was successfully added to your cart.

Diabetic Commonsense

By Uncategorized

Balance and Choice

A Personal Account
Beatrice Reid

Published on IDDT website by kind permission of the late Beatrice Reid

“In most healthcare systems there is no recognition of the capabilities or expertise of the consumer, while the physician frequently regards himself as the only trained member of the physician/patient relationship. Given this scenario, it is natural for the healthcare provider not to consult the patient. Further, diabetes education is often given only to enable the person with diabetes to follow instructions and not to empower him to take decisions. All this gives rise to consumers who are passive, fragile and extremely dependent.

These traditional roles account for the dependency of a lay person and the paternalism of a physician. It creates resentment and frustration when an assertive and knowledgeable lay individual does not behave ‘traditionally’ and questions a healthcare provider …. This traditional relationship often continues within a diabetes organisation, and causes its failure.

People with diabetes and healthcare providers have to dispose of the roles they have played for centuries and start acting as equal partners when they work together in a diabetes association.”

Maria de Alva, President of the Internation Diabetes Federation, who is not a physician but is a consumer – she has diabetes.

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

Health Warning
This little book is intended for ordinary people: diabetic specialists would be well-advised to steer clear of it. My commonsense approach might disturb the medical fraternity, for it will challenge the assumptions of recent practice and expose the folly that can result from behaving towards diabetics as if they were scientific experiments instead of human beings.

The views expressed here are my own, based on a long-term partnership with diabetes. They do not belong to any other individual or organisation.

Diabetic Definitions

Diabetes is present when the sugar (glucose) level in the blood is too high and stays that way. The diabetic is unable to burn carbohydrates properly. This is due to a defect in the pancreas, a gland in the abdomen which produces INSULIN. This hormone is needed to keep blood sugar levels within the normal, healthy range. Diabetes may be present either when no insulin is made or when insulin is made but is not working properly.

Carbohydrates, sugar and starch, produce energy which supplies fuel for the body. They are found in bread, pasta, porridge, rice, potatoes, cakes, biscuits, jam and sweets.

Hypoglycaemia, known to diabetics as HYPO, is abnormally low blood sugar.

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence

By Uncategorized

Diabetes commonsense

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

 

Diabetes Common Sense
horizontaldots

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence

I am a diabetic and have been on insulin for seventy years. For much of that time, I was a patient of Dr. R. D. Lawrence, 1892 – 1968. The wisdom and compassion he bestowed on me has enriched and protected my life. I shall be happy if I can pass on to my fellow diabetics some of what I gained from knowing him.

Dr. Lawrence was one of the first people whose life was saved by the discovery of insulin in 1921. “In the successful treatment of diabetics the patient, the nurse, the practitioner and the specialist are often partners working together to establish the patient’s health. In the long run the most important part, the melody, is played by the patient and the accompaniment may be almost unheard.”(1)

When patients visited Dr. Lawrence in his Harley Street rooms, he greeted them with a hearty handshake. He always had a pink carnation in his buttonhole and never wore a white coat. After a friendly exchange of family news, I remember he would always ask to be shown the glucose sweets I was carrying. He would explain, with a twinkle in his eye, that in the past his patients had seemed too good to be true. Every one of them said they always carried glucose sweets ready for an emergency. When he asked to see what they were carrying, he found his fears were justified. Only about one in ten could produce the sweets they said they had. He told me he wouldn’t like me to be one of those irresponsible people on insulin who go around without the sugar they will need to counteract a hypo.

The next conversation would be about blood sugar. Dr. Lawrence would say, “We’ll both guess what we think your blood sugar is now. I’ll write down the answers and put them in front of us on my desk. No cheating! Of course, you should be right and I should be wrong. I can’t expect to know as much about how your body works as you can.” Sometimes we were both slightly wrong but most times I was the winner.

We would then discuss the new medium and long-lasting insulins that were coming on to the market. He would try them out on himself in different strengths and combinations. He would often say, “Your diabetes seems to be happy as it is. I see no advantage for you in disturbing things. Why should you change?”

I have followed his advice to this day. Neutral, quick-acting animal insulin is the only one I have ever used, except for the distressing interlude when I hoped to take advantage of the promised, but never fulfilled, wonders of ‘human’ insulin. The result of this conservative behaviour is that my body has fallen into the habit of good diabetic control. It has not had to undergo the stress of fitting itself into the rhythms of new insulins or learn to tolerate the additives mixed in to make insulin last for a longer or shorter time. Perhaps this simplicity is what has found favour with my hormones and helps to explain the health and happiness that have coloured my life.

Fate was kind on that overcast afternoon so long ago in 1930 when it sent me to see Dr. Lawrence for the first time. He taught me many things, and one of these was not to regard the doctor as a god. One day, after examining my eyes to detect early signs of diabetic retinopathy, he looked worried and said “Always remember, Beatrice, for all our expertise and training, we doctors really know very little about the fundamental problems of life. We don’t understand the cause of diabetic retinopathy, we can’t prevent liver cancer or even cure the common cold.” This humility and wisdom gave me lifelong courage and insight. The wise man is the one who knows he does not know.

Balance: Signpost to Success

By Uncategorized

Diabetes commonsense

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

 

Diabetes Common Sense
horizontaldots

Balance: Signpost to Success

Diabetes, to my surprise, forced me to become a juggler, learning to balance the blue carbohydrate balls against the red insulin balls. My aim is to keep the blood sugar steady, to throw the coloured balls so they will not fly too high nor fall too low. Either extreme leads to disaster. This balancing act is the secret which I have found to be the key to managing my diabetes and my life.

The message Dr. Lawrence passed on to me was, “Never let diabetes stop you doing anything you want to do. And remember you must control your diabetes: never let it control you.” Every diabetic, like every human being, is different and you are the only one who can listen to what your body is telling you. However caring and clever other people may be, they cannot overhear what your body is saying. No-one but you can decide which of many available treatments fits your lifestyle and suits you best. The job of the doctor, nurse and diabetic clinic should be to empower you to make an informed choice and help you put your choice into practice. The care team is there to provide a gentle accompaniment in the background: the melody is for you to play.

My focus on being a juggler and seeking balance is based on experience; it is not a will o’ the wisp, a passing fancy. It goes back a long way. “In 1932, for the first time in the history of any disease, a group of diabetics, aided by their interested doctors, began to form what became the British Diabetic Association to assist themselves and other diabetics. By 1934, an office was set up and a journal was established to link the members together.”(2) It is no accident that, to this day, their magazine is called BALANCE. This title sums up in one word what we diabetics must do to stay healthy.

Diabetes is not an illness any more than having red hair or flat feet is an illness. It is a permanent condition that has to be accepted and organised. If anyone from the diabetic establishment tries to persuade you that you have an illness, close your ears and go elsewhere for help and guidance. What did it mean, therefore, when I was told seventy years ago that I had diabetes? How was I different from those around me? First, it meant that while other people who are not diabetic produce enough insulin to digest the food they eat: I do not. My insulin shortage leaves energy-producing carbohydrates unprocessed and this causes blood sugar levels to rise. These undigested carbohydrates clog up the system like untreated sewage and, if not dealt with, the persistent poisoning is deadly. Second, it meant that other people have a natural system to control the level of their blood sugar: I do not. This is something I can do nothing to remedy and is less easy to cope with than the lack of insulin. Yet, strangely enough, it is a problem which has received little attention from diabetic specialists and has not attracted the curiosity of research scientists who seem unwilling or unable to notice how important its solution would be. Success here would be more valuable to ordinary diabetics like you and me than the money and ingenuity set aside to develop new insulin cocktails which only serve to complicate our juggling.

