Near normal blood sugar target did not delay risk of organ damage in people with diabetes

How are headlines and study summaries like this allowed to be published:

The media just grabs onto the juicy sounding parts which at a glance make it read that there is no benefit in tightly controlling your blood sugar. A lot of people have a hard time getting on top of the control in the first place and reading these kind of report glimpses is probably enough in some case for people to say "phew, no need to worry about all the controlling my sugar now".

If there is evidence of a large increase in Type 2 diabetes in younger adults year after year, then why does it even make sense to put studies together like this one with an average age of 62?

"In addition to having type 2 diabetes for an average of 10 years" . . . should read they "In addition to having been DIAGNOSED with type 2 diabetes for an average of 10 years" as there is no way to tell how long someone actually has been diabetic prior to diagnosis.

"Half of participants had an A1C over 8.1 percent - above the currently recommended target for good control." Where is the good control value listed as 8.1 percent or less??

I really would love to see studies with people in their 30's & 40's (I am 38 T2 diagnosed 2009) that will keep the motivation high for taking care of your OWN health.

That's all for my rant today!