General fitness, health and nutrition ยท Public discussion

WARNING-Actos-Avandia

Started by Peanutjake ยท ยท Last activity ยท 27 posts ยท 3,324 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
17 December 2003
Last activity
13 January 2004
Original author
Peanutjake
Posts
27
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,324
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1โ€“20 of 27
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Thiazolidinediones Contraindicated in Patients at Risk for Heart Failure CME

    News Author: Laurie Barclay, MD CME Author: Charles Vega, MD Authors and Disclosures

    Dec. 8, 2003 - A joint statement from the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Diabetes
    Association (ADA), published in the Dec. 9 issue of Circulation, urges physicians not to prescribe
    thiazolidinediones (TZDs) to patients at risk for congestive heart failure (CHF). The statement will
    also be published in the January 2004 issue of Diabetes Care.

    "There is now widespread use of TZDs in a broad group of patients with type 2 diabetes," lead author
    Richard W. Nesto, MD, from the Lahey Clinic in Burlington, Massachusetts, says in a news release.
    "At the same time there have been reports of CHF associated with their use."

    The TZDs rosiglitazone maleate (Avandia) and pioglitazone hydrochloride (Actos) are indicated as
    monotherapy or as combination therapy for type 2 diabetes. Although these drugs help control blood
    glucose and may improve other cardiovascular risk factors including hypertension, high cholesterol,
    and inflammatory biomarkers, some patients treated with these drugs develop edema.

    "It is sometimes difficult to know whether such swelling is a benign side effect of the drugs or a
    more ominous sign of heart failure," Dr. Nesto says. "It is this common association that concerns
    both cardiologists and diabetologists."

    To balance improved glycemic control achieved with TZDs against potential risk, the joint statement
    writing committee reviewed existing trials to identify diabetic patients who are at increased risk
    for CHF and who may not be ideal candidates for TZDs.

    Recommendations of the consensus statement include avoidance of TZDs in patients with advanced heart
    disease or severe CHF. In patients with depressed ejection fraction but without symptoms of CHF,
    TZDs should be prescribed only if glycemic control cannot be achieved with other drugs, and in these
    cases TZDs should be started at low doses.

    The statement also recommends a "start low, go slow" regimen of TZDs for diabetics with mild to
    moderate CHF, and in those with one or more risk factors for CHF. Because diabetes is a
    cardiovascular risk factor, many patients given TZDs for diabetes could also have underlying
    heart disease.

    "But at this point we don't know the real risk because we don't know either the actual number of
    patients with diabetes who are taking a TZD and develop CHF, compared to the total number of
    patients who are taking a TZD," Dr. Nesto says. "This risk is probably quite low, but without solid
    data that's just guesswork."

    According to the statement, patients receiving TZD treatment should report weight gain of more than
    3 kg (6.6 lb), sudden onset of pedal edema, dyspnea, or fatigue. For CHF diagnosed after initiation
    of TZD therapy, "dosage change and temporary or permanent discontinuance are the obvious options,
    but no one of these is preferred for all patients," the authors write.

    Circulation. 2003;108:2941-2948

    Learning Objectives Upon completion of this activity, participants will be able to: List the
    nonhypoglycemic benefits of TZDs. Describe how TZDs should and should not be used in the presence of
    CHF and CHF risk factors. Clinical Context TZDs have emerged as a treatment option for patients with
    diabetes in part due to effects beyond their ability to lower serum glucose. In a review by Parulkar
    and colleagues appearing in the Jan. 2, 2001, issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, the authors
    cite reduced blood pressure, correction of diabetic dyslipidemia, improvement in fibrinolysis, and a
    decrease in carotid artery intima-media thickness as other benefits associated with TZDs. However,
    the authors tempered their enthusiasm for TZDs in a discussion of the weight gain associated with
    the drugs.

    Weight gain and fluid retention are known adverse events associated with TZD use. In a retrospective
    analysis by Tang and colleagues of diabetic patients with known heart failure using TZDs, 17.1% of
    subjects developed fluid retention that resolved after the TZD was discontinued. The research, which
    appeared in the April 16, 2003, issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology,

    To reconcile the risks and benefits of TZDs in diabetic patients who either currently have CHF or
    have significant CHF risk factors, the AHA and ADA released the current consensus statement based on
    available evidence.

    Study Highlights Weight gain is common with both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone and may be due to
    both increased caloric retention as well as fluid retention. When combined with a sulfonylurea,
    weight gain may vary between 1.8 to 2.9 kg. Weight gain is even more significant when TZDs are
    combined with insulin (average gain, 2.3 - 5.4 kg). Edema is also frequently found in patients
    taking TZDs, occurring in 3% to 5% of patients using TZDs as monotherapy. Rates of edema are higher
    if TZDs are used in combination with other hypoglycemic agents. 13.1% to 16.2% of patients taking
    TZDs with insulin may experience edema. CHF is not frequently encountered with TZD use.
    Rosiglitazone, either alone or in combination with other oral hypoglycemic agents, is associated
    with an incidence of CHF of less than 1%. However, CHF incidence rises to 2% to 3% if rosiglitazone
    is combined with insulin. Pioglitazone has been associated with an incidence of CHF of 1.1%. In
    reviewing case reports of CHF associated with the use of TZDs, the authors of the consensus
    statement caution that TZDs may unmask previously asymptomatic cardiac insufficiency by increasing
    plasma volume. The recommendations of the consensus panel are as follows: Before prescribing a TZD,
    the physician should perform a thorough history and physical for risk factors, such as previous
    myocardial infarction or significant valvular disease, that could predispose a patient to CHF.
    Baseline dyspnea and edema should be recorded. Physicians should also pay attention to other
    medications, such as vasodilators, which may also contribute to fluid retention. Peripheral edema
    is not a contraindication for TZD use, but it should be monitored during TZD therapy. Patients
    should be instructed to report any weight gain more than 3 kg, new pedal edema, dyspnea, or fatigue
    after starting a TZD. In patients without known heart disease but with 1 or more cardiac risk
    factors, TZDs should be started at the lowest possible dose and advanced cautiously with special
    attention to possible fluid overload. TZDs should be avoided if possible when the patient has a
    known reduced ejection fraction (<40%) but is asymptomatic. Again, if TZDs must be used, the
    patient should be started on the lowest possible dose and advanced cautiously. TZDs also may be
    used with close patient supervision if the patient has known class I or II New York Heart Heart
    Association (NYHA) CHF. TZDs should be avoided in cases of class III or IV NYHA CHF. If evidence of
    fluid overload manifests itself during TZD therapy, especially in the first few months of
    treatment, the physician should mount a thorough investigation for CHF. This should include an
    electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and, possibly, serum evaluation for brain natriuretic peptide.
    If CHF is not present in a patient receiving TZDs with evidence of fluid overload, other drugs that
    may contribute to increased intravascular volume should be reconsidered. The TZD also may be
    discontinued or modified to a lower dose. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors with or without
    a thiazide diuretic may help to reduce edema. Any treatment-emergent CHF should prompt a
    reconsideration of the use of a TZD. If the TZD is discontinued, symptoms of volume overload should
    be expected to resolve fairly quickly, and diuretic therapy may be needed for only a short time.
    Pearls for Practice TZDs offer diabetic patients benefits beyond lowering serum glucose. TZDs
    frequently lead to fluid retention. All patients receiving TZDs should be monitored for symptoms
    and signs of fluid retention. TZDs should be avoided in patients with moderate to severe CHF or
    evidence of an ejection fraction less than 40%.