When, as good jugglers, we observe what is happening to us, we notice that doctors now push us towards low blood sugar. Imbalance has become woven into the pattern of modern treatment. Commonsense has been forgotten. Patients are warned that high blood sugar must be avoided at all costs because it will threaten their health and make them more vulnerable to long-term complications. This may well be true, but current medical advice leads patients into the unfriendly territory of low blood sugar and the dangers of more frequent hypos. The middle way is lost.

Why do some people fail to consider both the long and short-term complications that may be piling up in the aftermath of these repeated low blood sugar episodes? When a hypo hits us, the result is always distressing. The brain is starved of sugar, we sweat profusely and nothing works properly. This disrupts normal life, sometimes causes serious accidents and occasionally, especially after a sudden hypo at night, lands a diabetic in hospital in a coma. If one extreme is bad, would it not be prudent to expect the other extreme to be just as bad? Why is all the blame for long-term complications heaped on high blood sugar? Has any research been done to establish whether routine exposure to low blood sugar might also have to bear some of the guilt? This may sound like heresy, but doctors who are not themselves diabetic need to be constantly reminded that their diabetic patients can carry on when blood sugar rises but are flattened when it falls below normal. Whatever warnings the experts may issue to frighten us away from high blood sugar, I still prefer what happens to me when blood sugar rises to what happens when it falls too low. Prophesies of future complications seem a long way away, hidden in the shadows of Never-Never Land, while sudden hypos, felt in our blood and bones, crowd around us and demand immediate attention.

I have been a diabetic juggler for almost a lifetime and the balancing game has become second nature. This experience enables me to suggest that in modern treatment the scales should be weighted more evenly to help us keep the blood sugar steady. Our doctors will be able to help us better after they accept the truth, obvious to us diabetics, that abnormally low and abnormally high blood sugars are equally bad. Changes in treatment will not come about spontaneously, but it would be an advantage if all diabetic jugglers knew what they wanted and were determined to get it. Let us hope that a time will come when doctors will have the confidence to emerge from behind the protection of their white coats and listen to what we tell them. Together we may then clear the air and talk the same language.

Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls

By Uncategorized

Diabetes commonsense

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

 

Diabetes Common Sense
horizontaldots

Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls

Jugglers need to know the shape, size and weight of the balls they are juggling. I have met diabetics who were hopelessly lost because the word carbohydrate had never been explained to them and they had no idea of how much carbohydrate to eat each day. Their blue carbohydrate balls were therefore falling about in all directions, unrelated to the insulin or tablets they were taking and completely out of control. This chaos need not happen to you. With the help of your doctor and dietician, you can be sensible and decide what to do. Modern treatment gives you freedom. You do not have to be starved, deprived or over-fed. The only thing that matters is to adopt a mindset that encourages us to keep our carbohydrate intake the same each day. Commonsense shouts the message that anybody who eats a lot of carbohydrate on Monday and very little on Tuesday is not going to feel well. Because diabetics have lost the automatic blood sugar control system which others enjoy, this is especially true for them. To keep carbohydrate intake steady is as important as to keep the blood sugar steady.

This message had not reached an elderly lady who shared a hospital ward with me. She became bad-tempered and cranky when her blood sugar went out of control, although she insisted that she always obeyed the rules. I watched her and was horrified to notice that she was constantly helping herself to the fruit that her visitors showered upon her. She would not listen to me when I told her that the extra carbohydrate in the fruit was enough to explain her unwelcome high blood sugar. Her doctor had told her that fruit was good for her and that was that.

How much you want to eat each day is for you to decide. Your dietician can suggest various choices but only you can make a true commitment and determine to fulfil it. I know this is difficult because I have been a Captain in the Fight-Against-Flab Army for many years and my indiscretions have always prevented my promotion to Colonel. Keeping the balance right, not eating too much or too little, will never be easy but the good health reward for success makes the effort worthwhile. You have only to scrutinise your naked body in the mirror to see whether the billows and bulges are attractive or just floppy rolls of ugly fat getting in the way. The stark truth is that slimming means eating less and exercising more. Huge profits are made at our expense from special diets and slimming aids. These are costly ways of telling us that our will power is weak and it is time we tried harder.

Once you have taken your first flight and are on the way to becoming a fully-fledged diabetic, you will become aware that insulin and carbohydrate work together. If you decide to take extra carbohydrate, you will need extra insulin to digest it. Imagine you are invited to a birthday dinner on Saturday. When you return home after the feast, you will have to consider how much extra carbohydrate you consumed. Do not panic or feel guilty; an occasional high blood sugar is not a crime. To digest the extra carbohydrate and restore the balance, you could take a brisk walk, eat less carbohydrate at the next meal, or inject a little extra insulin – two or four units will probably be enough.

When we know the amount of carbohydrate we need to balance the insulin, how do we help ourselves to keep the balance right? For me, the easiest way is to divide the day into three parts – morning, afternoon, evening. If my dietician and I have selected 300 grams as the daily norm, then 100 grams is eaten for breakfast and elevenses, 100 grams for lunch and tea, and 100 grams for supper and bedtime. This plan allows flexibility and a sensible spread over time. If you are hungry, more can be eaten for lunch and less for tea; if you are not hungry or in a rush, you can eat less for lunch and make up by eating an extra bun or sandwich for tea. Diabetics are often told they must have three main meals and three snacks daily. These instructions suggest a timetable that is difficult to carry out for a person leading a hectic life. All that is necessary is to know what you are doing and avoid stuffing yourself at one moment and starving yourself the next. Your body cannot be expected to perform well if you throw different amounts of food at it every day and never allow it to integrate with the insulin flowing through your veins.

Being diabetic has the great advantage that it requires you to stick to a pattern of eating that is healthy for everybody. There is no such thing as a diabetic diet. A healthy diet for you is also a healthy diet for your family. You need not waste money on special diabetic foods. An emancipated diabetic can eat anything; the only limitation is to eat the right amount at the right time. The signpost pointing to healthy eating will read ‘low fat, high fibre, with plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables.’ It is the carbohydrates that need to be carefully managed, whether you are on insulin, tablets or diet. Proteins (meat, fish, eggs, nuts, beans, lentils) and fats can be eaten in normal helpings.

A true, cautionary tale might be useful here to embroider the word ‘normal’. At a diabetic clinic, I found myself sitting beside a handsome, but overweight, young man. He complained that he never felt really well and could not lose weight although he always kept strictly to his diet sheet. I asked him to tell me everything he had eaten yesterday and what he planned to eat tomorrow. I was appalled to discover he thought he could eat as much cheese as he liked, and he was eating nearly a pound of cheese each day. No wonder he felt ill and could not lose weight! He badly needed an injection of commonsense.

