Here's another little update on my time with the Medtronic MiniMed 640G. This time it's a look at what SmartGuard is and how it works. When someone first tried to explain how SmartGuard worked to me I can remember it felt bewilderingly complicated, with all sorts of levels and numbers flying around. Actually once you have got your head around it, I have found it relatively simple - so I'm trying to explain it here with a little animated diagram that tries to work through an example of how and when Smartguard is activated, and what it does.
It should be remembered, of course, that for all it's magic, SmartGuard is not supposed to replace hypo-treatment entirely. Unfortunately for all the over-enthusiastic media hype about the 'Artificial Pancreas' when the MM640G launched, we are nothing like there yet. SmartGuard is a useful step in the right direction, but a full AP it ain't. For starters, there are many situations in which stopping your basal insulin will simply not act quickly enough, or have enough impact, to head off an impending low. And there are other situations where SmartGuard might be triggered for all the right reasons, but not actually have been needed and you end up higher than you'd like because of it.
I'll cover some of those situations in more detail in another blog - but for now, let's focus on those gentle (or not so gentle) drifts below 4.0 which SmartGuard effortlessly squashes without bothering you with any irritating alarms.
When it works well, it genuinely feels like you have a little 'diabetes helper' by your side, actively looking out for you. Not something I have ever felt about any other piece of diabetes technology.
If you have any questions or comments, please do leave them below. I'd love to hear what you think.
Watch this a little larger on my YouTube channel.
Friday, 17 July 2015
Thursday, 16 July 2015
FDA Report on Targeted Drug Development: The Diabetes Section
Are you a policy geek? FDA has a white paper out on drug development and it has some background on diabetes (T1 and T2) and how they go about drug approval.
It isn't page turner like Game of Thrones (GoT) but hey let be honest GoT books 4 and 5 dragged on.
Here is the preface of what they say about diabetes and a link to the section of the white paper on diabetes:
Have fun reading geeks.
The reader digest version is summed up in these quotes:
It isn't page turner like Game of Thrones (GoT) but hey let be honest GoT books 4 and 5 dragged on.
Here is the preface of what they say about diabetes and a link to the section of the white paper on diabetes:
..our understanding of disease causation and progression is sufficient to permit our use of certain tools such as surrogate endpoints. But it is insufficient to develop others such as biomarkers to help target specific subset of patients who are less likely to suffer side effects from specific drugs. Even where scientific research has not yet identified the molecular and genetic bases for a disease and its treatment, FDA is using tools other than targeting and biomarkers to reduce the length and cost of clinical trials, including flexible trial designs, expedited development pathways, public-private research collaborations, and intensive engagement with drug sponsors. In addition, these tools can support the development of one of the most promising avenues for accelerating drug development: targeted, or precision, medicine—the ability to target the right drug to the right patient based on understanding of the genetic and biochemical basis of a disease in patient subgroups.Diabetes : http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/ucm454955.htm#Diabetes
Have fun reading geeks.
The reader digest version is summed up in these quotes:
Yeah there is more in there. If you like wanting around in Westeros, enjoy the read.
- FDA has long allowed manufacturers to show that a diabetes drug works by using a simple surrogate endpoint—lowering blood sugar.
- There have been longstanding concerns that some drugs for type 2 diabetes that successfully lower blood sugar may nevertheless increase rather than decrease the risk of heart attack.
- To minimize the impact on innovation while ensuring acceptable cardiovascular safety, FDA asks for preliminary CV safety data before approval and for detailed additional data to characterize CV effects after the product is on the market.
- FDA has approved seven new diabetes drugs in the last two years. This includes three drugs that represent entirely new drug classes—a measure of how innovative these drugs are. In June 2014, FDA approved the only inhaled insulin product. The diabetes drug pipeline is among the strongest for any disease category and includes potentially transformative advances for type 1 diabetes.
Wednesday, 15 July 2015
#135shoes - 108 unnecessary amputations a week
Diabetes UK have been working on their 'Putting Feet First' campaign for some time now, but today is the day they are really trying to hit hard with it. They are staging an event in Westminster featuring 135 shoes scattered across a lawn, each bearing a note of the impact that amputation, or living with the threat of amputation can bring. The statistic is horrifying, but even more gut-wrenching is the byline. Eighty percent of these amputations could have been prevented. Eighty percent. It strikes a particular chord with me as I am aware that Bristol, where I live, has a particularly high rate of amputations compared to the national average.