  2. Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this mean
    that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack due to
    the avandia?

  3. Electromatic said this...

    Quoted message said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this mean
    that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack due to
    the avandia?


    someone will probably correct me on this but here goes....

    Avandia is containdicated for people with a history of heart disease.

    Hypertension (high BP) is NOT a heart issue. It's a vascular issue. Basically constriction of
    the blood vessels, which means the heart has to work harder to push blood round. Hence
    increased pressure!

    So Avandia isn't necessarily dangerous to someone with high BP on medication.

    Any other thoughts anyone?

    ratty
    --
    www.flyingrat.net

  4. "Electromatic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this mean
    that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack due to
    the avandia?


    I would show this information to my doctor and follow his advice.

  5. I'm also taking 4mg of Avandia per day but my MD (cardiologist/general) has me split it and take 1/2
    in the morning and 1/2 in the evening. Wonder if that has anything to do with a risk? I also take
    80mg Zocor, 50mg Vioxx ,100mg Pletal and an 81mg aspirin. Haven't had any heart problems that I know
    of and my blood pressure is great (knock on wood) but will run this by my MD on next visit in
    February. Rob Mills

    "Electromatic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this mean
    that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack due to
    the avandia?

  6. Electromatic said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this mean
    that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack due to
    the avandia?

    I note the original warning says contra-indicated IF you a HISTORY or OTHER RISK. So it seems to me
    like a high-protein diet damageing kidneys - panic (quite understandable) leading to assuming that
    starting something off is the same as making worse something already started.

    jmo, but avandia/actos are perfectly safe if used correctly. Like everything else they unsafe if
    used incorrectly.
    --
    Al.
    Idiopathic t1
    HbA1c 5.95
    Total Chol 2.7
    Blood Pressure 105/70
    Beef Lente 1x
    Beef Neutral 2x

  7. Flying Rat wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    Electromatic said this...

    Quoted message said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this
    mean that I should discontinue the avandia because


    I'm

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    in grave danger of having a heart attack due to the avandia?


    someone will probably correct me on this but here goes....

    Avandia is containdicated for people with a history of heart disease.

    Hypertension (high BP) is NOT a heart issue. It's a vascular issue. Basically constriction of the
    blood vessels, which means the heart has to work harder to push blood round. Hence increased
    pressure!

    So Avandia isn't necessarily dangerous to someone with high BP on medication.

    Any other thoughts anyone?

    ratty
    --
    www.flyingrat.net

    The docs lump the various forms of heart disease into "heart disease" in the press releases,
    then separate them in the discussion.

    If you have diabetes then you are prone to ischemic heart disease, i.e. the diabetes causes damage
    which encourages the plugging of arteries. The TZD's like Actos and Avandia "fight" ischemic heart
    disease in diabetics and therefore:

    For many diabetics, Actos and Avandia are life-saving drugs.

    However, the TZD's encourage fluid retention. If you are prone to Congestive Heart Failure, (a
    "heart disease" different than Ischemic Heart Disease) then:

    For "you", the TZD's have a dangerous side effect.

    The docs fling the buzz words around and don't make it easy for us amateurs to pick out the
    differences. Note how they use "heart failure" all through this quoted report but don't mention
    infarction which is the death-dealing result of ischemic heart disease.

    There is a bit of gallows humor in this whole subject.

    a. In my family, folks die young from infarctions caused by ischemic heart disease. However, we
    don't have problems with Congestive Heart Failure. Therefore, we notice the life-saving
    effects of the anti-ischemic meds and recommend them to everybody (e.g. I am always pushing
    the TZD's in the newsgroups)

    b. In some families, Congestive Heart Failure is a problem. Folks with this genetic heritage
    notice the edema effects of the TZD's and are quick to point out how dangerous they are.

    Annette has relatives who suffer form congestive heart failure but don't seem to suffer from
    ischemic heart disease. For her, Actos and Avandia are dangerous drugs with unnecessary anti-
    ischemic heart disease benefits.

    My wife has a pre-school grandchild. The "other" grandmother is a T2 diabetic.

    The "other" grandmother has congestive heart failure and therefore is barred from the life-saving
    benefits of Actos and Avandia.

    My wife will enjoy her grandchild's exeriences as he progresses through school. I don't think the
    "other" grandmother will live long enough to watch her grandchild graduate from high school, perhaps
    not from middle school, perhaps even not from kindergarden. That part is not humorous, only sad.

    Now, we must think about high blood pressure.

    AFAIK, damage from high blood pressure can cause congestive heart failure. Insulin Resistance
    produces high levels of circulating insulin which damages arteries which causes high blood pressure.

    Actos and Avandia are anti-Insulin Resistance meds. Therefore, they fight high blood pressure, and
    thus also fight congestive heart failure.

    Therefore:

    Actos and Avandia have anti-heart disease effects in that:

    c. They fight the high blood pressure which causes congestive heart failure

    d. They improve the lipid profiles/bG excursions which lead to ischemic heart disease.

    However, it you don't "catch" the congestive heart disease problem/tendency/genetic predisposition??
    soon enough, then you are prohibited from enjoying the life-saving effects of Actos and Avandia.

    Thus the doctors' dilemma.

    e. If they avoid prescribing TZD's, they may exacerbate heart disease tendencies, .

    f. If they prescribe TZD's, they may exacerbate undiscovered heart disease

    One answer is to fight Insulin Resistance tooth and nail before getting into that dilemma. The
    "other" grandmother lost that race.

    That's why cardiologists refer to T2 as a cardiovascular disease marked by occasional high
    blood sugars.

