Hi Rip
We have Cholesterol reference ranges which seem to be designed to keep you ON treatment and thus keep you as a customer. We have Testosterone ref ranges which seem to be designed to keep you OFF treatment, I assume to keep you on "their" more profitable other drugs. However Diabetes (type2) reference ranges seem to be "honest" ? Would you agree ? We can either choose to stop eating donuts, train and get healthy and not need the drugs or eat shit and take the drugs.
I’m only assuming based on my own symptoms. I’ve been diabetic for 20 + yrs and have experienced all the increased thirst, excess night urination, tingling extremities, failing vision etc when my sugar levels have been high, ie outside the ref ranges. All those things subside when i track within normal recommendations. I just think with diabetes they have less gaming to do because there is a willing supply of people who are lazy and like eating & drinking shit and sitting on the couch.
PS, I’ve seen a noticeable improvement in my sugar levels since both SS and TRT
T2DM is a weird diagnosis, like hyperlipidaemia. You acknowledge that blood sugars exist on a continuum, that at a certain point higher values incur a proportionate risk, and pick a number to then call a “disease”.
However if someone asked me if the relationship between medicine and pharma was not simply -“Hey pharma, create a drug to safely bring down blood sugars and we’ll buy it,” and more “Hey medicine, we’ve got a drug we want to sell, do you mind changing some diagnostic criteria a bit to accommodate us,” then I would be strongly suspicious the latter is not infrequent.
I can say from experience that you can rock a 5.6 A1C for two years and not a single medical professional will say a thing. Hit 5.7 and you’ll get a prescription for Metformin and be told to do cardio and eat Keto.