Infographic: CGMs and Medicare


Actually, click HERE

Download this infographic here:
infographic final .pdf (156.9 KB)

2 Likes

Too bad it is so Type 1 centric. According to the CDC there are 6 million people with diabetes on insulin and the JDRF notes that there are 1.25 million people with T1. That means that 4.75 million people with T2 are on insulin, nearly four times the number of patients with T1. Too bad the JDRF couldn’t include the need to cover CGMs for those of us with T2 on insulin.

2 Likes

JDRF’s stated mission is “to accelerate life-changing breakthroughs to cure, prevent and treat T1D and its complications”, so I think is exactly right, and makes sense, that this is T1-focused. That’s who JDRF serves!

I think that, for a variety of reasons, Medicare is going to cover CGM for T1 before T2, and lots of folks are thinking that as part of the step-wise process to allow coverage for EVERYONE who needs a CGM we first have to get the T1 piece passed. I’m glad for ALL of us that people are pushing hard for that, and I’m confident that the moment T1s get coverage many of those folks will turn their efforts to that next crucial step, to cover folks with T2 as well. This is an effort we can all benefit from, even if not at the same time.

2 Likes

Hence their name… Though in modern terminology they’ve replaced the term juvenile with “type 1” to encompass all ages… @Brian_BSC this is a textbook example of why I keep saying that the type 1 / type 2 model is quite a disservice to us all… There are absolutely people labeled as “type 2” (which is a essentially a meaningless label) who need a cgm far more than I do, and can’t get one…

I think insulin dependent is a far more important baseline than type 1 vs type 2.

3 Likes

I understand that JDRF has a mission to address T1 but this is not solely a JDRF or T1 issue. JDRF has allied itself with the broader community to advocate for this. I just am disappointed that they preset a parochial view of the issue rather than adopting the position of the broader community, namely that we all (both T1 and T2) deserve appropriate access to CGM technologies under medicare.

3 Likes

I agree!! I’d love to see a push toward CGM coverage for all people on insulin therapy, regardless of type. It’s a much more appropriate measure of need/benefit. I think an advocacy effort is needed in order to make that argument, since our medical and political establishments currently only understand (or perhaps misunderstand) “type” language, and draw all their distinctions from there.

2 Likes

Now that is something I’d be proud to be a part of.

Regardless of the imperfect graphic, the essence of the message remains:

**

“Everyone pays when Medicare doesn’t cover CGMs”

**

2 Likes

True, cgm dramatically improves quality of life for brittle diabetics. I know one type one on medical or Medicare some state program who got a cgm just a month ago after a struggle. The type one type two question is very interesting. Type two is in the general case less brittle than type one. Also too the diseases can be identical both diseases can result in no insulin production. I would think in that case the attending physician could change the diagnosis to match the Medicare requirements. I suspect that many insulin dependant type two diabetics simply supplement their self produced insulin. Frankly I don’t know how brittle their condition is. One insulin dependant type two I knew told me she couldn’t deal with it and had stopped taking her insulin. And that is not uncommon. And she died a horrifying death. Now she lived without insulin. So was she insulin dependant? Then too she may have been able to deal with the vague promises of insulin had she a cgm. I suspect some type two diabetics may get a cgm as more of a curiosity. True of type one’s. If we don’t effect our treatment by careful, diligent observation of the graph it is less useful. Thus the need for the wrist watch. I say cgm wrist watch not just cgm pocket watch. But it was great touching @EmilyC at the tudiabetes booth in San Diego last week.

@AARON10, that was YOU who came over and then disappeared!! I so wanted to talk, but was in the middle of showing another member some of our new site features. Next time stick around and chat :smile:

I know you’re all down to earth. But this new media world … I was star struck

3 Likes

@EmilyC, thanks so much for this discussion. I did not see this discussion until today (10/24). My Congressman and Senator are both co-sponsors of the CGM bill. I saw a report indicating how many Congressmen/women and how many Senators are currently supporting the bill. I wonder how many supporters are necessary before the bill comes up for a vote?