizzy, she feels faint. Today she felt nauseous. If she is able to recognize her hypoglycemia, she will eat something sweet, candy or juice. This will normally bring her around and she feels better. If she is unable to tell us she feels bad, and the low blood sugar becomes worse, she may become incoherent and difficult to deal with. Thank God we haven't been to this stage yet, but I wake up every morning thinking this will probably be the day. If she can't eat or drink, we can squeeze some glucose gel or cake frosting into her mouth and hope that somehow she ingests enough of it to make a difference. If she completely passes out, we have been given a special syringe with glucagon in it. We are supposed to inject it immediately, and this will cause the liver to release stored glucose. When they told us about the glucagon syringe at the hospital, I dismissed the likelihood of us needing it. As responsible parents and caregivers, we would never let her get to that state. What a truly barbaric remedy. Come to find out, it's not all that unusual. My friend's sister, diabetic for 40 years, has needed the glucagon many times. She has often been found unconscious in her bed. That freaks me out. If the glucagon doesn't work, then 911 is called. Hopefully, it's not too late. I've read about this... it's called "dead-in-bed" syndrome. I try not to dwell on it.

If she receives too little insulin, her blood sugar gets high. She gets cranky, headachy, and nauseous. If it remains too high for too long, she will begin (and has begun) down the slow, inexorable path to the pathetic complications of diabetes...neuropathy, nephropathy, retinopathy. As you probably know...as I knew, but never really thought about....diabetes is one of the leading causes of death in our country, consuming 10% of our healthcare dollars. But with insulin, it's manageable, right?

Now I'm getting around to the politically incorrect part of this diatribe. If you are squeamish or very P.C. then I would by all means recommend you read no further. Because you see, diabetes is not a P.C. disease. I know that millions of dollars are donated to diabetes research every year and for that, I have become almost nauseatingly grateful. When my daughter was diagnosed, I began donating to the cause, but soon realized the pitiful amount I could manage would not be a drop in the ocean. I have even fantasized that maybe it's not too late for me to become a brilliant scientist and "cure" diabetes. Needless to say, that is not happening and I am feeling quite inadequate.

Money may not cure this disease but it will sure as hell help. There is a small army of researchers with very expensive toys trying to find a cure. If there were more money available, there will be more toys for them to play with and more incentive to find the cure. We need more money, more scientists, and more equipment.

I think we all know what diseases are politically correct. Breast cancer is P.C. Prostate cancer is not, even though both kill approximately the same amount of people. One of these days, men may learn to organize like women have on behalf of their disease. But I digress. I do not begrudge any dollars spent on breast cancer research. After all, if my daughter survives diabetes, I certainly don't want her dying of breast cancer. And of course, cancer is not a disease one can readily prevent. But the most P.C. disease is of course AIDS. Why, there has been more publicity and hoopla generated on behalf of AIDS in the last 5 years than there has been for diabetes in the last 100.

Now I'm beginning to get very f***ing angry. I am not a homophobe. I wish that so many thousands of young men in America had not died of AIDS or had not become ill. I have had several good friends who were homosexual. They were some of the most delightful people I have known. I have attended "gay-liberation" balls in college that were wildly entertaining, if not decadent. But the simple fact of the matter is that AIDS is almost entirely preventable already. There is no need to spend multi-millions of dollars on this disease. There is no need for big Hollywood stars to make themselves feel good by lending their name to this cause. There is no need to wear a f***ing red ribbon on your lapel to show that you are hip and caring.

Why is there no need?

Because all we need to do to prevent AIDS is for these people not to put their penises in other men's anuses. That is a little blunt, but is quite apt. If the thousands of young men had not engaged in homosexual sex they would not have died. It's not a question of whether it's perverted sex or if God is punishing gays. It is simply a fact that most AIDS victims are homosexuals. Surely, 95% of the people on Earth (and 99.9% in the USA) already know how you get AIDS. Some just choose to ignore these inconvenient facts.

I don't understand why Hollywood stars like Elizabeth Taylor are so adamant about defending and encouraging the right of men to put their penises in other men's anuses. Does she really care or is it just P.C.? Are the Hollywood stars (I don't mean to pick on them... there are plenty of non-Hollywood types with the same predilections) really concerned about everyone having this option? They always act like AIDS is this mysterious scourge sweeping across the planet, endangering everyone, when in fact, it mainly affects men who engage in this type of sex. And intravenous drug users. Don't get me started on intravenous drug use. I've seen enough of it in the last few months. And Africa. The pathology of AIDS in Africa is not relevant to this rant.

Anyway, I don't really begrudge funding for AIDS research. But let's get real. AIDS is preventable. Diabetes, one of the oldest diseases known to mankind, is not. I will have respect for these Hollywood types when they advocate for diabetes sufferers like they do for AIDS. Surely innocent children are more deserving of compassion than young men who choose to ignore the dangers of unsafe sex.