Diabetes yes, but I am not a Diabetic!

Jen, very well put (you must write for a living) Anyway, the negative rap that comes with having diabetes is why I get quite active in October contacting news media that November is Diabetes Month and requesting that they get things correct. It is important that the general public understands how and why diabetes is diagnosed. Of course, that info would work to negate the bad rap, but would also let general public know that since those of us with diabetes didn't cause it by "misbehaving", it means that the general public could be at risk themselves. Hopefully the correct info would cause people to look at their family tree for any apples with type 2 - and take action. In terms of diabetes Ignorance is not Bliss.

One of the terms I especially dislike is "diabesity" And that was coined by a renowned diabetes expert, Francine Kaufman. That equates to the general public believing if you are fat, you'll get diabetes (and njo diference is made as to the types). There are skinny people with type 2 and not everyone who is overweight gets (or has) type 2.

Again, Jen, you write beautifully - that is not one of my gifts.

Still off topic, my older brother used to introduce me as "the accident".
My dad, who was a wonderful and wise man, sat me down and asked me if I knew how babies were made. I didn't. He said they are made with lots of calculating, calendars etc or they are made because a mommy and daddy really loved each other. Then he told me that "accidents" arrive from the second method. Made me feel really good.

When we were teenagers my brothers used to introduce me to their friends as, "This is my sister. She's blind." It used to annoy me so much—both the fact that they did not use my name and the fact that they immediately said I was blind as if that was the most important thing about me! But in hindsight I think they were just unsure of how to bring up something that they knew their friends would end up asking about, and so wanted to get it out of the way at the start. I also think they may have been proud of the fact that they had a blind sister and no one else did. They used to bring their friends in to look at my high-tech equipment, get me to teach them braille and how to use my cane, and one did a high school project on me as "someone who inspired them" or something like that. Thankfully, as adults they no longer introduce me to their friends in this way. :)

Thanks - I don't write for a living, but I have always enjoyed writing ever since I learned to print. :)

The information you send out around Diabetes Awareness Month is great! I also try to advocate around that time (well, and always!) and that is where effort should be spent.

And you are totally right about Type 2 not being caused by obesity, of course. I dislike the term diabesity (and dia- anything, really).

Last year, I was watching the Today Show and there was a segment on Joy Bauer's Joy Fit Club - about people successfully losing a lot of weight. In it she mentioned something about their diabetes being gone....(!!!!) I sent her an email explaining that yes, people with type 2 can get off meds, but their diabetes is still there. I also addressed the issue that I get about if I just lost weight I'd be cured (type 1 for 30+ years) She wrote me back! And....this is the best part, she includes a statement as to the type of diabetes the person is dealing with.

Well said, Zoe. Took the words right out of my hunt and peck typing mind!

As I said, though, I feel as if changing language in this manner actually does the opposite of what it intends and puts the emphasis on the fact that this is a negative aspect of someone and therefore an attempt must be made to hide it.

Communication is so frail! As listeners/readers we infer certain things, whether intended or not, and move to second and third levels of analysis in an attempt to decode what the communicator intended. I believe in the principle of Occam's razor. It simply says that in competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions is probably the correct one.

In essence, you're saying that using the term "person with diabetes" instead of diabetic, the listener/reader may think you think there's shame in diabetes.

I do agree that long-embedded societal attitudes will not be eroded with simply changing the descriptive words we use to identify someone. But I do think clear non-judgment laden terms help reinforce positive social evolution.

I think, for present, I will use the "person with diabetes" term since I have been exposed to many people that object to "diabetic."

I have never been defined by my diabetes other than in my medical chart. I have chosen to have it engraved on my medical alert jewelry. If any of my friends or family introduced me as a diabetic; PWD; one having diabetes; or the girl with the sugars; well, they would never do it again! I don't introduce anyone else by anything other than their name, and sometimes our relationship if appropriate. I am also not a siphon - I am more of a collector.

In essence, you're saying that using the term "person with diabetes" instead of diabetic, the listener/reader may think you think there's shame in diabetes.

I think maybe we are talking about two different scales here. I'm talking more about society as a whole, not communication between two individuals. Between individuals, sure, we use whatever term we are most comfortable with—and this may change over time, and may depend on how people around us use such terms, and what terms we grew up hearing, and in what context we heard them, and so on.

But I do think clear non-judgment laden terms help reinforce positive social evolution.