I have found the easiest way to eat the right amount of carbohydrate is to follow the ten-gram exchange system invented by Dr. Lawrence. This method has fallen out of favour lately, perhaps because it can be followed without the help of a qualified dietician. It simply tells you how much of each food is equivalent to ten grams carbohydrate and leaves you to mix and match the ten gram portions to your taste. For example, one slice of bread counts as about one ten-gram portion. It can be exchanged for any one of the following: two cream crackers, one egg-sized potato, one medium apple, one orange, half a large banana, ten strawberries or ten grapes, three large plums or apricots, and so on. This list of ten-gram exchanges can be extended at will. The idea is even simple enough for young children to use.

I remember, as a rebellious seven year old, kicking against injections and food rules, how Dr. Lawrence took the wind out of my sails by telling me I could eat whatever I liked; all I had to do was to remember what I had eaten and tell my mum about it, and not try to deceive her or myself. It did not take me long to put this teaching into practice. At school, my teacher and my classmates knew about my diabetes and that I had to eat one large banana, twenty grams carbohydrate, at break. This routine bored me stiff. I cut my banana in two, ten grams each, and started to swap with what my class friends had brought for their mid-morning break. Banana was a novelty for them and they were as keen to try it as I was to be rid of it. This developed into a fascinating barter system. One day half a banana was swapped for a digestive biscuit, next day for half a sandwich, then for three toffees. Becoming braver, both halves of the banana were exchanged for a biscuit and an apple, or an orange and ten smarties. Break became exciting, not boring. I did not feel deprived any longer and have not done so since. I remembered the second part of Dr. Lawrence’s instructions. I always told my mother exactly what I had eaten and I was always praised for doing this. When she called to collect me from school, my friends would rush over to tell her all about that day’s banana exchanges!

Health and happiness are dislocated if you eat too much or too little carbohydrate. What matters is that the bullseye of the carbohydrate target is hit each day. When this is achieved, the insulin and the carbohydrate will fall into each other’s arms and waltz along happily together. A clever juggler will be able to keep the blue balls balanced and have the confidence to try wonderful new ways of eating and living.

We juggled with the carbohydrate first because this is easier to balance than the insulin. We can control and measure what we put into our mouths even if we sometimes cheat. Although insulin, too, can be accurately measured, it is more difficult to balance because its behaviour is influenced by many factors, some of them outside our control. Remember, insulin does not work on its own. It plays an essential part in our hormone orchestra. If other hormones, for example, adrenalin or thyroid, are discordant, we will have a hard job trying to keep the insulin in tune. We also need to be aware that exercise, infection, stress and weather are four awkward customers, difficult to deal with because they change all the time, upsetting the insulin balance and defying scientific measurement. Perhaps this could explain why diabetic experts often ignore these factors when teaching us how to live with our diabetes.

It might be helpful to explore the features of these four awkward customers. Consider exercise first. If you think about it for a minute, you will realise that whenever you take physical exercise not part of the normal routine, you will burn up extra energy (sugar) and therefore need less insulin or more carbohydrate to keep the balance right. For example, before playing a strenuous game of tennis, you should take a carbohydrate snack to provide the extra energy you will be using. This is the moment to indulge in a chocolate digestive biscuit without the bitter taste of guilt that might spoil the flavour at other times.

The second awkward customer is infection which can play havoc with the required insulin dose. Be prepared. Note carefully what is happening and do not be taken by surprise. A sudden increase in insulin dosage is nothing to worry about and when you get better, the fall back to normal may be equally sudden. Recently, a bad bout of influenza caused my insulin need to double almost overnight. Three days later, as healing progressed, my body picked up its normal rhythm and the insulin went back during the next day to its usual dose.

Stress is the third awkward customer that you need to be aware of as it arrives uninvited, upsets the balance and is difficult to counteract. Dr. Lawrence used to warn us, “When the stock exchange falls, the blood sugar rises!” Moving house, unemployment, exams, family problems, bereavement and accidents are some of the experiences that may trigger stress-related insulin upsets.

The fourth awkward customer, the weather, is the one that is completely beyond our control. It creates variable conditions that affect the rate at which we burn up energy and use up insulin. As my husband used to say, on a frosty morning or a hot, dry summer day, “Watch out! This is hypo weather. Be careful. Be sure to have your glucose sweets in your pocket.” In my experience, on a crisp, dry day, I would feel symptoms of an approaching hypo half an hour earlier than on a sultry, humid day. Knowing this, I could be prepared and avoid trouble. ‘Fore-warned is fore-armed,’ says the old proverb.

These variables, the four awkward customers, make juggling the red insulin balls a difficult but fascinating challenge. Their existence reminds us that we are not a chemical experiment, whatever the diabetic clinic thinks. No insulin dose is ever perfect, but we can feel pleased and proud when the blood sugar obeys our instructions and remains reasonably steady.

It will be easier to manage these delicate red insulin balls when we investigate how our blood sugar levels rise and fall during the day. To do this, I suggest we set aside a testing week when the weather, your carbohydrate intake, and your stress levels are pretty stable. Test your blood sugar four times a day for seven days. It is clearer if you enter the results on graph paper. If the first test is on waking and the second around midday, the third at teatime and the fourth at bedtime, you join these four dots and this shows the blood sugar profile for the first day. Repeat this for seven days. The results at the end of the week make it possible to draw an average daily blood sugar profile. Next time you attend the diabetic clinic or see your consultant, ask them to draw their version of your blood sugar profile and compare notes. It will be interesting to find out which of you is more accurate.

Nobody likes to test but it has to be done, whether we use a urine or blood sample. We need to do this to control our diabetes and not let it control us. We should not test to please a relative, a doctor, a scientific study or an enthusiastic salesman. Be careful not to become a diabetic bore, obsessed with constant testing. Doing a test is a waste of time and money unless the result can be used to plan future action and manage our diabetes better.

Finger-pricking blood tests are faster, more accurate, more expensive and more painful than using a urine sample. This does not always make them the best. Nowadays, home testing blood sugar meters have become popular. They are in universal use in rich countries where the expensive test strips can be afforded. The decrease in hypo warnings and the quicker action of the new ‘human’ insulins make frequent testing more necessary. The manufacturers of these high-tech machines must be rubbing their hands in glee as they watch their profits mount. The remarkable accuracy of these meters is one of their chief selling points. The fact is, however, that such accuracy is irrelevant.

Every doctor knows that blood sugar, like blood pressure, does not remain static for diabetics or non-diabetics. By the time the result has been recorded, the precise measurement will have changed. If the test result is 5.6 mm now, it will have moved up or down to perhaps 6.2 or 4.3 mm half an hour later. The amazing accuracy of these high-tech blood testing meters does not greatly help us when what we really want to know, to understand our diabetes, is whether the blood sugar is low, medium or high and whether it is rising or falling. Their detailed information only serves to distract us from the truth that blood sugar is always rising or falling, constantly changing, whatever test method is used.

These modern machines are not yet clever enough to respond to this fundamental truth. Professionals do not seem to acknowledge how important it is for diabetics to know about the rise and fall of blood sugar, or if they do, they do not always tell this to patients. After many years experience, I have found that dipping a test strip in urine, though the results are less accurate and less immediate, tells me all I need to know. If the bladder is emptied and a second sample taken fifteen minutes later, the answer is immediate enough for normal purposes and I am not diverted by misleading accuracy.