Having lived with diabetes for over 25 years I have spent quite a lot of time trying not to think about complications, but if you are lucky enough to still have all ten toes attached, just think for a moment about the impact on your every day life of losing one or both of your feet. Of the additional challenges that would come with a million every day moments. Stairs, nipping to the shops, running for the bus, running for pleasure, sports, shoes, paddling in the ocean, walking the dog... And for 108 of those 135 people, this devastating event might have been prevented.
Many of the people who live very real and very human lives behind this cold, hard statistic will be living with Type 2 Diabetes. They will be used to having people assume that this is all their own fault. That they should be ashamed of themselves. That they have only themselves to blame. Because type 2 is a 'lifestyle' disease, right? "Too many cakes and not enough exercise you poor, waddling excuse for a human being". Blah blah blah. So on top of the physical trauma and day to day difficulties faced, they will be heaped upon with guilt for the enormous cost of their treatment to the tax payer. What remains of their self esteem crushed beneath the weight of media, public and family opinion and in some cases even a medical profession that seems to overtly judge them as failures.
But is it really as simple as that? And even if you think it is, what fruit does that mindset bear?
Personally I don't believe that it is. There is a lot in this article, You did NOT eat your way to type 2 diabetes, that makes a lot of sense to me. Now that's not to say that I dismiss the concept of personal responsibility entirely. Of course not. If some people had made changes perhaps they could have dodged their diabetes diagnosis. But it just seems to me that many (most?) people who live with Type 2 diabetes were doing pretty much what everyone else was doing, it was just that their metabolisms weren't up to dealing with the semi-toxic combination of a modern Western diet and a massively wealthy and profit-hungry food industry.
But getting a diagnosis of diabetes (of either type!) surely should not inevitably lead to 135 people each week undergoing expensive life-altering surgery. Our understanding of managing long term conditions, like diabetes, seems to be improving year on year, and yet many of the outcome measures seem to be getting steadily worse.
How can we change the balance so that there are only 81 shoes on the lawn?
Here are a few thoughts from my unqualified, unmedical viewpoint:
Well done to Diabetes UK for highlighting this important topic. I hope some action can be taken to reduce the enormous, unnecessary, financial and personal cost behind these statistics.
Having lived with diabetes for over 25 years I have spent quite a lot of time trying not to think about complications, but if you are lucky enough to still have all ten toes attached, just think for a moment about the impact on your every day life of losing one or both of your feet. Of the additional challenges that would come with a million every day moments. Stairs, nipping to the shops, running for the bus, running for pleasure, sports, shoes, paddling in the ocean, walking the dog... And for 108 of those 135 people, this devastating event might have been prevented.
Many of the people who live very real and very human lives behind this cold, hard statistic will be living with Type 2 Diabetes. They will be used to having people assume that this is all their own fault. That they should be ashamed of themselves. That they have only themselves to blame. Because type 2 is a 'lifestyle' disease, right? "Too many cakes and not enough exercise you poor, waddling excuse for a human being". Blah blah blah. So on top of the physical trauma and day to day difficulties faced, they will be heaped upon with guilt for the enormous cost of their treatment to the tax payer. What remains of their self esteem crushed beneath the weight of media, public and family opinion and in some cases even a medical profession that seems to overtly judge them as failures.
But is it really as simple as that? And even if you think it is, what fruit does that mindset bear?
Personally I don't believe that it is. There is a lot in this article, You did NOT eat your way to type 2 diabetes, that makes a lot of sense to me. Now that's not to say that I dismiss the concept of personal responsibility entirely. Of course not. If some people had made changes perhaps they could have dodged their diabetes diagnosis. But it just seems to me that many (most?) people who live with Type 2 diabetes were doing pretty much what everyone else was doing, it was just that their metabolisms weren't up to dealing with the semi-toxic combination of a modern Western diet and a massively wealthy and profit-hungry food industry.
But getting a diagnosis of diabetes (of either type!) surely should not inevitably lead to 135 people each week undergoing expensive life-altering surgery. Our understanding of managing long term conditions, like diabetes, seems to be improving year on year, and yet many of the outcome measures seem to be getting steadily worse.