    Regards Old Al (Say. . .there's this med called metformin which the Brits have been using for 40
    years and. . . .)

  8. Al,

    These drugs are pretty new to the market, and it is only in the last couple months that evidence of
    their damaging side effects has come to light. The after-marketing procedure is tilted in the
    direction of letting the drug manufacturers continue to market their drugs. Doctors must report the
    drug side effect to the FDA (a cumbersome process) for it to get attention. But doctors who give a
    patient Actos or Avandia and then saw them develop congestive heart failure may not have connected
    the two--after all these patients tend to be older and in poor health. And many doctors do not
    report. I know that mine did not when I developed permanent tinnitus from Clinoril.

    So many people must die before the FDA takes another look. Look at how in the US, antidepressants
    are still being prescribed to teenagers, though in Britain it has become evident that they cause a
    much higher than expected incidence of suicide and agitation. (I just saw a neighbor's friend have
    exactly this reaction to one of the drugs banned for teens in the UK, alas. Then they put her on the
    anti-psychotic that causes diabetes. She gained 40 lbs in 3 months, and I suspect that at 15 because
    of the initial mis-presciption, they've just ruined her life. <sigh>๐Ÿ˜‰

    So this is a situation where you have to be a bit paranoid about the possibility of side effects
    because the chances are that the true incidence of these new side effects is not known.

    Nor can you trust that your doctor is up-to-date with the latest information about side effects. I
    have learned this the hard way! I have been misprescribed several drugs that are contraindicated for
    people with my drug reaction history though I have spelled it out very clearly each time I go to the
    doctor. Only be reading the prescribing info myself have I found how inappropriate these
    prescriptions were.

    The problem with Actos/Avandia as I see it is that there's some latitude in discovering who is, in
    fact, "at risk" for heart failure (a terrible, irreversible and eventually fatal condition.) If your
    doctor has run all the tests mentioned in the article, perhaps you are safe. But if your doctor (and
    HMO) is like mine, they haven't run those tests and won't until you develop symptoms. So it isn't
    known if you are truly at risk for heart failure

    Plus, there is going to be a small number of people who develop the side effect with no obvious
    warning. Maybe it's only 1 in 200,000 but if you're that one, it means you die a lot earlier than
    necessary.

    From what I've read on Medscape, my suggestion would be that anyone who experiences sudden or swift
    weight gain of any type on these drugs should stop taking them rather than gamble with their heart's
    ability to pump.

    Also, these same drugs are also now associated with an increase macular edema (swelling in the
    retina) and that can lead to blindness!

    What's really sad, is that the people I know who are on Actos/Avandia (including some relatives)
    were never told to try carbohydrate restriction before committing to these potentially damaging
    drugs. At the big family get together they sit shoveling down low fat potato salad and pasta which
    they are convinced is healthy because their doctors told them to eat a low fat diet. This past year
    I've watched one cousin (in her early 30s) gain 40 lbs on Avandia. <sigh> -- Jenny

    Cut the carbs to respond to my new email address! New photo:
    geocities.comjennypics.htm Weight: 168.5/137 Diabetes Type II diagnosed
    8/1998 - HBa1c 5.2 10/03 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now

    geocities.comjenny the bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people
    really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings
    * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low
    Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * Do Starch Blockers Work? * NEW!
    Why the Low Carb Diet is Great for Diabetes * NEW! Low Carb Strategies for People with Diabetes

    "Al Hardy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
    berlin.de...

    Quoted message said:
    Electromatic said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this
    mean that I should discontinue the avandia because I'm in grave danger of having a heart attack
    due to the avandia?

    I note the original warning says contra-indicated IF you a HISTORY or


    OTHER

    Quoted message said:

    RISK. So it seems to me like a high-protein diet damageing kidneys - panic (quite understandable)
    leading to assuming that starting something off is the same as making worse something already
    started.

    jmo, but avandia/actos are perfectly safe if used correctly. Like


    everything

    Quoted message said:

    else they unsafe if used incorrectly.
    --
    Al. Idiopathic t1 HbA1c 5.95 Total Chol 2.7 Blood Pressure 105/70 Beef Lente 1x Beef Neutral 2x

  9. Jenny said:

    Al,


    I am not sure if you are responding to me in person, looking at the thread it seems that you are.
    Please to forgive if I got that wrong.

    Quoted message said:

    These drugs are pretty new to the market, and it is only in the last couple months that evidence
    of their damaging side effects has come to light.


    Is it not the case that extensive safety testing is done by the FDA before marketing is allowed?
    Sometimes here in the UK we are as much as a year behind America in allowing new drugs. Sometimes an
    advantage, sometimes a disadvantage. Here, we don`t have just one ageny involved, but at least two,
    MAHRA and NICE, sometimes MAFF gets involved as well.

    Quoted message said:

    The after-marketing procedure is tilted in the direction of letting the drug manufacturers
    continue to market their drugs. Doctors must report the drug side effect to the FDA (a cumbersome
    process) for it to get attention. But doctors who give a patient Actos or Avandia and then saw
    them develop congestive heart failure may not have connected the two--after all these patients
    tend to be older and in poor health. And many doctors do not report. I know that mine did not when
    I developed permanent tinnitus from Clinoril.


    Older and in poor health is, imho, an excellent reason to exercise care with any new drug for any
    health problem.

    Quoted message said:

    So many people must die before the FDA takes another look.


    No offence intended, but FDA is utterly irrelevant in the UK, just as MAHRA and NICE are irrelevant
    in the US.

    Quoted message said:

    Look at how in the US, antidepressants are still being prescribed to teenagers, though in Britain
    it has become evident that they cause a much higher than expected incidence of suicide and
    agitation. (I just saw a neighbor's friend have exactly this reaction to one of the drugs banned
    for teens in the UK, alas. Then they put her on the anti-psychotic that causes diabetes. She
    gained 40 lbs in 3 months, and I suspect that at 15 because of the initial mis-presciption,
    they've just ruined her life. <sigh>๐Ÿ˜‰

    So this is a situation where you have to be a bit paranoid about the possibility of side effects
    because the chances are that the true incidence of these new side effects is not known.


    Aah, but I, personally am not willing to take any medication except salbutamol, beclomethazone,
    insulin: without them I`m dead very quickly.

    Quoted message said:

    Nor can you trust that your doctor is up-to-date with the latest information about side effects. I
    have learned this the hard way! I have been misprescribed several drugs that are contraindicated
    for people with my drug reaction history though I have spelled it out very clearly each time I go
    to the doctor. Only be reading the prescribing info myself have I found how inappropriate these
    prescriptions were.