The diabetic establishment favours synthetic ‘human’ insulin and finger-pricking blood sugar testing machines. Some of us, not part of the establishment, may think differently. Just as we may prefer to stay with the slow, gentle action and more satisfactory warnings of hypos that animal insulin gives us, so we may also wish to use the urine testing method to avoid the sore fingers caused by frequent finger-pricking. Expert advisers, perhaps influenced by pharmaceutical companies, seem to have forgotten that clever machines have no natural instincts. We would have to stop the clock and hang in suspended animation to give meaning to the delicate precision presented to us by these modern test meters. Time moves on and we move with it.

The red insulin balls gradually become more friendly and familiar as we learn not to expect miracles, or be disappointed when stress, infection or weather temporarily disrupt blood sugar levels. Our confidence increases, we make fewer mistakes and we handle them better. We train ourselves to tune in to the song of our own good health.

The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?

By Uncategorized

Diabetes commonsense

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

 

Diabetes Common Sense
horizontaldots

The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?

Progress towards becoming a well-balanced diabetic is not helped by the wide range and increasing choice of insulins being put on the market. Is this complication really necessary? Over forty varieties of insulin (3) are advertised and none of them would be on the shelves unless manufacturers could make a profit by selling them. Commonsense tells me to complain loudly about having to find my way and make the right choices through the insulin maze. It does not matter if we select the wrong toothpaste or cat food, but insulin is different. The diabetic community cannot survive without this life-saving drug. We therefore form a captive market and, as any economist will tell you, this creates a perfect opportunity for experts to manipulate and exploit us. Have our gurus the time or inclination to guide us through this jungle of short, medium, long-term and mixed insulins? Do they explain the scientific jargon and help us make a free and informed choice?

In this search for the right insulin, newly-diagnosed diabetics, handcuffed by ignorance and fear, are particularly vulnerable. No way can they decide for themselves which insulin to use. They have to be guided by the care team who, in these circumstances, have no option but to take control. Let us hope that sooner rather than later, these fledgling diabetics will be able to fly from the nest and act on their own initiative to make an informed choice of which insulin suits them best.

Three clues will help us make up our mind. The first is not to abdicate in favour of the care team or encourage them to steal our melody. The second clue is not to make a decision until you have in front of you a complete list of all insulins on the market, both animal and ‘human’. Thus fortified, you and your helpers can work out what is possible for you. An informed, rather than an imposed, choice will result. The third clue is not to believe what the printed instructions tell you about the strength and duration of action of each kind of insulin. In my body, short-acting, neutral insulin reaches its peak after six hours and remains active for at least twelve hours. Two injections daily are enough. The label, however, informs us that it lasts only six hours and peaks after three hours. If my doctor or I had believed what the manufacturers told us, we would have been up the creek in a big way!

The debate about whether to choose animal or ‘human’ insulin has raged ever since the latter was invented in 1982. Two red herrings, now rotten and stinking, must be cleared away before rational argument can proceed. Whenever the ‘human’/animal insulin issue raises its head, there are people around who talk rubbish and tell us we need synthetic ‘human’ insulin because the world is threatened with a shortage of animal insulin. This is nonsense because such a shortage is not real. IDDT has figures to show that there are plenty of animal pancreases. Enough cattle and beef pancreases from slaughtered animals are available worldwide to supply what might be needed for two hundred million people. In the United Kingdom about three hundred and fifty thousand people are dependent on insulin. We are a long way from being short of animal pancreases to supply insulin for all who need it everywhere. Human insulin is not required now or in the foreseeable future to make up for a non-existent shortage of animal insulin. Let this red herring be buried once and for all. Those who persist in keeping this rumour alive are foolish; their behaviour in the face of the known evidence is unworthy of their training as doctors and scientists.

The other red herring, that there is no difference between natural animal and synthetic ‘human’ insulin, is equally far-fetched. Animal insulin is extracted from the pancreas of dead cows and pigs. Human insulin is produced in a completely different way, in a laboratory. “A great deal of research went into producing human insulin by means of genetic engineering. The genetic material of a bacterium of a yeast is reprogrammed to make insulin instead of the proteins it would normally produce. This insulin is purified so that it contains no trace of the original bacterium.” (4)

Synthetic human and natural animal insulins are produced from different raw materials in different ways. It follows that they are as unlike as chalk and cheese. I find it hard to believe that any reasonably intelligent doctor or scientist could be so misguided as to expect them to be the same and have the same effects. Complicated and costly research with double-blind samples and vast arrays of figures are not necessary to prove what any normal person can work out on the back of an envelope. Yet, in spite of this, when I started to use ‘human’ insulin in 1985, and found it played havoc with my life and my diabetic control, two eminent diabetic consultants told me that there was no difference between animal and ‘human’ insulin. My troubles, they insisted, were entirely imaginary, although my local doctor, my carers and friends all supported me. In my distress, I phoned the British Diabetic Association and found they had received three thousand unsolicited letters, all complaining about the difficulties experienced with ‘human’ insulin. This information made me realise I was not going mad and my self- confidence began to return. Is it too much to ask the medical profession to recognise that some people are not suited to synthetic ‘human’ insulin?

“The dismissal of patients’ reports of problems with ‘human’ insulin, because this is only anecdotal evidence, is quite wrong. All reported side effects for any drugs are always anecdotal. The demand for scientific evidence to prove that these side effects exist, is unrealistic because it is impossible to prove a negative.” (5)

It is hard to understand why this delusion of sameness persists. Even today, some experts are unwilling to believe that this difference between ‘human’ and animal insulin is real and that the ‘human’ variety can disagree with some diabetics. Let us hope that this red herring can be cast out and forgotten with its twin, the mythical shortage of animal pancreases.

When we have cleared away this confusion, the next task is to expose the censorship surrounding animal insulin. Many doctors leave us ignorant about animal insulin. The depth of this ignorance was exposed to me recently. It has shattered any fragile remnants I retained of good-will towards the medical and pharmaceutical establishments. I was being driven home one evening by a diabetic friend on ‘human’ insulin. I asked her how she was coping with it and told her it had not suited me. “Oh, I find it’s fine. It suits me perfectly. The only trouble is that I get hypos in the middle of the night. My husband has to feed me and rescue me. It worries him a lot. I don’t know what to do. I am going away to an international meeting for four nights and I won’t have him to sleep beside me.” I replied, “But if you change to animal insulin you will be all right. I live alone and don’t have to bother about sudden hypos by day or night.” She replied, “I couldn’t do that! My doctor wouldn’t hear of it. He would not approve. He says human insulin is the best!” Professor Teuscher pointed out at the 1999 AGM. of IDDT: “The problems are always blamed on the patient and never on the product. Where ‘human’ insulin and hypoglycaemia are concerned, it is a product problem and not a patient problem!”

I did not want to believe my ears. My friend is a highly intelligent professional woman working in a hospital. What had gone wrong? Surely, at least anybody who experiences sudden hypos by day or night should be encouraged to overcome this difficulty by changing to animal insulin. But apparently she is condemned to suffer needlessly. “There is a need to convince healthcare professionals and doctors that if a person is experiencing frequent and/or severe hypos or any other unexplained symptoms, then they should try natural animal insulin.”(6) It is amazing that, in this information age, thousands of diabetics are kept in ignorance of the availability and advantages of animal insulin and are allowed to suffer the fear and indignity of avoidable sudden hypos.