How can we change the balance so that there are only 81 shoes on the lawn?
Here are a few thoughts from my unqualified, unmedical viewpoint:
- Get your feet checked every year
This is for us lot with diabetes really. Foot checks are supposed to be part of your annual review every year. Go to your appointment and make sure you get your pulses and sensitivity checked. If there are any problems you want them spotted early. - Stop telling people that diabetes is inevitably progressive
This is less a factor for us living with Type 1, but many with Type 2 are set up to fail from the outset - if something is inevitable, why bother putting in effort to prevent it? Effective managment of diabetes is a relentless slog, we need to be encouraged that the effort is worth it. Don't blame people if they need more or different medication as time goes on, but never make them feel like it is not worth trying, that there is nothing they can do. Focus more on the positive benefits of effective management in the short and long term. - Stop telling people that type 2 is 'mild'
Incredibly this still seems to be suggested to some people. That type 2 is not really very serious and doesn't need much attention paid to it. I much prefer the quote about diabetes and tigers: "Living with diabetes is like living with a tiger. If you feed it, groom it, never turn your back on it; you can live with a tiger. If you neglect it; it'll pounce on you and rip you to shreds." - Start telling people to watch their carbs
Diabetes is a long term condition. People were diagnosed with it years ago, and told the information that was felt appropriate then. Some years ago people diagnosed with type 2 diabetes often significantly increased their 'starchy carb' intake on the advice of their healthcare professionals. Almost all sources now seem to acknowledge that moderating carbohydrate intake - and not just sugar, ALL carbohydrate - is beneficial for people with diabetes. Now I'm not going to open the low-carb can of worms here, because what I am talking about is really more to do with better BG outcomes than any arbitrary label you might place on a number of grams of carb a day that you might feel works for you. Which leads me nicely on to... - Allow motivated patients to check their Blood Glucose
The vast majority of people living with diabetes in the UK have type 2. And the vast majority of them are told, time and time again, that they do not need to test their blood glucose levels. That the 6-monthly HbA1c test is enough. I could write a long and ranty post about how we seem to have got ourselves into this mess (including the Farmer et al study that is still used as an official reason why SMBG - self monitoring of blood glucose - for type 2 is not recommended) but I would rather talk about the motivated people I see on diabetes forums. They fund their own strips because their surgery won't. They test before and an hour or two after eating something (whenever they generally get their highest reading). They look at the results and the quantities and types of foods eaten and make adjustments. They use the very pre- and post-meal target values that are in the same NICE guideline that denys them access to SMBG. And as a result? They are able to actively tailor their diet to suit their own diabetes, many are able to reduce or emilinate medication and their HbA1cs usually fall well outside of the 'danger zone'. And if they can do it... so can hundreds and thousands more if given the right testing framework, simple guidance and 6 month's or a year's worth of strips for that intensive early testing.
Well done to Diabetes UK for highlighting this important topic. I hope some action can be taken to reduce the enormous, unnecessary, financial and personal cost behind these statistics.
Wednesday, 8 July 2015
64 Days with the Medtronic 640G: Ep 2 The first 28 days' results
I wasn't expecting to be posting this blog today (well it seems like it'll be tomorrow by the time it has uploaded, but it's still today as I'm typing this). I had a vague plan that I'd do an introductory blog, and then move on to explain what SmartGuard was and how it worked. But today marks 4 weeks since I have been living with the MiniMed 640G and having looked at the results so far to say I am impressed is an understatement.
Ever since diagnosis, if I'm honest, I have preferred to run on the low side rather than on the high side. Lows were quick to sort out and usually involved eating something sweet and tasty, while highs took much longer to come down and, while they did not make me feel particularly grim like they do for many people, they also carried with them the spectre of all those diabetes nasties waiting in the wings. Blindness, kidney failure and amputation vs fruit pastilles seemed an easy choice to make.
Of course running on the low side and 'preferring' hypos is not a brilliant plan. My hypo awareness began to take rather a dent and I spent many years with significant hypo unawareness and the severe hypos that go with it, especially overnight. Looking back I am ashamed that I did not realise the pressure and stress that this placed on my whole family and especially Jane.
