September 21st, 2011 - Activity

20110921 0100

Got the results of my latest blood test. The results were disappointing. I have elevated levels of LDL cholesterol. My triglycerides and HDL levels are fine, though. In fact, they are great. I bet the endocrinologist will want me on cholesterol medication. Nope. Not for me. I don't do drugs. I'll find homoeopathic methods to manage my health. A friend has recommended physterol. From what I have read it is definitely worth a try. However, high LDL levels also mean I need to get off my ass and exercise more.

But ... it's not responsible!

In a recent rant on his blog, Michael Hoskins, wrote the following in response to someone who made some rash statements to someone with diabetes.

A message to the point: Yes, we CAN eat ice cream.

It’s a myth to think otherwise.

via The Diabetic's Corner Booth: Yes, We CAN Eat Ice Cream!.

I think Mr. Hoskins statements are equally rash and I think, irresponsible. Yes, I can — using the dictionary definition of the "can" to be "am able" — eat ice cream. So yes, I am able to eat ice-cream. I have that ability if I take enough insulin to cover the carbs.

But I think taking extra units of insulin — for me it would be two units of Novolog — just to cover one serving of Ben & Jerry's (230 calories and 24g of carb) is not responsible. Ice cream is mostly fat and sugar. It has a high glycemic index — which means that my blood sugar will spike into the hundreds way before that fast acting insulin starts to do its thing. And most times, you won't be given one serving of ice-cream. It's most likely to be two. So that's 460 calories and 48g of carb for Ben & Jerry's.

So, yes, I “am able” to eat ice cream and cookies and other zero-nutritional value high-calorie high-sugar foods. But as a person who wants to be responsible for my health I will not. And my endocrinologist agrees.

Why Punitive Fees for “Unhealthy Behaviors” (Like Diabetes)?

Blogger and diabetes advocate Allison Blass responds to an Arizona state initiative that seeks to fine "unhealthy" citizens.

There are so many problems with this initiative that it’s hard to know where to start, but consider… why is it OK for the rich Arizonians to remain fat?! If it were so important for the state to use punishment to motivate behavior change, why wouldn’t they charge the wealthy-unhealthy proportionately?

I agree with Allison that this "fee' is punitive but I already know that this not about improving the health of anyone. It's about money.

A spokesperson for Arizona’s Medicaid, Monica Coury, says “We want to stretch our dollars as far as we can. Part of that is engaging people to take better care of themselves.”

This seems a lot like earlier misguided initiatives to tax products like soda and pizza.  It is more about providing additional revenue to a cash strapped state than about improving the health of Arizonans.  State governments tried taxing cigarettes out of existence and people  just kept smoking.  States got used to the tax revenue.  I mean, if taxing cigarettes was really about public health, why couldn't the government just make the sale of tobacco illegal?

Maybe instead of cutting gym class at schools or making fast food so appealing to children (Happy Meal toys anyone?), Arizona should cough up money for Weight Watchers programs and diabetes education, to name a few.