Whenever anybody tries to lift the veil of secrecy surrounding animal insulin, or mentions the limitations and difficulties of ‘human’ insulin, an angry chorus tries to shut them up, saying it is unfair to frighten and upset diabetics and their carers who are happy and settled on ‘human’ insulin. If this is so, and they are really happy, then why should they be upset? “And what does happy on ‘human’ insulin mean anyway? If you have never tried any other insulin you actually do not know how happy you are on human! I always remember a doctor saying to me about being unwell – the trouble is when you are unwell you don’t realise how unwell you are until you are well again. This also applies to happiness – how do we know if the people who are said to be happy on human insulin are as happy as they could be? We don’t know, nor do they and nor do their doctors.” (7) How do they know they have to put up with the problem, if they have never been told that there is an alternative treatment? Could you honestly say you preferred tinned salmon if you had never been lucky enough to taste fresh salmon?

Those who are satisfied with the status quo will not be involved, but a sizeable minority, including myself, cannot function on ‘human’ insulin. Currently about fifty thousand diabetics in the United Kingdom are on animal insulin and their number does not seem to be decreasing as the elderly die off. Their welfare should not be swept under the carpet to simplify life for doctors, reduce distribution costs for manufacturers, allow them to benefit from economies of scale and increase profits. We are informed that synthetic ‘human’ insulin will probably become standard. Those of us who need animal insulin will be victims of considerable commercial pressure. “Drug companies function on an international level and so do the medical profession, added to which they also have partnerships with each other. These partnerships exclude patients but include an agenda that may well be different from ours. We have only one agenda: to have the treatment that we need with the species of insulin that suits those needs.”(8)

To make matters worse, ignorance about the availability of animal insulin is widespread amongst professionals – doctors, diabetes specialist nurses and pharmacists. This can embarrass patients and they often have to become assertive to obtain the prescription they need. Already, to my dismay, animal insulin has been systematically withdrawn from the USA, Canada, Australia, France and the Irish Republic. For those who are lucky enough to live in the United Kingdom, it can still be found in Wrexham, Wales, where it is manufactured by C.P. Pharmaceuticals [now Wockhardt UK] in many varieties in both bottles and cartridges, and if you order cartridges, a well-designed insulin pen will be supplied free of charge.

What differences do those of us who have tried both kinds of insulin notice? The fundamental difference seems to be that animal insulin, as any of the thousands of diabetics using it can tell you, works more slowly and gently in your body and gives longer warnings of an approaching hypo. It helps your hormones play in tune without the discordant notes that seem to sound with ‘human’ insulins. This may have something to do with the antibodies still present in animal insulin which have been taken out of the ‘human’ variety. These antibodies may also explain why warnings of impending hypos come sooner and last longer. Perhaps it is the extreme purity of human insulin that makes it difficult for some of us to use, and causes us to question its value. It provides the extra insulin that diabetics need but, in doing so, does nothing to restore the system that regulates the blood sugar. The insulin supply is OK but the balancing mechanism is as cranky as ever. Could it be that those antibodies in the old-fashioned animal insulin made it work more gently and slowly within our body and helped our hormone system warn us earlier when the blood sugar was falling dangerously low? Did those clever genetic engineers concentrate so hard on making insulin that they forgot that we ordinary diabetics urgently needed help to know when blood sugar is falling abnormally low? Please could they remove their one-eyed goggles, swallow a mug of commonsense and look at the whole picture of being diabetic which is not simply the need for insulin. Please, if we have to be programmed for synthetic ‘human’ insulin, could we have our antibodies back? After this is done, we shall all feel a lot safer.

More than fifteen years have passed since synthetic ‘human’ insulin was launched on the market. Its advent was heralded as the start of a new era. Absorbing the propaganda, I could not wait to get my needle into this scientific miracle. I was disappointed and frustrated. Diabetics are still waiting to enjoy the benefits, scientific or anecdotal, that this discovery was supposed to have brought them. The promised progress, widely advertised at the time, has never materialised beyond an illusion invented by clever spin-doctors. It is time scientists stopped wooing and confusing us with all these wonderful new ‘designer’ insulins. They are only tinkering with our real problems and leading us up blind alleys. They need to roll up their sleeves and have the courage to tackle a more difficult project. The urgent need is to try to discover how to replace the reliable blood sugar control system we lost when we became diabetic. I believe that until success is achieved in doing this, we will need animal insulin, with its helpful antibodies, to lessen the unacceptable threat of sudden hypos that seems to be inherent in the use of ‘human’ insulins. I hope I am wrong and that some time in the future the promised wonders of this artificial insulin will appear. Until then, I cannot help feeling cheated. I have done nothing to deserve being caught up in this conspiracy of silence about alternative treatments. Which God was it that empowered the medical fraternity to feed me with misinformation and deny me the right to choose between using natural animal or genetically engineered ‘human’ insulin?

Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

By Uncategorized

Diabetes commonsense

Introduction: Enter Dr Lawrence
Balance: Signpost to Success
Juggling the Blue Carbohydrate and Red Insulin Balls
The Great Debate: Natural Animal or Artificial ‘Human’ Insulin?
Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

 

Diabetes Common Sense
horizontaldots

Conclusion: Commonsense Rules

Has there been any progress in the treatment of diabetes since Dr. Lawrence died on 28 August 1968? The traditional treatment which he devised involved two injections in twenty four hours. Nowadays, some diabetics on insulin are expected to prick the skin as often as five or even six times a day. This can hardly be regarded as progress. “There is nothing wrong with what is called conventional therapy, twice daily doses of short and longer acting insulins, and it is quite possible to achieve ‘good’ control on this regime.

The multi-dose treatment encourages people to keep changing doses and then there can be too many variables involved to achieve stability.”(9) Despite all the modern methods of treatment and so many professionals working with diabetics, there is not much to show for it. The Cohort Study, carried out from 1972 to 1997 by the British Diabetic Association (now Diabetes UK), based on research into trends or causes of death, states that “although care has been improving and quality of life for people with diabetes has improved, the study does not show that there has been the reduction in the rates of death among younger diabetics under the age of forty that might have been expected. Only further studies will show if this improved knowledge will reduce deaths in the future.” Unfortunately, some people on insulin are still at risk of being found dead in their beds and, as Dr. Gerlis points out, these are avoidable deaths that should never occur.

Could it be that commonsense has been forgotten and research has taken a wrong turn? Recently, genetically modified ‘human’ insulins have appeared in bewildering varieties. This has confused everybody. In the effort to make a right choice, the possible advantages of old-fashioned animal insulin, with its slower action and better warning of hypos, can be overlooked. With these new insulins, the threat of sudden hypos has increased rather than decreased, cutting away our safety net. When we recover from the distress of a sudden hypo, we wonder why nothing has been done to replace the blood sugar control system we lost when we became diabetic. It is high time that scientific research should concentrate on giving us back this valuable warning system instead of flooding the market with new ‘designer’ insulins of doubtful value. Dr. Laurence Gerlis has stated that there is not a shred of evidence to show that human insulin has any benefits over animal insulins.(10) Indeed, many thousands of us have suffered from its disadvantages. Commercial pressure seems to be the main reason for promoting these synthetic insulins. Perhaps this explains why information about animal insulin as a viable alternative has been suppressed and, worse still, why it has been taken off the market in many countries.

