Talk:Complications of diabetes

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 15 November 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Ab5931.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

"Moved" claim

In my most recent edit, I said I moved the following text to Diabetes type 2. Actually, I think it needs a more specific reference than a news page before insertion there, so I pasted it here meanwhile. Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Women with high blood pressure (hypertension) are three times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes as compared with women with optimal BP after adjusting for various factors such as age, ethnicity, smoking, alcohol intake, body mass index (BMI), exercise, family history of diabetes, etc, according to as study including 38,000 female health professionals for ten years. "Women with high BP at three-fold risk of developing diabetes." TopNews.in July 1, 2009. http://www.topnews.in/women-high-bp-three-fold-risk-developing-diabetes-23341

Thanks for the great page! A suggestion.

I really like this page! I'm so glad I encountered it. I like the layout. Acute...chronic. I only have this suggestion: At a glance, i didn't find any heading saying "skin infections" which i happened to be netsearching for a diabetic. After a quick re-read of the page, I found skin infection tucked into chronic. I'm not a doctor, and i have little say about how to present this page, but since i was netsearching diabetic skin infections, i would have found it helpful to click directly to it at the content list. Just like i could hypoglycemia, etc. Perhaps a mini-list of the chronics in the content list would be a helpful access point. Anyway, it looks like the page was hard work! great job! thanks. Do what you think is best. I saved the page to refer to it in the future.96.20.158.99 (talk) 00:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)Blip

Explanation of removal of text

Since removal of material is not so popular I want to explain why I will remove a small part here, please read this before you revert me, and if you do revert please explain why Im wrong to do so. The page states

• "The fact that 40% of diabetics who carefully control their blood sugar nevertheless develop neuropathy,[8] and that some of those with good blood sugar control still develop nephropathy,[9] requires explanation."

If we follow ref 9, it says

• " Only approximately one half of patients with poor glycemic control develop DN, whereas some patients do so despite relatively good control (21)."

So I guess what is written follows the ref decently, relativly good have become good, but wait, what does 21 says? I.e. the source to the surce. [[1]]

• " The group was divided into tertiles according to the index of hyperglycemia (lowest = 0% to 11.9%, middle = 12.0% to 25.0%, and highest � 25.1%) to calculate the cumulative incidence rate of ESRD over 35 years of IDDM according to glycemic control (Fig. 2). Those with the poorest control (severe hyperglycemia on more than I of 4 clinic visits) had a significantly higher risk of ESRD 36.3% 8.7% (P = 0.02) than the middle and best tertiles (14.4% 6.0% and 9.2% 5.1%, respectively) "

So what this ref says is that if you do not have severe hyperglycemia you can also get complications.

So what does severe hyperglycemia mean, they define it as:

• "Stated simply, severe hyperglycemia was defined as a blood sugar above the 66th percentile of all clinic blood sugars"

So if you are not above the 66th percentile of all clinic blood sugars you can still get complications, it does not say that if you are below the 66th percentile you have "good blood sugar control" or even "relatively good control"

Therefore I remove the last section of this sentence, and I cant add the last ref to the pat and then remove it so therefore I explain here.

Comments?? Anyone who have access to M. Centofani, "Diabetes Complications: More than Sugar?" Science News, vol. 149, no. 26/27, Dec. 23–30, p. 421 (1995) I really would like to read that.... does carefully control mean try hard, or try hard and succeeds? and how good do hey succeed?