    If I couldn`t trust my doctor, then I would find a different one. I got through 5 GPs in the past 7
    years, but now I am satisfied.

    Quoted message said:

    The problem with Actos/Avandia as I see it is that there's some latitude in discovering who is, in
    fact, "at risk" for heart failure (a terrible, irreversible and eventually fatal condition.) If
    your doctor has run all the tests mentioned in the article, perhaps you are safe. But if your
    doctor (and HMO) is like mine, they haven't run those tests and won't until you develop symptoms.
    So it isn't known if you are truly at risk for heart failure

    Plus, there is going to be a small number of people who develop the side effect with no obvious
    warning. Maybe it's only 1 in 200,000 but if you're that one, it means you die a lot earlier than
    necessary.

    From what I've read on Medscape, my suggestion would be that anyone who experiences sudden or
    swift weight gain of any type on these drugs should stop taking them rather than gamble with their
    heart's ability to pump.

    Also, these same drugs are also now associated with an increase macular edema (swelling in the
    retina) and that can lead to blindness!

    What's really sad, is that the people I know who are on Actos/Avandia (including some relatives)
    were never told to try carbohydrate restriction before committing to these potentially damaging
    drugs. At the big family get together they sit shoveling down low fat potato salad and pasta which
    they are convinced is healthy because their doctors told them to eat a low fat diet. This past
    year I've watched one cousin (in her early 30s) gain 40 lbs on Avandia. <sigh>

    May I ask (not sarcastically, I do actually want to know) what is *carbohydrate restriction*, how
    low is *low-carb*? I am 5` 10" tall, weigh 139 lbs, physically active (on my feet at least 8 hours a
    day), no statins or Met or Actos or anything has ever been prescribed or even hinted at, and I am
    t1. And why would low-carb prevent the need for Actos/Avandia?

    Nearly forgot, I do have a *slight* heart issue, enlarged left ventricle, maternally inherited,
    predates diabetes by over 4 decades.
    --
    Al.
    Idiopathic t1
    HbA1c 5.95
    Total Chol 2.7
    Blood Pressure 105/70
    Beef Lente 1x
    Beef Neutral 2x

  10. oldal4865 said:

    Flying Rat wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    Electromatic said this...

    Quoted message said:

    Ok, I'm on 4mg daily of avandia and 5mg daily of elanapril for high blood pressure. Does this
    mean that I should discontinue the avandia because



    I'm

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    in grave danger of having a heart attack due to the avandia?

    someone will probably correct me on this but here goes....

    Avandia is containdicated for people with a history of heart disease.

    Hypertension (high BP) is NOT a heart issue. It's a vascular issue. Basically constriction of the
    blood vessels, which means the heart has to work harder to push blood round. Hence increased
    pressure!

    So Avandia isn't necessarily dangerous to someone with high BP on medication.

    Any other thoughts anyone?

    ratty
    --
    www.flyingrat.net

    The docs lump the various forms of heart disease into "heart disease" in the press releases,
    then separate them in the discussion.

    If you have diabetes then you are prone to ischemic heart disease, i.e. the diabetes causes damage
    which encourages the plugging of arteries. The TZD's like Actos and Avandia "fight" ischemic heart
    disease in diabetics and therefore:

    For many diabetics, Actos and Avandia are life-saving drugs.

    However, the TZD's encourage fluid retention. If you are prone to Congestive Heart Failure, (a
    "heart disease" different than Ischemic Heart Disease) then:

    For "you", the TZD's have a dangerous side effect.

    The docs fling the buzz words around and don't make it easy for us amateurs to pick out the
    differences. Note how they use "heart failure" all through this quoted report but don't mention
    infarction which is the death-dealing result of ischemic heart disease.

    There is a bit of gallows humor in this whole subject.

    a. In my family, folks die young from infarctions caused by ischemic heart disease. However,
    we don't have problems with Congestive Heart Failure. Therefore, we notice the life-saving
    effects of the anti-ischemic meds and recommend them to everybody (e.g. I am always
    pushing the TZD's in the newsgroups)

    b. In some families, Congestive Heart Failure is a problem. Folks with this genetic heritage
    notice the edema effects of the TZD's and are quick to point out how dangerous they are.

    Annette has relatives who suffer form congestive heart failure but don't seem to suffer from
    ischemic heart disease. For her, Actos and Avandia are dangerous drugs with unnecessary anti-
    ischemic heart disease benefits.

    My wife has a pre-school grandchild. The "other" grandmother is a T2 diabetic.

    The "other" grandmother has congestive heart failure and therefore is barred from the life-saving
    benefits of Actos and Avandia.

    My wife will enjoy her grandchild's exeriences as he progresses through school. I don't think the
    "other" grandmother will live long enough to watch her grandchild graduate from high school,
    perhaps not from middle school, perhaps even not from kindergarden. That part is not humorous,
    only sad.

    Now, we must think about high blood pressure.

    AFAIK, damage from high blood pressure can cause congestive heart failure. Insulin Resistance
    produces high levels of circulating insulin which damages arteries which causes high blood
    pressure.

    Actos and Avandia are anti-Insulin Resistance meds. Therefore, they fight high blood pressure, and
    thus also fight congestive heart failure.

    Therefore:

    Actos and Avandia have anti-heart disease effects in that:

    a. They fight the high blood pressure which causes congestive heart failure

    b. They improve the lipid profiles/bG excursions which lead to ischemic heart disease.

    However, it you don't "catch" the congestive heart disease problem/tendency/genetic
    predisposition?? soon enough, then you are prohibited from enjoying the life-saving effects of
    Actos and Avandia.

    Thus the doctors' dilemma.

    a. If they avoid prescribing TZD's, they may exacerbate heart disease tendencies, .

    b. If they prescribe TZD's, they may exacerbate undiscovered heart disease

    One answer is to fight Insulin Resistance tooth and nail before getting into that dilemma. The
    "other" grandmother lost that race.

    That's why cardiologists refer to T2 as a cardiovascular disease marked by occasional high
    blood sugars.

    Regards Old Al (Say. . .there's this med called metformin which the Brits have been using for 40
    years and. . . .)

    My thanks for this clear logical treatise.

  11. In article said:

    In alt.support.diabetes Al Hardy <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:

    If I recall correctly, about 5 years ago there were three drugs onthe market , Actos, Avandia and ?
    (don't remember the name).

    The other drug was Rezulin.