Of course it would be wonderful if a cure for diabetes could be found. In the meantime, however, a general problem in modern medicine has to be addressed, to allow for individual personal dynamics. For people with diabetes, this is especially true. An awareness of the many differences in treatment and dietary needs is crucial for good medicine and good health. Knowing this, patients and doctors must find out how to co-operate on equal terms. My hope for the future is that the capabilities and expertise of the patient may come to the surface, and that commonsense will rule, with balance close beside it on one side and informed choice on the other. We must become skilled jugglers, working with the blue carbohydrate and the red insulin balls before we can live successfully with our diabetes. Sadly, diabetic welfare can be threatened by commercial interests. The right to decide which treatment suits us best should not be negotiable. I shall end as I began, by reverting to the wisdom of Dr. Lawrence. The care team should provide the accompaniment but, as an intelligent diabetic, it is for me to play my own melody and to be in control.

© Copyright Beatrice Reid 2000

Footnotes

  1. R.D.Lawrence, Almost All About Diabetes, London: A Family Doctor Booklet, British Medical Association. P. 2.
  2. ibid. P. 31.
  3. Peter Sonksen, Dr. Charles Fox, Sue Judd, Diatetes at Your Fingertips, London: Class Publishing,     Fourth Edition Reprinted 1999. P. 58.
  4. ibid. P. 56.
  5. Dr. Laurence Gerlis, report from AGM of IDDT, Birmingham, October 1999. P. 5.
  6. ibid. P. 6.
  7. Jenny Hirst, IDDT Newsletter No. 21, July 1999.
  8. Report from AGM of IDDT, October 1999. P. 1.
  9. Dr. Laurence Gerlis, ibid. P. 5.
  10. ibid.

Useful Addresses

InDependent Diabetes Trust
PO Box 294
Northampton
NN1 4XS
England

tel: 01604 622837 
e-mail: [email protected]  

Diabetes UK [formerly British Diabetic Association] 10 Queen Anne Street
London W1M 0BD
England

tel: 01 171 3231531

Diabetic Federation of Ireland
76 Gardiner Street Lower
Dublin 1
Ireland

tel: 01 8363

CP Pharmaceuticals Ltd [now Wockhardt UK]
Ash Road North
Wrexham Industrial Estate
Wrexham LL13 0UF

Help line: 01 1978 666172

Further copies of this booklet may be obtained from IDDT, see above.

Understanding Your Diabetes

By Uncategorized

A booklet which explains in detail the differences between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.   Written in plain English, it explains the relationship between insulin or medication, diet and exercise. In doing this, it supports people with both types of diabetes by removing some of the harmful myths and misunderstandings.

Understanding Your Diabetes

30 years of Synthetic Insulin

By Uncategorized

Are people with diabetes getting the best deal?

This report looks at the lessons that can be learned from the 30 years since the introduction of synthetic insulins and questions the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on patients’ choice of insulin treatment. It looks forward to developing ways of protecting the best interests of people with diabetes who need and deserve treatment that is based on evidence of benefit while at the same time, being cost effective.

30 years of Synthetic Insulin – English version
30 years of Synthetic Insulin – German version

Information Packs

By Uncategorized

IDDT provides a wide range of information which has been written to meet the needs of people with diabetes, their carers and health care professionals. This publication list has been compiled so you can order what you need free of charge. Simply state how many copies or items you require, fill in your address in the space provided and submit your order to IDDT.

Free Information

IDDT runs purely on voluntary donations and all the information we produce is free. If you would like to help us continue to provide this valuable information to people with both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes please send us a donation via PayPal Donate using the button below:

Healthcare professionals ordering multiple copies

All IDDT booklets and leaflets will remain free of charge. We are delighted that healthcare professionals and others are ordering multiple copies of our booklets and leaflets to give to people with diabetes and grateful for the help and support being given to people with diabetes in this way.

  • For orders over 100 copies, please contact IDDT for the cost of delivery by telephone 01604 622837 or by email [email protected]
  • Invoices will be sent with the order.
  • If funding the delivery charges is a problem, we are happy to supply FREE multiple copies of Publication Lists for healthcare professionals to give to their patients so that they can order direct from IDDT.

Thank You!

Ordering Info Packs

  • Your details

  • Handy Bits

  • Introductory Packs

  • Other Information Packs

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Introducing IDDT

By Uncategorized

This printed publication provides factual information about the differences between natural animal insulins and synthetic analogue and human insulins and about the adverse effects that significant numbers of people experience with the synthetic analogue and human insulins.

It confirms the availability of pork insulins in the UK and describes their duration and peaks of action. It acts as a reminder that people with diabetes do have a right to a choice of treatment and offers advice on how to change to animal insulin for those who feel they are not being heard by their health professionals. Describing patient experiences of the adverse effects that synthetic insulins can cause, provides confidence and support for those who feel isolated and alone.

Quarterly Newsletters are also available in large print for the blind and visually impaired:
Update information about diabetes.
Latest research news.
Campaign progress reports.

Downloading and Ordering Leaflets

By Uncategorized

The leaflets listed below are available as PDFs for you to download – just click the link and save the PDF to your computer.
Scroll downor click here – to order printed leaflets.

PDF leaflets for download –

Type 1 Diabetes – Know the Facts
Passport for Diabetes in Care Settings
Type 2 Diabetes – Management and Medication
Diet and Diabetes
Diabetes – Everyday Eating
IDDT Hospital Passport
Diabetes – Stress, Anxiety and Depression
Diabetes – What Schools Need to Know
For Family Carers (online only)
For Parents Of Children With Diabetes (online only)
Exercise And Diabetes
The Eye & Diabetes
Hypoglycaemia
The Importance Of Sleep
Joint and Bone Problems and Osteoporosis
Kidney & Diabetes
Looking After Your Feet
Parents Passport for Schools
Pregnancy and Gestational Diabetes
Sexual Dysfunction In Men & Women
Understanding Your Diabetes
‘Your 9 Key Checks’, What They Are And Why They Are Important
Holiday Tips
Diabetes at Christmas

IDDT Publications

IDDT provides a wide range of information which has been written to meet the needs of people with diabetes, their carers and health care professionals. This publication list has been compiled so you can order what you need free of charge. Simply state how many copies or items you require, fill in your address in the space provided and submit your order to IDDT.

Free Information

IDDT runs purely on voluntary donations and all the information we produce is free. If you would like to help us continue to provide this valuable information to people with both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes please send us a donation via PayPal Donate using the button below:

Healthcare professionals ordering multiple copies

All IDDT booklets and leaflets will remain free of charge. We are delighted that healthcare professionals and others are ordering multiple copies of our booklets and leaflets to give to people with diabetes and grateful for the help and support being given to people with diabetes in this way.

Ordering Leaflets

  • Your details

  • IDDT Publications

    Please choose the quantity of each leaflet you would like to order. If you need large quantities of leaflets for any reason, such as a Diabetes Information Day then contact Matt on 01604 622837 or email him [email protected]
  •  
  • Legacies

    Thinking about making or updating your will? Why not consider leaving us a gift to help us continue our work? Order our free Reasons For Making Your Will leaflet below.
    A donation in memory of a loved one helps people affected by diabetes. Ask for our free A Gift In Memory leaflet.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

IDDT Triumphs in Australia

By Uncategorized

IDDT Triumphs in Australia

The Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust (IDDT) – after many years of lobbying – has at last succeeded in facilitating supplies of pork insulin into Australia.  Previously, people with diabetes in Australia who wished to use porcine animal insulin were forced to import it via the UK, but with the intervention of IDDT, pork insulin is now available from Aspen Pharmacare Australia.