--Stefan-S ^talk 15:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Idea Generally Accepted

Many sources can be found which state that there is a considerable disconnect between blood sugar control and the development of diabetic complications, so other citations could be offered. For example, the Diapedia: Acute and Chronic Complications Article (available online) says that "even though a higher HbA1c is clearly associated with an increased risk for complications, individual differences in HbA1c explain only about 11% of the difference in complication risk," and "some individuals suffer severe complications despite good glycaemic control, whereas others seem protected from these complications despite persistently poor HbA1c values." L. Zhang, et al, "Risk of Developing Retinopathy in Diabetes Control and Complications Trial," Diabetes Care, 24 (7) 1275-1279 (2001) makes the same point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.114.28 (talk) 18:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

made a lot of changes

i made a lot of changes, because i thought there had n´t been done an overviewing copy edit for a while. just addition of bits and pieces here and there. the lede was more of a political statement...

what is missing IMO (I am a doc but no diabetes expert) is:

• more info on the chronic complications which this page should really be about, not the acute ones whch all have their own pages
• frequencies ?
• risk by age, gender, type of diabetes.
• more on management ? (i dont mean amputation, dialysis etc, which is discussed on the respective complication pages)
• an illustration of where which complications occur ?

--Wuerzele (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2017 (UTC) (plse ping me if you want my attention, i likely will not see comments)

Adding Glucagon Dysregulation as a complication of Type 1

I will be adding glucagon dysregulation as a complication of type 1 diabetes. It has been thoroughly shown to be a characteristic of type 1, and though not all the implications of it are fully understood as to their mechanisms, just citing that it is in dysregulation should be important, being that it is a major metabolic hormone, and specifically the counter-regulator of insulin. I will also be adding this to the complications portion of the page "Diabetes Melitus Type one. feedback in balancing the information into the most appropriate places would be appreciated.

Basics of this add are:

Glucagon is dysregulated. Hyperglucagonemia under euglycemia and hypoglucagonemia under hypoglycemia. Too much glucagon can bring on ketosis. lack of sufficient glucagon under insulin induced hypoglycemia means inability for body to recuse blood sugar via glycogen dump and gluconeogenesis.

Mechanisms of dysregulation still to be elicudated, but there is known loss of islet alpha cell controls. Islet-produced insulin helps regulate glucagon via paracrine signaling. loss of islet produced insulin changes how alpha cells experience insulin regulation All type 1 diabetics experience rapid early islet sympathetic nerve pruning during the autoimmune destruction of beta cell mass. sympathetic stimulation is a main form of glucagon secretion when bloodsugar falls to dangerous levels. Pruning is due to p75 ntr, though the mechanism by which it is activated is still being researched.

Glucagon is being included as part of closed loop artificial pancreas systems, in attempt to improve the metabolic balance of insulin and glucagon.

Jthibaudeau (talk) 16:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Diabetes mellitus type 1 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Type 1 diabetes which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:59, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Major revisions to page

I would like to help revitalize this article and wanted to post some ideas here. I pared down the lead to be more succinct and reflect the body of the article. I am in favor of shifting the focus towards chronic complications and dramatically reducing the discussion of acute issues as these are covered well in their respective pages. I would also favor restructuring the chronic complications to go by organ rather than separate micro vs macro as it may be more accessible to a lay audience. Open to suggestions/comments! Pattkait (talk) 16:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Peer review OMEN Palestine Wikipedia-editing course

Good job on the article!The content added helped the article to be more complete.The article neutral and unbiased. Each section  was adequately represented and discussed. Easy languagae and explained  medical terminologies .In general, the coverage of the article is neutral and unbiased. The refrences are reliable sources.

During the review there was found some problems, listed below

• The first sentence in the second paragraph in acute DKA is hard to read.
• The management section needs more work on the flow of the ideas and the structure.
• There is two sections that lack any citations: hypoglycemia and diabetic coma.
• There is a very old citation from 1977  Pirart J (December 1977). "[Diabetes mellitus and its degenerative complications: a prospective study of 4,400 patients observed between 1947 and 1973 (3rd and last part) (author's transl)]". Diabete & Metabolisme. 3 (4): 245–256. PMID 598565.

About the chronic complications part, The proper citations are added to the proper information from reliable resources.

It is easy to read, medical words are linked to other articles.

I think it is appropriate to add more definitions for medical words in a simple way other than the links only. It will be easier for someone who wants to have a quick idea about it.Since also there are many of those medical words in this section.

More attached links can be added too Annayas (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)