Cindy Haglund wrote:
> 0n (18 Jan 08) Allen Prunty wrote to Cindy Haglund...
> 
>  AP> Cindy Haglund wrote:
> 
> 
>  Yes you were taught. What you say below shows that.

The psychological definition is *conditioned* not *taught* there is a 
clear difference.  Teaching is a *active* process by which we gain 
knowledge and skills.  Conditioning is a *passive* process in which our 
minds are unconsciously influenced with knowledge or we learn 
unconscious actions much like reflexes.

For instance... if you were to slap a child often enough, granted he 
learns what slapping is... but him drawing back and shielding himself 
when you raise your hand is a conditioned response... you can be 
taught/conditioned at the same time.

For me the process was more subconscious... my family was very passive 
about it and offered very good reasons for me not to go to birthday 
parties but never made it feel like punishment... subconsciously I was 
conditioned to feel like there was something wrong with me... something 
undesirable.

Mom would say... why would you want to eat out when I fixed your 
favorite dinner... and etc.  And I would think... ("because they cook 
better than you do and to food has flavor").

>  It was meant with the best intention- to spare you your feelings and
> those who may have felt uncomfortable around you because of your
> difference. In this way is how we who have differences learn to be
> ashamed of our difference and eve hate ourselves for it. It's only
> when we and others are allowed compromise and happy acceptance that
> the shame goes away. And I am not talking just about diabetes.

I don't think it was to spare me... but to spare them.  Here I am in 
pretty good health and I have my cousin who is almost 375 pounds telling 
me I shouldn't have a piece of cake this weekend when I was at a family 
gathering... I quickly told her that my blood glucose is under 
control... I have the lab work to prove it... I am not considered 
overweight... and I eat a disciplined and healthy diet that makes room 
for a piece of cake.  Now do *you* have any reason why you shouldn't be 
eating cake yourself?  I know it sounds cruel... but some people need to 
have their reality chain rattled.

> With the child who can't eat the cake etc it would simply be learned
> that he have something else and everybody would be fine with that...
> etc. When people make accommodation without any fuss or negative
> attitudes (causing humiliation for example)- differences become less
> stigmatizing and simply different.

Or you can simply adjust the insulin dose as they learn now to let them 
have cake... or make other dietary arrangement combined with insulin so 
that they can.  Diabetes is -not- as rigid as it once was.

> People at ease with differences including the 'victim'
> put out a positive energy - everybody is happy that way.
> 
> If I have a guest who is diabetic I make myself aware of his our her
> needs and simply provide. But yeah I would feel a little guilty eating
> something they can't have, in front of them. hehe.. even if they're
> fine with it. So I'd probably not indulge. I don't eat much of those
> sugary things anyway.

True... but when I eat with friends or go to a friends house to eat the 
only way you know that I am diabetic is that I am using a PDA to analyze 
the meal's glucose content and adjust my dosage to what I eat.  I 
literally eat with a PDA on the table... as I add food to my plate it is 
  entered ito the PDA... make sense?  The only thing I ask for is 
unsweetened tea or plain water... I can not stand the syrupy taste of 
soft drinks... and that's personal not dietary.

> Mary Tyler Moore (the actress you may recall of the show by her name)
> is diabetic. She once commented how the diabetic diet is actually th
> healthiest died. :) You have to practice moderation and self control..
> you're life depends on it.

I've met her... and I often have Lunch with the former Ms. America 
Heather French-Henry who is also a diabetic on an insulin pump.  I think 
that diabetes does not force us to eat healthier... rather it opens our 
eyes to what we are consuming.

> My mom always had to keep an eye on my dad because he often forgot to
> eat.. he owned a retail store and was often that busy where he'd
> forget "it's lunch time". As you know a diabetic must adhere to a
> fairly strict 'when to eat 'time in order to maintain their blood
> sugar at a good level. Mom kept candy in the car in fact... hey you
> know what???  I was naughty.. But then mom never told any of us that
> daddy had to have that candy sometimes and not to touch it...

Not with an insulin pump... if you choose not to eat you dial it down... 
Your body will no longer have the insulin there to drive the hunger. 
Your liver has a glycogen (concentrated glucose) store that can last a 
normal people a while... by dialing down the insulin pump you will draw 
a little from your reserves like a normal person and not fall over.  The 
insulin pump does this by not having long acting insulin in your 
system... it gives constant microscopic doses of fast acting insulin 
several times a minute.

Type I's on insulin injections do not have this luxury because their 
injected long acting (NPH, LANTUS and ETC) will continue to work and 
drive their hunger.

Type II diabetics on pills do not have the luxury of being flexible ... 
their pills cause the pancreas to squrit out more insulin... thus 
driving their hunger.

> Maybe dad wasn't really ashamed of his condition. .Maybe just annoyed.
> The other person I told you about , I think: wanted to deny it.
> .........

Back in the day diabetes was controlled by insulin/pills and hard candy. 
  There was no finger poking and blood monitoring... (which is the 
second key of control) testing it and testing it often.