    They all were

    Quoted message said:

    insulin resistance reducers. ? was pulled from the market because of, I believe it was liver
    problems, but at any rate, there was too high incidence of death from a side effect.

    The incidence of death from liver problems was NOT that high; about 1 in 50,000, and this was
    without carrying out liver tests. It would not have been withdrawn if Actos and Avandia, slightly
    different drugs believed not to have the liver problem, were not already going through the
    approval process.

    There has been discussion before

    Quoted message said:

    on this group about people getting edema with these drugs and being taken off them. THis warning is
    quite specific to a particular group of individuals, as bigAl has pointed out and certainly is
    contraindicated if it results in any edema or unusual weight gain, particularly from water
    retention.

    Apparently the problem with edema was not caught during drug testing. There are NO "safe
    effective drugs".

    Quoted message said:

    Isn't Metformin also supposed to have some insulin reduction effect without the edema, as well as
    its primary action of reducing glucagon release from the liver?

    Slight. Metformin also has its risks, including liver problems and lactic acidosis, I believe.

    --
    This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics
    Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
    [email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

  12. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Al Hardy said:
    Rose said:

    From another discussion:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > A low carb diet would help a young person with Type II diabetes because many people in the
    > earlier stages of type II diabetes still make enough insulin to handle a modest load of carbohydrate--
    > 12 - 15 grams a meal but not the 200 - 300 grams that old fashioned dieticians and doctors
    > recommend.

    A lower carb higher fat diet seems to have helped this definitely not young person with rather
    advanced Type 2 diabetes. I am not on any kind of extreme diet, but my weight has dropped slightly
    and my lipids have improved.
    --
    This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics
    Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
    [email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

  13. In alt.support.diabetes Al Hardy <[email hidden]> wrote:

    If I recall correctly, about 5 years ago there were three drugs onthe market , Actos, Avandia and ?
    (don't remember the name). They all were insulin resistance reducers. ? was pulled from the market
    because of, I believe it was liver problems, but at any rate, there was too high incidence of death
    from a side effect. There has been discussion before on this group about people getting edema with
    these drugs and being taken off them. THis warning is quite specific to a particular group of
    individuals, as bigAl has pointed out and certainly is contraindicated if it results in any edema or
    unusual weight gain, particularly from water retention.

    Isn't Metformin also supposed to have some insulin reduction effect without the edema, as well as
    its primary action of reducing glucagon release from the liver?

    Wendy

  14. Al,

    Years ago before the AIDS epidemic when drugs were only marketed to doctors, not the public, the FDA
    was more rigorous in testing drugs. Unfortunatley, in response to the dire need of AIDS patients to
    try experimental drugs, the whole process got speeded up and drugs now hit the market with short
    term studies done in a couple thousand people which cannot catch any long term effects.

    In addition, the drug companies pretty much run the FDA since they fund it, and the current
    administration is not interested in any more regulation of huge corporate campaign donors.

    There's an excellent book called _Bitter Pills: Inside the hazardous world of legal drugs_ by
    Stephen Fried which anyone who takes pharmaceuticals should read. Fried was a mainstream
    investigative journalist whose wife suffered irreversible brain damage from a Floxin drug prescribed
    for a minor urinary tract infection. He was able to document the way that the manufacturer had kept
    the drug on the market despite mounting evidence that it caused this side effect in a small number
    of people. His expose of how the approval and aftermarket process works is must reading!

    Quoted message said:

    May I ask (not sarcastically, I do actually want to know) what is *carbohydrate restriction*, how
    low is *low-carb*? I am 5` 10" tall, weigh 139 lbs, physically active (on my feet at least 8 hours
    a day), no statins or Met or Actos or anything has ever been prescribed or even hinted at, and I am
    t1. And why would low-carb prevent the need for Actos/Avandia?

    As a thin T1, Actos or Avandia would not be of use to you. Your problem isn't insulin resistance
    (i.e. an inability for cells to respond to insulin) it's not making insulin, which is something
    else entirely.

    These insulin resistance drugs are prescribed for Type IIs who still make insulin but who are
    believed to be insulin resistant (usually without any actual testing.) The drugs work on PPAR-gamma
    receptors in muscle tissue to help those tissues take in blood sugar with the help of the body's own
    insulin. According to the endocrinologist I saw, this tends to pack on weight in these muscle
    tissues (arms and legs in particular).

    A low carb diet would help a young person with Type II diabetes because many people in the earlier
    stages of type II diabetes still make enough insulin to handle a modest load of carbohydrate--12 -
    15 grams a meal but not the 200 - 300 grams that old fashioned dieticians and doctors recommend.
    When overweight people with type II diabetes go on a low carb diet, their weight loss can also be
    very dramatic. I know many people who have lost as much as 100 pounds over a year of low carbing.
    That kind of weight loss itself reduces insulin resistance too, which makes blood sugar much easier
    to control.

    Unfortunately here in the US we are bombarded with TV and magazine ads for these very expensive
    drugs which are advertised with all the subtlety (and logic) of new cars. The message they give is
    that these drugs take care of diabetes without the person having to make any changes in their diet.
    Since drug manufacturers fund most medical research nowadays, most of the articles doctors read
    about diabetes are about how drugs control it.

    Sad . . .

    --Jenny

    Cut the carbs to respond to my new email address! New photo:
    geocities.comjennypics.htm Weight: 168.5/137 Diabetes Type II diagnosed
    8/1998 - HBa1c 5.2 10/03 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now

    geocities.comjenny the bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people
    really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings
    * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low
    Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * Do Starch Blockers Work? * NEW!
    Why the Low Carb Diet is Great for Diabetes * NEW! Low Carb Strategies for People with Diabetes

    "Al Hardy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
    berlin.de...

    Quoted message said:
    Jenny said:

    Al,


    I am not sure if you are responding to me in person, looking at the


    thread

    Quoted message said:

    it seems that you are. Please to forgive if I got that wrong.

    Quoted message said:

    These drugs are pretty new to the market, and it is only in the last couple months that evidence
    of their damaging side effects has come to light.


    Is it not the case that extensive safety testing is done by the FDA before marketing is allowed?
    Sometimes here in the UK we are as much as a year behind America in allowing new drugs. Sometimes
    an advantage, sometimes a disadvantage. Here, we don`t have just one ageny involved, but at least


    two,

    Quoted message said:

    MAHRA and NICE, sometimes MAFF gets involved as well.