IDDT Chair, Jenny Hirst commented, ‘We are so pleased that at last people in Australia have choice.  This has taken years of lobbying and although in the past it was possible for Australians to import some animal insulins from the UK, this proved to be extremely problematic.  This was largely because insulin doesn’t travel well in high temperatures and is adversely affected, and the cost of importation was extremely high.

Although the pork insulin (Hypurin Porcine) is not a registered product it is available through a government Special Access Scheme (SAS) on a case-by-case basis.   It is a Category B product and applications for its supply can be made by registered medical practitioners.

Ian Kershaw, IDDT’s Australian campaign officer said, ‘This is a real breakthrough for us here in Australia.  Prior to this new supply route it was almost impossible for people here to use porcine animal insulin.  However, thanks to everyone’s hard work we now have easy access to this insulin here in Australia.’

In order to make the supply as simple and fast as possible for both patients and healthcare professionals, Aspen Pharmacare have prepared very clear instructions on how to order Hypurin Porcine Insulin with prices and SAS forms, all of which are available by telephone, fax or on their website (details below).

Notes to Editors

For further information on the supply of pork insulin in Australia, please contact:

Aspen Pharmacare
tel: 02 8436  8300
fax: 02 9901 3540
website: www.aspenpharma.com.au

Ian Kershaw – IDDT Australia
tel: 03 6334 7552
e-mail: [email protected]

Press Contact
Veronica Wray (London, UK)
tel: 0011 44 20 8568 8546 or 0011 44 7710 624454
e-mail: [email protected]

In Sickness and in Health

By Uncategorized

In Sickness and in Health: Diabetic treatments need an injection of common sense

Sunday Telegraph, 31.10.04
By James Le Fanu

Animal insulins can suit diabetic patients far better than human insulin, says Dr James Le Fanu

Medicine is, for the most part, a sane and scientific enterprise but it can be surprisingly intolerant of even the most well-intentioned criticism.
Thus, some of those with diabetes find that modern regimes of treatment can cause, perhaps paradoxically, severe problems – but their difficulties have fallen on deaf ears, with serious implications.

Since the discovery of the life-saving potential of insulin in 1921, diabetics have successfully controlled the level of sugar in their blood by regularly injecting themselves with the hormone, derived from pigs and cows. This is cheap, plentiful and highly effective.

Then, in the early 1980s, scientists managed to produce human insulin by the revolutionary process of genetic engineering. They inserted the relevant gene into a bacterium that reproduced billions of times, producing the hormone in prodigious quantities.

In practical terms, the chemistry of human insulin is virtually identical to the animal varieties, but it seemed obvious that the human form must be “better” and doctors accordingly advised their patients that they should switch.

Some found, quite unexpectedly, that their previously well-controlled diabetes suddenly went haywire, as the levels of sugar in the blood oscillated wildly. Matthew Kiln, a family doctor, found that he could no longer anticipate the potentially serious state when his blood sugar fell too low – known as a “hypo” – which must be promptly corrected before coma supervenes. His personality changed, too, and he became uncharacteristically more irritable and argumentative, with unfortunate consequences for his personal and professional life.

Surveys revealed that about one in four diabetics were experiencing similar difficulties. No one could come up with a satisfactory explanation but most were able, albeit with some difficulty, to persuade their doctors to do the sensible thing and switch them back to the animal-based insulins.

Dr Kiln and his contemporaries had realised that there was something wrong because they knew, from personal experience, how the control of their diabetes had deteriorated. This opportunity is, however, denied to those who have come after them, and who are routinely started on the genetically engineered human form.
No doubt, this works for many but certainly not for all, as revealed by the experience of another doctor-cum-diabetic, Ann Robinson, a 46-year-old psychiatrist.

Dr Robinson discovered that she had diabetes a couple of years ago, but expected to be back at work in no time. Her human insulin injections, as intended, kept the levels of sugar in her blood within the normal range, but she felt terrible. “I did not feel like me with an illness. I felt like someone else,” she says. “I became a zombie. I could not concentrate for more than a few minutes and, whenever I took the least exercise such as going for a walk, my blood sugar went right through the floor.”

The months went by and her perplexed consultant changed Dr Robinson’s regime of injections no less than five times, but to no avail. She realised eventually that there was no alternative but to take early retirement on medical grounds.

Then, one evening in July, while idly flipping through a medical journal, she chanced upon an article by Dr Kiln that rang a peal of bells with her. She rushed round to her family doctor, brandishing Dr Kiln’s article, and persuaded him to switch her from human to pig insulin. Within a couple of days, her life changed.
“I woke feeling hungry for the first time in two years,” she says, as if, once again, her body’s metabolism was working as it should. Her intellect emerged from the twilight as she found she could concentrate once more, her joints loosened up and her personality returned. “I was me again,” she says.

Dr Robinson wonders how many others there are like her: children, for example, whose behavioural and learning problems are blamed on their reaction to being diagnosed as having diabetes, but who will become their sunny selves again simply by switching to pig insulin. But how are they (or their parents) to know?

And there’s the rub. Ten years ago, Dr Kiln helped set up the Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust to promote research and publicise this important issue – but, astonishingly, no one really seems to want to know. It is scarcely revolutionary to propose that some of those with diabetes might do better with animal-based insulins – but, for many and complex reasons, neither the diabetes specialists nor the drug companies are prepared to give them a sympathetic hearing.

Indeed, it remains an uphill struggle to ensure that the animal insulins are even available. This is perhaps not unrelated to the fact that they are far less profitable to the drug companies than the much more expensive human forms. Enough said.

The IDDT can be contacted at:

Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust [IDDT]
PO Box 294
Northampton
NN1 4XS

tel: 01604 622837
e-mail: [email protected]
website: www.iddtinternational.org

IDDT’s Position Statement on DTCA

By Uncategorized

IDDT’s Position Statement on DTCA

Issued April 2002

Provision of information to consumers by pharmaceutical companies

The Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust [IDDT] is an international patient organisation for people that live with diabetes. In order to function in the best interests of this consumer group without any conflicts of interest, we have a stated policy that we will not accept any funding from the pharmaceutical industry, unlike many other diabetes organisations.

We are totally opposed to the proposal that the pharmaceutical industry should be allowed to supply disease-related information directly to consumers and to any movement towards DTCA. While we accept that there may be a need for consumers to have more information about prescription drugs in language they can understand, we strongly believe that both this and information about the condition being treated should be as unbiased as possible. Therefore it is inappropriate that it should be provided by the pharmaceutical industry whose understandable aim, is profit.

The ability for consumers to obtain independent information is already threatened by:

  • Industry funded research and conflicts of interest and prestigious research institutions receiving industry funding, so blurring the relationship between research and commercial gain.
  • Preparation of clinical guidelines, an article in JAMA, February 2002, finding that 90% of the authors received funding from or acted as consultants to drug companies
  • ‘Fast track’ approval of drugs coupled with ADR reporting systems being grossly underused.  In diabetes, troglitazone highlighted this situation when at least 92 people died and many others were damaged because the drug was heavily marketed with a lack of independent evidence-based information.
  • The many ways in which physicians or their departments and staff are sponsored by industry.