>  AP> I have even some cousins who gasp when they see me eat things like
>  AP> this, but I assure them I will be ok... it's not the
"poison" that
>  AP> they once
> 
> 
> Allan have you had any problems with the sugar substites. Splenda
> seems safe enough but some of the others ones like sorbitol cause a
> lot of gas...  If not then I think there's a lot of things you can eat
> otherwise? :)

Actually I don't use any of those... I use a natural sweetner called 
Stevia.  I do prefer my tea unsweetened... but stevia will sweeten 
things up nicely.

Sorbitol is a sugar alcohol... it is also one of the ingredients in 
laxitives... as with malitol, xylitol and other "itol" family sweetners.

Spenda is made from sugar by bonding sugar with chlorine... you are 
eating chlorinated sugar... bleah.

If I am drinking a cup of hot chocolate, eating chocolate or enjoying a 
dessert I eat a modest portion of the dessert or have just one 8 ounce 
cup or 1 serving size of a candy bar and adjust the insulin for it.  I 
am not overweight so there's no reason not to enjoy it and allot for the 
treat.  My HGA1C is a 5.2 which means I am in EXCELLENT control that's 
below the diabetic range.  I am a true juvenile and things go to ____ 
really fast if I go too long without insulin.

>  AP> thought it was.  Everything you eat breaks down into sugar.  With an
> 
> Except fat IIRC. But yeah glucose is our body's main fuel. IIRC a
> diabetic  can eat starches safely as they break down slowly so not to
> jar the blood sugar levels/giving time for the insulin to work.
> Sucrose is faster and then fructose even faster than that. (In being
> converted to glucose.

Dextrose is the fastest... it's almost instantaneous and can be absorbed 
buccally and sublingualy (by the gums and under the tongue)

> Can you refresh my memory on this? When dad had an insulin reaction
> this means the blood sugar is too low right? I remember mom would give
> him a tsp of sugar in a small glass of OJ. You have to get the blood
> sugar up. I remember when a person has this reaction they act as
> though they were drunk. But what about the insulin? I know the low
> blood sugar is effected by not having eaten recently enough to keep it
> at a safe level but can it also be due to there being too much insulin?
> That is what confuses me.

It may be caused by too much insulin... it may also be caused by over 
exertion, heat, stress, a really good romp in the hay, a sudden release 
of adrenaline, or a multitude of other things.  That's the ancient way 
of treating it... the safest way by modern standard is to take DEX-4 
tabs.  A dex-4 tab gives you 4grams of very fast acting glucose.  The 
standard dosage is three of them but I have lost enough weight two of 
them run me pretty high.  And it's almost instant how quick it pulls you 
out of it.

> And then there's the OTHER end. If the diabetic has too much sugar in
> his blood (and not enough insulin to deal with it) - that is what
> ends up as a diabetic coma?

You can end up in a coma either way... being too low is the most 
dangerous... as it causes brain death.  The brain is the only organ with 
cells that does not need insulin to metabolize glucose.

If your blood sugar is too high you do more long term damage to your 
body... but you are less likely to die from a high than a low.  Your 
miles may vary on this one because each body has different chemistry.

>  AP> insulin pump, carb counting, and a whole lot of discipline I can live
>  AP> somewhat of a normal life.  I just have to account for it more and
>  AP> exercise more.
> 
>  My younger brother's son has the pump. Works really well for him. :)
> I'm happy for him. :)

It will go a long way for him to play sports and do other things 
normally.  I could not be a firefighter or work in law enforcement 
without it.

> It sure is! Not just the technology but attitudes too. I remember when
> my brother had to prick his son's finger several times a day for the
> blood sugar test. Ouch. But as the parents did it quite matter of
> fact the child accepted it likewise.

Children who have diabetic parents do tend to be more accepting of it. 
Also when children can learn to do it themselves they will develop 
techniques that will get them an adequate sample... and not hurt as 
much.  I, to this day, will not let a nurse or anyone else stick me. 
They always think they have to jab the entire needle of that lancet in 
all the way to get a sample.  You just have to nick the surface... 
that's all.

> Well anything that causes impairment (Cell phones come to mind)
> to safe driving is criminal because impairment endangers life - yours
> and everyone else in the car and on the road. It's highly
> commendable take steps to prevent that. :) That is being responsible.
> Taking charge of oneself. Bravo to you.

Don't get me started on cell phones!

>  You know what? If more people took the kind of responsibility you do
> for whatever- we wouldn't needs so many laws which for the most part
> attempt to enforce common sense (so sadly lacking in so many
> people...)

Well working law enforcement really drills in responsibility.  Although 
I was more of a Technical officer that worked with the more scientific 
aspects and not a "beat" officer I still got drilled on policy and 
procedure always being the same.  When I get in my car it's almost like 
a pilot's checklist before I stick the key in.

> IE : In our Op-Ed section of the paper a gent wrote to say he was all
> for wearing helmets while riding motorcycles. He always did! But not
> because of the law, rather because it's simply common sense. He said
> if someone wants to be stupid enough not to where a helmet then well
> ... the consequences might clean up the gene pool a bit. I agree!

Ever hear of the Darwin Awards... I love 'em.

Thanks for the kind message Cindy... why don't you take a look at the 
diabetes echo... it's starting to move a bit.  I'm trying to revive a 
few dead echos.

Allen
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32