    Quoted message said:

    The after-marketing procedure is tilted in the direction of letting the drug manufacturers
    continue to market their drugs. Doctors must report the drug side effect to the FDA (a
    cumbersome process) for it to get attention. But doctors who give a patient Actos or Avandia and
    then saw them develop congestive heart failure may not have connected the two--after all these
    patients tend to be older and in poor health. And many doctors do not report. I know that mine
    did not when I developed permanent tinnitus from Clinoril.


    Older and in poor health is, imho, an excellent reason to exercise care


    with

    Quoted message said:

    any new drug for any health problem.

    Quoted message said:

    So many people must die before the FDA takes another look.


    No offence intended, but FDA is utterly irrelevant in the UK, just as


    MAHRA

    Quoted message said:

    and NICE are irrelevant in the US.

    Quoted message said:

    Look at how in the US, antidepressants are still being prescribed to teenagers, though in
    Britain it has become evident that they cause a much higher than expected incidence of suicide
    and agitation. (I just saw a neighbor's friend have exactly this reaction to one of the drugs
    banned for teens in the UK, alas. Then they put her on the anti-psychotic that causes diabetes.
    She gained 40 lbs in 3 months, and I suspect that at 15 because of the initial mis-presciption,
    they've just ruined her life. <sigh>๐Ÿ˜‰

    So this is a situation where you have to be a bit paranoid about the possibility of side effects
    because the chances are that the true incidence of these new side effects is not known.


    Aah, but I, personally am not willing to take any medication except salbutamol, beclomethazone,
    insulin: without them I`m dead very quickly.

    Quoted message said:

    Nor can you trust that your doctor is up-to-date with the latest information about side effects.
    I have learned this the hard way! I have been misprescribed several drugs that are
    contraindicated for people with my drug reaction history though I have spelled it out very
    clearly each time I go to the doctor. Only be reading the prescribing info myself have I found
    how inappropriate these prescriptions were.


    If I couldn`t trust my doctor, then I would find a different one. I got through 5 GPs in the past
    7 years, but now I am satisfied.

    Quoted message said:

    The problem with Actos/Avandia as I see it is that there's some latitude in discovering who is,
    in fact, "at risk" for heart failure (a terrible, irreversible and eventually fatal condition.)
    If your doctor has run all the tests mentioned in the article, perhaps you are safe. But if your
    doctor (and HMO) is like mine, they haven't run those tests and won't until you develop
    symptoms. So it isn't known if you are truly at risk for heart failure

    Plus, there is going to be a small number of people who develop the side effect with no obvious
    warning. Maybe it's only 1 in 200,000 but if you're that one, it means you die a lot earlier
    than necessary.

    From what I've read on Medscape, my suggestion would be that anyone who experiences sudden or
    swift weight gain of any type on these drugs should stop taking them rather than gamble with
    their heart's ability to pump.

    Also, these same drugs are also now associated with an increase macular edema (swelling in the
    retina) and that can lead to blindness!

    What's really sad, is that the people I know who are on Actos/Avandia (including some relatives)
    were never told to try carbohydrate restriction before committing to these potentially damaging
    drugs. At the big family get together they sit shoveling down low fat potato salad and pasta
    which they are convinced is healthy because their doctors told them to eat a low fat diet. This
    past year I've watched one cousin (in her early 30s) gain 40 lbs on Avandia. <sigh>

    May I ask (not sarcastically, I do actually want to know) what is *carbohydrate restriction*, how
    low is *low-carb*? I am 5` 10" tall, weigh 139 lbs, physically active (on my feet at least 8 hours
    a day), no statins or Met or Actos or anything has ever been prescribed or even hinted at,


    and

    Quoted message said:

    I am t1. And why would low-carb prevent the need for Actos/Avandia?

    Nearly forgot, I do have a *slight* heart issue, enlarged left ventricle, maternally inherited,
    predates diabetes by over 4 decades.
    --
    Al. Idiopathic t1 HbA1c 5.95 Total Chol 2.7 Blood Pressure 105/70 Beef Lente 1x Beef Neutral 2x

  15. Wendy,

    The earlier drug was Rezulin. One of the things that came out before it was pulled off the market
    was that even though the manufacturers included a "black box warning" i.e. the most strongly worded
    warning about fatal side effects, doctors continued to prescribe it to people in the group at risk
    for fatal reactions and did not do the periodic liver testing that the drug companies recommended.

    There is some evidence that these new drugs also cause occasional liver failure (i.e. death!) but
    they'll have to kill a lot more people before they get pulled off the market. Unfortunately, if a
    drug only kills 30 or 40 people a year, it will continue to be marketed. This is only a problem, of
    course, if you are one of the forty!

    -- Jenny

    Cut the carbs to respond to my new email address! New photo:
    geocities.comjennypics.htm Weight: 168.5/137 Diabetes Type II diagnosed
    8/1998 - HBa1c 5.2 10/03 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now

    geocities.comjenny the bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people
    really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings
    * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low
    Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * Do Starch Blockers Work? * NEW!
    Why the Low Carb Diet is Great for Diabetes * NEW! Low Carb Strategies for People with Diabetes

    "W. Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In alt.support.diabetes Al Hardy <[email hidden]> wrote:

    If I recall correctly, about 5 years ago there were three drugs onthe market , Actos, Avandia and
    ? (don't remember the name). They all were insulin resistance reducers. ? was pulled from the
    market because of, I believe it was liver problems, but at any rate, there was too high incidence
    of death from a side effect. There has been discussion before on this group about people getting
    edema with these drugs and being taken off them. THis warning is quite specific to a particular
    group of individuals, as bigAl has pointed out and certainly is contraindicated if it results in
    any edema or unusual weight gain, particularly from water retention.

    Isn't Metformin also supposed to have some insulin reduction effect without the edema, as well as
    its primary action of reducing glucagon release from the liver?

    Wendy

  16. Jenny said:

    Al,

    Years ago before the AIDS epidemic when drugs were only marketed to doctors, not the public,


    There is more difference than I thought between your system and ours. Here drugs are not marketed to
    doctors or piblic, only advertised, and not even supplied by the doctor, but the pharmacist. But
    there is possibly a linguisic difference between my undestanding of the word *marketing* and yours.

    Quoted message said:

    the FDA was more rigorous in testing drugs. Unfortunatley, in response to the dire need of AIDS
    patients to try experimental drugs, the whole process got speeded up and drugs now hit the market
    with short term studies done in a couple thousand people which cannot catch any long term effects.

    In addition, the drug companies pretty much run the FDA since they fund it, and the current
    administration is not interested in any more regulation of huge corporate campaign donors.


    A definite difference there, NICE and MAHRA are funded by the govt but totally autonomous in every
    other way.

