[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [IP] British Medical Journal article on pumping



I agree and this is what I sent to them:


"Please rethink your conclusion"
-----------------------------------------------------------------

<!-- article ID: 324/7339/705 -->

<P>  "However we consider that in general insulin pump should be reserved
for those with special problems such as unpredictable hypoglycaemia or a
marked increase in blood glucose concentration at dawn, despite best
attempts to improve control with optimised injection regimens."

<P>  I find it appalling that 'professionals' would make such a statement.
When I consider my child, any difference in control and thus reduction in
risk is appreciable.  Furthermore, this study does not take into account
the emotional effect of diabetes and the flexibility that the pump can
provide.  Yes this might be achieved with MDI, but at the price of a lower
quality of life.

<P>  To study the pump, establish an increased ability to control glycemic
levels and still reserve it for "special problems" is absurd!  It's clear
to me that most likely none of you lives with this disease.  In the
unlikely event that one or more of you do, I am certain that you have not
tried CSII.

<P>  You cannot study the treatment of disease without taking into account
the patients whom you purport to treat.  I implore you to seriously
rethink your conclusion.  As members in the medical field, if you are not
looking out for the best interest of patients, you should choose another
field.

<P>  With due respect,
Marisa Schmidt


-----Original Message-----
From: Connie Miller <email @ redacted>
To: email @ redacted <email @ redacted>
Date: Sunday, March 24, 2002 11:09 PM
Subject: RE: [IP] British Medical Journal article on pumping


>From   http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7339/705   Ellen sent this
>earlier...
>WHY in the   #$%^   would any report add this??? UGH!.....Insulin pump
>therapy is unnecessary for most people with type 1 diabetes and should be
>reserved for those with special problems with optimised insulin injections
>....
>Conclusions: Glycaemic control is better during continuous subcutaneous
>insulin infusion compared with optimised injection therapy, and less
insulin
>is needed to achieve this level of strict control. The difference in
control
>between the two methods is small but should reduce the risk of
microvascular
>complications.
>This kind of research makes me crazy, and is what some NON CHILD PUMP
>FRIENDLY CLINICs hold on to! IT's NOT right!
>
>Connie Miller
>Photography benefiting the Children With DIABETES Foundation.
>If  9 out of 10 people that read this say NO, we still raise $300,000 this
>year for CWDF.
>If  9 out of 10 people that read this say YES, we raise 3 MILLION this year
>to fund a porcine islet cell transplantation trial.
>Are you with us? www.fundsfordiabetes.org
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: email @ redacted
>[mailto:email @ redacted]On Behalf Of email @ redacted
>Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 4:33 PM
>To: email @ redacted
>Subject: [IP] British Medical Journal article on pumping
>
> <A HREF="http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7339/705">bmj.com Pickup et
>al. 324 (7339): 705</A>
>----------------------------------------------------------
>for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
>send a DONATION http://www.Insulin-Pumpers.org/donate.shtml
>----------------------------------------------------------
>for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
>send a DONATION http://www.Insulin-Pumpers.org/donate.shtml
----------------------------------------------------------
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
send a DONATION http://www.Insulin-Pumpers.org/donate.shtml