Pretty much since we began writing this blog I began to try to reduce my incidence of hypoglycaemia and regain my warning signs, and generally wrestle my diabetes into behaving itself a little better. I have put quite a bit of work in and learned a lot. Thankfully I have not had an episode of Severe Hypoglycaemia for something like 3 or 4 years now - long enough ago that I can't remember anyway. But for all the success there have remained a stubborn few dips under 4 (which may or may not be hypos depending on your definition) that I have been unable to tame.
This video blog examines what effect SmartGuard has had to my results in these first 4 weeks.
Want more updates? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.
Ever since diagnosis, if I'm honest, I have preferred to run on the low side rather than on the high side. Lows were quick to sort out and usually involved eating something sweet and tasty, while highs took much longer to come down and, while they did not make me feel particularly grim like they do for many people, they also carried with them the spectre of all those diabetes nasties waiting in the wings. Blindness, kidney failure and amputation vs fruit pastilles seemed an easy choice to make.
Of course running on the low side and 'preferring' hypos is not a brilliant plan. My hypo awareness began to take rather a dent and I spent many years with significant hypo unawareness and the severe hypos that go with it, especially overnight. Looking back I am ashamed that I did not realise the pressure and stress that this placed on my whole family and especially Jane.
Pretty much since we began writing this blog I began to try to reduce my incidence of hypoglycaemia and regain my warning signs, and generally wrestle my diabetes into behaving itself a little better. I have put quite a bit of work in and learned a lot. Thankfully I have not had an episode of Severe Hypoglycaemia for something like 3 or 4 years now - long enough ago that I can't remember anyway. But for all the success there have remained a stubborn few dips under 4 (which may or may not be hypos depending on your definition) that I have been unable to tame.
This video blog examines what effect SmartGuard has had to my results in these first 4 weeks.
Want more updates? Subscribe to my YouTube channel.
Thursday, 2 July 2015
64 Days with the Medtronic 640G: Ep 1 Introduction. Comparing the MM640G with Paradigm Veo
Following on from my early preview of the MiniMed 640G insulin pump, I have been invited by the fine folks at Medtronic to spend 64 days with their new box of tricks, and to share my experiences through the slightly scary and unfamiliar medium of video blogging.
It's what all the cool kids are up to (apparently).
For this first installment I have tried to do a little compare and contrast between the Medtronic Veo and the new MiniMed 640G. Just a few things that have struck me during my first couple of weeks of use really. I'm not yet going to mention Smartguard and compare that feature to the Veo's Low Glucose Suspend, partly because I think that Smartguard deserves a vlog all of its own, but mostly because I have never used sensors with my Veo so have nothing to usefully compare.
I am hoping to post a video every week or so over the 64 day period, but I have quickly come to realise that this video blogging lark is nothing like as easy as everyone makes it look, so you may have to bear with me on timings. I'll announce any new episodes here and on Twitter, naturally, but if you are really keen I suppose you could always subscribe to what is now laughably described as my YouTube Channel.
In the meantime you can find some more, rather more coherent information on the MiniMed 640G here.
And please do check out the video blogs of other MM640G users too.
Leave any comments or questions here or on YouTube and I'll do my best to answer them.
Watch this video on YouTube.
It's what all the cool kids are up to (apparently).
For this first installment I have tried to do a little compare and contrast between the Medtronic Veo and the new MiniMed 640G. Just a few things that have struck me during my first couple of weeks of use really. I'm not yet going to mention Smartguard and compare that feature to the Veo's Low Glucose Suspend, partly because I think that Smartguard deserves a vlog all of its own, but mostly because I have never used sensors with my Veo so have nothing to usefully compare.
I am hoping to post a video every week or so over the 64 day period, but I have quickly come to realise that this video blogging lark is nothing like as easy as everyone makes it look, so you may have to bear with me on timings. I'll announce any new episodes here and on Twitter, naturally, but if you are really keen I suppose you could always subscribe to what is now laughably described as my YouTube Channel.
In the meantime you can find some more, rather more coherent information on the MiniMed 640G here.
And please do check out the video blogs of other MM640G users too.
Leave any comments or questions here or on YouTube and I'll do my best to answer them.
Watch this video on YouTube.
Wednesday, 1 July 2015
CrossFit Resorts to Bullying People with Diabetes
So recently, the people at CrossFit have started a new campaign insinuating sugar (and namely, Coca-Cola) kill people and give them diabetes. Their distasteful tweet went out to say...