But this is exactly it—who is deciding that diabetes (the condition) and therefore "diabetic" (the term) is negative and laden in judgement? For the most part it's society, not the people who live with diabetes themselves. There is nothing wrong with being diabetic, or being blind, or being anything else&mdsah;except that society tells people it's wrong, and therefore it's felt that we need to try and manipulate language to emphasize the individual over the (undesirable) condition. I don't think it's right or fair that people feel the need to change how they describe themselves simply because society has given them the message that they have something "wrong".

I can't think of a single positive characteristic that is treated this way. Of course, there is always a choice—you can say "I'm artistic" or "I'm an artist" and it doesn't really matter. And that's all I'm saying with "I'm diabetic" versus "I have diabetes"—use whichever you want, and it shouldn't matter in the end.

I do have an issue with clumping an entire group together, such as saying "diabetics" or "the blind", but that's a whole other issue! Also keep in mind that my perspective is coming partly from my experience with blindness, which deals with much the same language issues but is steeped in MUCH more societal negativity than diabetes. Also, this is just my perspective of why I myself don't have a problem with either term; I'm not trying to dictate what others should use (hope it didn't come across that way).

I'm a diabetic. End of, I don't care, it doesn't define me, it doesn't alter what I do. I decide what I do, what I can or can not eat, or what I'm going to accomplish. It does not, nor will I allow it ever to. I am not a siphon, but I don't see being called diabetic a stigma.

Tomorrow I'm racing. Does it say anywhere on my sign up form I'm diabetic? no. Does it say on my bike anywhere? no. Ok, I might end up wearing my JDRF jersey if it's dry (very doubtful at the moment) but that's only because I like it, and I support them.

I wear glasses, that doesn't define me. I have a plate in my elbow, it doesn't define me. Being diabetic is a part of me as they are, but it doesn't define me either. But I am a diabetic and frankly I don't give a stuff about any stigma, repulsion or anything else that some people might think of that. It's just a small part of me, but not all I am.

You are very fortunate. I had a colleague inform me that she heard a dept manager say the I wouldn't be considered for promotion because I obviously wasn't responsible - "after all, I couldn't take care of my health and look she (that was me)has diabetes". I have never let it impeded my actions or choices, but it is important that the myths and misinformation that is so damaging (like my example to people's careers) is dealt with.

I see it as like the difference between the phrase "I'm blonde" and "I'm A blonde" (you remember all the dumb blonde jokes). I don't want anyone to think I felt any shame about having diabetes, I have always been very open about it. But using the example above of the word "artist": I have preferred to be introduced with the [phrase "she paints" rather than "she's an artist" I n my experience the "she paints" phrase started more interesting conversations, with questions as to media, subject, etc... And that was the point in my being introduced in the first place. I digress (yet again)

I have no problem with it. It is what the non-diabetic world hears and sort of relates to. Personally, if someone asks me again about my "sugar," I may.... HATE that. I definitely prefer "glucose." It is a truer terminology and removes the whole..sugar, what ddi you eat to cause this..it is all your fault..from the equation.

Wow, artwoman, there is so much wrong with that whole scenario - A) the manager discussing your health with a colleague. B) that said manager even knows you have diabetes. C) that you are not only thought to be irresponsible, but a manager told a colleague this. WHY?? Yikes - None that is okay. I'd be more pissed off about being talked about at all than the problem with myths and misinformation about diabetes.

GO TO HR. That is harassment.

Unfortunately there was a major turnover in upper management - incl HR. I figured it wasn't worth a battle. It all ended well - I got "stolen" by another dept. and then retired. Since that awful manager comes from a group with high risk for type 2, I figure she'll have either personal or a close family member with type 2.

I also use "glucose" rather than "sugar" even with medical people.

I SO love that response, artwoman.

You know the movie, "The Good The Bad and the Ugly?" The Good--we have much better technology compared to 52 years ago..The Bad--being diabetic totally sucks...The Ugly--we deal daily with the stupidity of doctors, endos, friends, family and almost everyone else who do not live as a diabetic everyday.

AND it is what it is.

What "high risk" group is that manager from? I am not meaning to go totally off topic here but this blows my mind. I cannot imagine having my work mates all knowing my medical business and have no desire to know theirs. Congrats on being retired! Problem solved :)

I like what Nyadach said and ditto all except for the plate in my elbow part and the racing part, though I will be blazing a trail of another kind.

An ethnic group with high risk for type 2, as well as family members who already have type 2.