    Quoted message said:

    There's an excellent book called _Bitter Pills: Inside the hazardous world of legal drugs_ by
    Stephen Fried which anyone who takes pharmaceuticals should read. Fried was a mainstream
    investigative journalist whose wife suffered irreversible brain damage from a Floxin drug
    prescribed for a minor urinary tract infection.


    Oh, that is so sad!

    Quoted message said:

    He was able to document the way that the manufacturer had kept the drug on the market despite
    mounting evidence that it caused this side effect in a small number of people. His expose of how
    the approval and aftermarket process works is must reading!

    Quoted message said:

    May I ask (not sarcastically, I do actually want to know) what is *carbohydrate restriction*, how
    low is *low-carb*? I am 5` 10" tall, weigh 139 lbs, physically active (on my feet at least 8
    hours a day), no statins or Met or Actos or anything has ever been prescribed or even hinted at,
    and I am t1. And why would low-carb prevent the need for Actos/Avandia?

    As a thin T1, Actos or Avandia would not be of use to you. Your problem isn't insulin resistance
    (i.e. an inability for cells to respond to insulin) it's not making insulin, which is something
    else entirely.

    These insulin resistance drugs are prescribed for Type IIs who still make insulin but who are
    believed to be insulin resistant (usually without any actual testing.) The drugs work on PPAR-
    gamma receptors in muscle tissue to help those tissues take in blood sugar with the help of the
    body's own insulin. According to the endocrinologist I saw, this tends to pack on weight in these
    muscle tissues (arms and legs in particular).


    Thank you for that, a very clear explanation.

    Quoted message said:

    A low carb diet would help a young person with Type II diabetes because many people in the earlier
    stages of type II diabetes still make enough insulin to handle a modest load of carbohydrate--12 -
    15 grams a meal but not the 200 - 300 grams that old fashioned dieticians and doctors recommend.


    Goodness gracious, are there still doctors recommending such a huge carb load? I eat 85gm to 95gm
    per day, but then I wish to put on another 7lbs or slightly more.

    Quoted message said:

    When overweight people with type II diabetes go on a low carb diet, their weight loss can also be
    very dramatic. I know many people who have lost as much as 100 pounds over a year of low carbing.
    That kind of weight loss itself reduces insulin resistance too, which makes blood sugar much
    easier to control.

    Unfortunately here in the US we are bombarded with TV and magazine ads for these very expensive
    drugs which are advertised with all the subtlety (and logic) of new cars. The message they give is
    that these drugs take care of diabetes without the person having to make any changes in their
    diet. Since drug manufacturers fund most medical research nowadays, most of the articles doctors
    read about diabetes are about how drugs control it.

    Sad . . .


    Thank you for your help, Jenny.

    Al.

  17. "W. Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In alt.support.diabetes Al Hardy <[email hidden]> wrote:

    If I recall correctly, about 5 years ago there were three drugs onthe market , Actos, Avandia and
    ? (don't remember the name). They all were insulin resistance reducers. ? was pulled from the
    market because of, I believe it was liver problems, but at any rate, there was too high incidence
    of death from a side effect. There has been discussion before on this group about people getting
    edema with these drugs and being taken off them. THis warning is quite specific to a particular
    group of individuals, as bigAl has pointed out and certainly is contraindicated if it results in
    any edema or unusual weight gain, particularly from water retention.

    Rezulin was the drug that was pulled.

    Quoted message said:


    Isn't Metformin also supposed to have some insulin reduction effect without the edema, as well as
    its primary action of reducing glucagon release from the liver?

    I think so.

    --
    Type 2 users.bestweb.net~jbove

  18. W. Baker wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    In alt.support.diabetes Al Hardy <[email hidden]> wrote:

    If I recall correctly, about 5 years ago there were three drugs onthe market , Actos, Avandia and ?
    (don't remember the name). They all were insulin resistance reducers. ? was pulled from the market
    because of, I believe it was liver problems, but at any rate, there was too high incidence of death
    from a side effect. There has been discussion before on this group about people getting edema with
    these drugs and being taken off them. THis warning is quite specific to a particular group of
    individuals, as bigAl has pointed out and certainly is contraindicated if it results in any edema
    or unusual weight gain, particularly from water retention.

    Isn't Metformin also supposed to have some insulin reduction effect without the edema, as well as
    its primary action of reducing glucagon release from the liver?

    Wendy

    Three points:

    1. I think Rezulin had the market to itself for most of its short product lifetime. Actos and
    Avandia came out just as they were removing Rezulin (I was taking it at the time)

    2. Rezulin was an interesting risk-benefit med:

    a. The product had life-saving benefits for many
    b. The product had life-threatening side effects for a small few

    Fortunately, if your doc was alert, he/she checked regularly for the "easily observed" side effects
    and pulled you off the med if they showed up. I have an extremely conservative doc who nevertheless
    prescribed Rezulin for me during the liver damage-death publicity period.

    At this time, he refuses to allow me to take statins because he can't differentiate between my
    arthritis joint pain and the joint pain due to the statin myopathy side effect. He won't run the
    liver tests, the joint pain is enough for him even though my general level of arthritis is quite
    significant, i.e. this guy is ***conservative***.

    3. Metformin has two known, major diabetic benefits. In tests at Baylor med, the docs found that
    It reduces liver release of glucose by about 30%, and it reduces Insulin Resistance by about
    35%. Those numbers are too crude to differentiate though a simple comparison would suggest
    that reducing Insulin Resistance actually is its major effect.

    (IMO, that Insulin Resistance effect is the reason behind its anti-heart attack effect)

    Note that metformin reduces Insulin Resistance by switching on a mechanism (AMP-kinase system) which
    in effect convinces the muscles that they have

    clinical trials) reduce Insulin Resistance by some mechanism involving fatty acids. Thus, they are
    complementary; they affect Insulin Resistance in different ways.

    edema.

    Regards
    Old Al

  19. Al,

    In the US drug companies run prime time TV ads targetted to the most simpleminded viewers which
    typically end up with a voiceover telling you something like "Ask your doctor about how Happinex can
    solve all your earlthy problems!" You need the prescription from the doctor to buy them at a
    pharmacy but doctors fear if they don't give that prescription to you when you ask, you'll change
    doctors, so they mostly do. The advertised drugs cost 20 times what generics cost that do the same
    job, and are the main reason why my monthly health insurance payment is higher than what my rent
    used to be.

    Magazines are filled with ads for these products too. On the back page in tiny letters they have all
    the warnings and side effects listed, but no one but me appears to read them.