This is the height of DISGUSTING morals and disrespect for a people with a poorly understood health condition, massive misinformation, and families and relatives who have passed away! As someone who lost her father to type 2 diabetes in 2003, I am deeply offended!
I do not just appeal to you to write CrossFit, as these people are surely not going to give a DAMN about what we have to say -- but hit them in the pockets with a potential lawsuit by writing Coca-Cola. Together, we can fight back. This is my letter. Modify as you need to... You may submit yours at https://secure.coca-colacompany.com/ssldocs/mail/eQuery_product.shtml. (Copy and paste in your browser).
"To Whom It May Concern,
I am an advocate for people with diabetes. It has recently come to my attention, and the attention of many other advocates and persons with diabetes that a certain company calling itself "CrossFit" has appropriated part of Coca-Cola's logo and good name as a means to attack and tarnish the reputations of people with type 2 diabetes, as a part of their scare tactic campaign and dissemination of misinformation.
As advocates, we work endlessly with other agencies such as the American Diabetes Association, JDRF, and the Joslin Diabetes Center to educate persons on the nature of diabetes, its various types, and any means of prevention possible. While we recognize that good nutrition is key to maintaining a healthy weight, we strongly denounce the tactics of this company. Consuming sugar in and of itself does NOT lead to any form of diabetes.
This campaign is deeply offensive to people with diabetes, and our voices are being ignored by this company. We would like to appeal to Coca Cola and their good name, to help us stand against this company -- not only because this is hurtful for people with diabetes, but because it damages the good name and brand of Coca Cola and its affiliates.
At this time, the "Crossfit" company is using parts of the Coca Cola logo, with an attached catchphrase of "open diabetes" which they claim is trademarked.
The information is being spread all over Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook, and may be seen at these links:
https://instagram.com/p/4hHG9htDUL/
https://twitter.com/CrossFit/status/615539464232902656
Thank you for your time, and we hope to hear from you soon.
Lizmari M. Collazo
Diabetes Advocate and Freelance Writer
http://theangrytype2diabetic.blogspot.com/"
"Make sure you pour some out for your dead homies."—Greg Glassman #CrossFit #Sugarkills @CrossFitCEO pic.twitter.com/QnwXOe4BTQ— CrossFit (@CrossFit) June 29, 2015
This is the height of DISGUSTING morals and disrespect for a people with a poorly understood health condition, massive misinformation, and families and relatives who have passed away! As someone who lost her father to type 2 diabetes in 2003, I am deeply offended!
I do not just appeal to you to write CrossFit, as these people are surely not going to give a DAMN about what we have to say -- but hit them in the pockets with a potential lawsuit by writing Coca-Cola. Together, we can fight back. This is my letter. Modify as you need to... You may submit yours at https://secure.coca-colacompany.com/ssldocs/mail/eQuery_product.shtml. (Copy and paste in your browser).
"To Whom It May Concern,
I am an advocate for people with diabetes. It has recently come to my attention, and the attention of many other advocates and persons with diabetes that a certain company calling itself "CrossFit" has appropriated part of Coca-Cola's logo and good name as a means to attack and tarnish the reputations of people with type 2 diabetes, as a part of their scare tactic campaign and dissemination of misinformation.
As advocates, we work endlessly with other agencies such as the American Diabetes Association, JDRF, and the Joslin Diabetes Center to educate persons on the nature of diabetes, its various types, and any means of prevention possible. While we recognize that good nutrition is key to maintaining a healthy weight, we strongly denounce the tactics of this company. Consuming sugar in and of itself does NOT lead to any form of diabetes.
This campaign is deeply offensive to people with diabetes, and our voices are being ignored by this company. We would like to appeal to Coca Cola and their good name, to help us stand against this company -- not only because this is hurtful for people with diabetes, but because it damages the good name and brand of Coca Cola and its affiliates.
At this time, the "Crossfit" company is using parts of the Coca Cola logo, with an attached catchphrase of "open diabetes" which they claim is trademarked.
The information is being spread all over Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook, and may be seen at these links:
https://instagram.com/p/4hHG9htDUL/
https://twitter.com/CrossFit/status/615539464232902656
Thank you for your time, and we hope to hear from you soon.
Lizmari M. Collazo
Diabetes Advocate and Freelance Writer
http://theangrytype2diabetic.blogspot.com/"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)