Thanks Tim, I am planning on doing that. The more I think about it the more I feel like this examination lacked some credibility....
For one thing I had seen the same guy in 2011, a year before being diagnosed with diabetes. My complaint was that my right eye "didn't feel right" and was constantly fatigued. He did a pretty lackadaisical exam at that time, didn't dilate my eyes, no retina scan, etc--- Then told me that my vision was excellent, and there was nothing wrong with my eyes whatsoever. (he did suggest that my right eye wouldn't feel weird if I stopped using my cell phone so much)
In the three years since (post-diabetes dx) I had gotten comprehensive dilated exams from two different ophthalmologists who evaluated my entire medical history--- and also noted and described the vitreous "floaters" as such, and noted without a doubt there was no retinopathy observed--- my A1C has been in high 4s to mid 5s that entire time (after the initial stabilization)
This time when I saw this guy he had reviewed my new retina photos before he even walked in the room or looked at my information that the assistant had charted, A1C, glucose averages, etc.... and then made the assumption that he needed to scold me about controlling blood sugar control, which couldn't be further from the truth---
So basically at this point I've pretty well convinced myself that he saw the word "diabetes" and went off on a tangent when he saw a little tiny bit of irregularity in one eye, even though it was a known issue not relating to diabetes...
Who knows maybe I'm fooling myself, as you can probably tell by reading this I've put a fair bit of thought into it (some of which while lying awake in the middle of the night) but I will follow up for a second opinion with an ophthalmologist.
Had a great endo apt today. A1C was 5.2. Feel a lot better about the bizarre eye exam after talking it over with him-- he asured me that there is no way on earth I have diabetic retinopathy at this point, āit just doesnāt happen that fast, period.ā
That's great news Sam! It's good your keeping an eye on it [ok, I couldn't resist...]. I hope you can find a doc with better bedside manner than Dr. Crankypants. I finally broke down and started going to an ophthalmologist last year and am glad that the one I found seems to be very sharp and is very pleasant.
Donāt be too hard on yourself. Your A1Cās have been excellent. The issue though is that no matter how vigilant you are, you will have blood glucose fluctuations that non-diabetics donāt have. Iāve had Type 1 for 32 years, and although thankfully my ophthal tells me each year that my eyes look good, he admits they still show evidence of diabetes. You donāt say if youāre T1 or T2, but the reality is that by the age of 40, virtually all T1ās show at least some minor retinopathy. Itās an extremely common complication along with kidney damage, both of which are very frustrating. So keep up the good work and take your docās feedback to heart, sounds like your eyes are still in very good shape.
I have had extensive laser treatmentāboth eyes. Still see a retina specialist every six months. First diagnosed 25 years ago. Still check up, but have done fine. The worst thing of all is floaters. I thought the world would end with that diagnosis.
With the proper intervention Iāve been able to maintain very near normal glucose levelsā¦ I donāt entirely buy into the type 1 / type 2 model, I donāt think one or the other of those can necessarily always define every single person with diabetes very accurately.
And I have to think the stats are probably largely skewed regarding 40 year old type 1 diabetics complicationsā¦ Because most of them spent many years in the ādark agesā before intensive bg monitoring, rapid insulins, etc-- Iām curious to know what you think too though?
My mother, a medical doctor, actually explained the whole difference quite well, I thought save for the expected text message autocorrects;
"That seems to be what optometrists do nowadays-spend a million dollars on fancy equipment that produces results that may or may not be real. Whereas opthomologists spent the money on training. "
āYes but in his defense he probably thinks heās doing the right thing by his patients by providing all those expensive options that the marketing folks tell him will be a benefit-to his patients as well as to his bottom line.ā
āIām just saying I think they as a group have bought into a bill of goods-maybe even hear during their training how wonderful all this stuff isā