    There are still far too many dieticians and doctors telling patients to eat a low fat, high carb
    diet for diabetes. I know. It's idiotic! But the cousins have one of those doctors, and of cours
    they've been seeing him all their lives so telling them he's an idiot is a complete waste of time.

    Plus, a wierd phenomenon I've noted is this. Since I have my blood sugar under control and have lost
    all this weight, most of the local people who I know who have diabetes seem to think I don't REALLY
    have diabetes like they do! They sit there eating their doctor-prescribed pasta and whole wheat
    bread, and finishing it off with the no-sugar-added low fat ice cream (which has more carbs than
    real ice cream) and explain that it might be okay for me to eat all that dreadful fat I eat and all
    that protein, but since they're diabetic, they can't! <sigh>

    -- Jenny

    Cut the carbs to respond to my new email address! New photo:
    geocities.comjennypics.htm Weight: 168.5/137 Diabetes Type II diagnosed
    8/1998 - HBa1c 5.2 10/03 Low Carb 9/1998 - 8/2001 and 11/10/02 - Now

    geocities.comjenny the bean How to calculate your need for protein * How much people
    really lose each month * Water Weight Gain & Loss * The "Two Gram Cure" for Hunger Cravings
    * Characteristics of Successful Dieters * Indispensible Low Carb Treats * Should You Count that Low
    Impact Carb? * Curing Ketobreath * Exercise Starting from Zero * Do Starch Blockers Work? * NEW!
    Why the Low Carb Diet is Great for Diabetes * NEW! Low Carb Strategies for People with Diabetes

    "Al Hardy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
    berlin.de...

    Quoted message said:
    Jenny said:

    Al,

    Years ago before the AIDS epidemic when drugs were only marketed to doctors, not the public,


    There is more difference than I thought between your system and ours. Here drugs are not
    marketed to doctors or piblic, only advertised, and not even supplied by the doctor, but the
    pharmacist. But there is possibly a linguisic difference between my undestanding of the word
    *marketing* and yours.

    Quoted message said:

    the FDA was more rigorous in testing drugs. Unfortunatley, in response to the dire need of AIDS
    patients to try experimental drugs, the whole process got speeded up and drugs now hit the
    market with short term studies done in a couple thousand people which cannot catch any long term
    effects.

    In addition, the drug companies pretty much run the FDA since they fund it, and the current
    administration is not interested in any more regulation of huge corporate campaign donors.


    A definite difference there, NICE and MAHRA are funded by the govt but totally autonomous in every
    other way.

    Quoted message said:

    There's an excellent book called _Bitter Pills: Inside the hazardous world of legal drugs_ by
    Stephen Fried which anyone who takes pharmaceuticals should read. Fried was a mainstream
    investigative journalist whose wife suffered irreversible brain damage from a Floxin drug
    prescribed for a minor urinary tract infection.


    Oh, that is so sad!

    Quoted message said:

    He was able to document the way that the manufacturer had kept the drug on the market despite
    mounting evidence that it caused this side effect in a small number of people. His expose of how
    the approval and aftermarket process works is must reading!

    Quoted message said:

    May I ask (not sarcastically, I do actually want to know) what is *carbohydrate restriction*,
    how low is *low-carb*? I am 5` 10" tall, weigh 139 lbs, physically active (on my feet at least
    8 hours a day), no statins or Met or Actos or anything has ever been prescribed or even hinted
    at, and I am t1. And why would low-carb prevent the need for Actos/Avandia?

    As a thin T1, Actos or Avandia would not be of use to you. Your problem isn't insulin resistance
    (i.e. an inability for cells to respond to insulin) it's not making insulin, which is something
    else entirely.

    These insulin resistance drugs are prescribed for Type IIs who still make insulin but who are
    believed to be insulin resistant (usually without any actual testing.) The drugs work on PPAR-
    gamma receptors in muscle tissue to help those tissues take in blood sugar with the help of the
    body's own insulin. According to the endocrinologist I saw, this tends to pack on weight in
    these muscle tissues (arms and legs in particular).


    Thank you for that, a very clear explanation.

    Quoted message said:

    A low carb diet would help a young person with Type II diabetes because many people in the
    earlier stages of type II diabetes still make enough insulin to handle a modest load of carbohydrate--
    12 - 15 grams a meal but not the 200 - 300 grams that old fashioned dieticians and doctors
    recommend.


    Goodness gracious, are there still doctors recommending such a huge carb load? I eat 85gm to 95gm
    per day, but then I wish to put on another 7lbs


    or

    Quoted message said:

    slightly more.

    Quoted message said:

    When overweight people with type II diabetes go on a low carb diet, their weight loss can also
    be very dramatic. I know many people who have lost as much as 100 pounds over a year of low
    carbing. That kind of weight loss itself reduces insulin resistance too, which makes blood sugar
    much easier to control.

    Unfortunately here in the US we are bombarded with TV and magazine ads for these very expensive
    drugs which are advertised with all the subtlety (and logic) of new cars. The message they give
    is that these drugs take care of diabetes without the person having to make any changes in their
    diet. Since drug manufacturers fund most medical research nowadays, most of the articles doctors
    read about diabetes are about how drugs control it.

    Sad . . .


    Thank you for your help, Jenny.

    Al.

  20. From another discussion:

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    A low carb diet would help a young person with Type II diabetes because many people in the
    earlier stages of type II diabetes still make enough insulin to handle a modest load of carbohydrate--
    12 - 15 grams a meal but not the 200 - 300 grams that old fashioned dieticians and doctors
    recommend.


    Goodness gracious, are there still doctors recommending such a huge carb load? I eat 85gm to 95gm
    per day, but then I wish to put on another 7lbs or slightly more.

    When people refer to carbs like the above exchange, are they referring to total carbs or net carbs
    (w/ fiber subtracted)?

    For example, so far this month, my average daily total carb intake is 105 grams, but 29 of that is
    fiber. So the average net carbs is about 76 grams/day. If I talk about carb intake in this group,
    which figure would I use?

    Thanks, Rose Type II

    P. S. Thank you to everyone who answered my previous question about being hungry all the time. It
    was related to carb intake. I threw away the 11-starch-serving prescribed diet and started eating
    to my meter. I cut out half my Amaryl (4 mg in morning now) and I am no longer bothered by hunger
    - now hubby has to remind me to eat. My average FBS has come down to 117 and only four days w/
    spikes (160+) so far this month. Not ideal numbers, I know, but much improved and going to get
    better. Thanks again.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users ยท 0 guests ยท0 bots ยท0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.