People with diabetes have already witnessed the power of drug company advertising to the medical profession. In the 1980s the majority of people requiring insulin were transferred to genetically produced ‘human’ insulin even though there was, and still is, no evidence that ‘human’ insulin has any clinical advantages for patients over the natural animal insulin. Despite a catalogue of adverse reactions to ‘human’ insulin, it is now first line treatment for insulin requiring diabetes. People are not given the choice of insulin species and if information is requested, many people are told by their physician, diabetes nurse specialist and/or their pharmacy that animal insulins are no longer available. As Novo Nordisk only advertise their more profitable synthetic ‘human’ insulins to professionals, this misinformation may be understandable. However, it has affected prescribing habits resulting in a diminution of the sales of animal insulins so enabling the manufacturers to try to justify discontinuation of animal insulins in many EU countries.

In addition, global insulin production is in the hands of three multi-national companies providing them with a dominant market position. If they are allowed to provide information direct to consumers, the few remaining small insulin manufacturers will be unable to compete, resulting in ‘blockbuster human’ insulins that are not tolerated by a significant minority of people with diabetes.

Here to Help

By Uncategorized

About IDDT

The InDependent Diabetes Trust (IDDT) is a registered charity based in the UK which formed 1994. Our aim is to listen to the needs of people who live with diabetes, understanding those needs and doing our utmost to offer help and support. We not only want to help those who actually have diabetes but also their carers – the husbands, wives, partners and parents, indeed, all of us who ‘live with diabetes’. We recognise that when one person in a family has diabetes, all other family members are affected to a greater or lesser extent and they all have views and needs which may be different from the person with diabetes, but nevertheless are important.

The Trust was set up to look at some of the day to day difficulties of living with diabetes, the worries, fears and concerns that perhaps we don’t talk about at the hospital clinic- the ones that many of us experience and understand because we actually live with diabetes. As a charity, IDDT has a Board of Trustees and all our Trustees either have diabetes or have family members with diabetes. So we all know first hand that while diabetes doesn’t rule our lives, it is an important part of them. It needs care and attention, it can be a nuisance and it is not without it’s problems!

Within a few years of our formation, we were contacted by people in countries around the world in need of the information and support we offer and so IDDT-International was formed. This offers an umbrella for groups and individuals from countries around the world to be part of the world to share experiences and information to the benefit of people living with diabetes.

IDDT also tries to represent the best interests of people with diabetes and campaigns on their behalf and becoming a member of IDDT is one of the best ways you can help us. Membership of IDDT is free, as is all the information we provide, but it is to help us with our campaigning issues that we ask people to join us – the more people who become members, the louder and more powerful is our voice. So please join us.

The Trust is run entirely by voluntary donations and we do not accept funding from the pharmaceutical industry in order to remain uninfluenced and independent.

Join IDDT or Renew your membership

By Uncategorized

Join Us BadgeThe InDependent Diabetes Trust is very much a patient/carer centred organisation. It is run by people who live with diabetes for people, who live with diabetes so we understand some of the day to day difficulties that occur.

Why join IDDT?

There are many other sites that will tell you about the factual and medical aspects of diabetes. We understand from experience some of the problems that may occur are not just factual or medical and that living with diabetes is not always easy. We understand and offer a listening ear when it is needed. We provide information in non-medical language which we can all understand.  We offer help and support to people with adverse reactions to synthetic ‘human’ and analogue insulins. Thanks to the help of our members we lobbied government to ensure that natural animal insulins remain available for the people who need them. Our activities have widened but ensuring that people with diabetes have an informed choice of treatment is still our priority. We try to represent the needs of children and adults living with diabetes and the larger our membership the more powerful is our voice.

By joining or renewing your membership of IDDT you will help to ensure that people with diabetes receive the care and treatment they deserve.  We are an independent, international patient/carer organisation – probably one of the very few in the world and certainly in the world of diabetes. IDDT has a policy of not accepting funds from the pharmaceutical industry, so that we remain independent and uninfluenced by income sources. Our source of funding is entirely by voluntary donation and we are very grateful for this help.

We hope that you will join us

If you would like to make a donation to IDDT choosing to Gift Aid your donation will allow us to reclaim the basic rate of income tax paid on the cost of your donation. For every £10.00 that is donated to IDDT in this way we can reclaim an extra £2.50. If UK tax is deducted from any of your income, ask IDDT for a declaration form and when you receive it, post it back to us and we do all the rest. Please show your support by joining IDDT now, we do appreciate donations to help with our costs.

Join IDDT

  • Your details

  • Your diabetes

  • Donations

  • You do not have to make a donation to become a member. However, making a donation helps us to help members like you, by providing free leaflets and information packs, providing services to all of our members, and allowing IDDT to survive as a charity.

    Please note that, although we offer an online service that allows you to donate to IDDT, the providers of this service will take a percentage of your donation to cover their running costs. However, if you call us directly to donate, IDDT will receive all of the money that you give.

    To make a donation by credit or debit card, please telephone IDDT on 01604 622837

    Alternatively...

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Research grants

By Uncategorized

Research Grant Applications
IDDT Funded Research Findings
Participating in research – OK to Ask

horizontaldots

Research Grant Applications

IDDT registered as a charity in 1994 and it aims to help and support people with diabetes. It is run by people who live with diabetes for people that live with diabetes and as such, IDDT has a stated policy of not accepting any funding from the pharmaceutical industry. This enables IDDT to be independent and uninfluenced by funding sources. For this reason the amount of money the Trust has to fund research projects is fairly limited but the Trust has grown and is now in a position to consider awarding research grants. Initially, we are prepared to consider applications for research in the area of primary care up to £30,000 for any one project but is happy to consider joint funding.

The Trust would not wish to interfere in any way with the publication of the research, if the applicants wish to do so.

The Trust is not accepting applications until further notice.

If an application has not been accepted, further applications may not be made for a further 12 months.

Application Procedure
For simplicity and speed, the Trust has four levels of procedure for applying for funding from its Research Fund. These are as follows:

Stage 1
Submission of an interim research application questionnaire (IQ) by the applicant. The IQ will be sent to all interested applicants on request.

The purpose of the IQ is so that it is simple and quick to fill in for the applicant. This should help to stop busy people wasting unnecessary time drafting a full application for research funding when their research field is outside the boundaries of the Trust’s “patient centred” areas of interest.

Stage 2
If the IQ is approved by the Trust’s research group, then the applicant will be invited to submit a full research application. However, we do suggest that the applicant considers Stage 3 carefully before deciding whether to continue with a full research application. i.e. Stage 4

Stage 3
Before submitting a full research application, the Trust suggests that applicants carefully consider what potential benefits the research could have for the average every day diabetic patient (if there is such a thing!).

The Trust is not against any research that might question generally accepted principals in diabetes care, providing it is reasonable and does not potentially put patients’ health or wellbeing at risk.

The Trust would particularly support new ways of thinking and treating diabetes especially when consumer input and consumer experience is put as a key aspect of the research. Learning from patient experiences and patient experts was one of the main reasons the Trust had to be started up to 10 years ago.

Stage 4
Submission of the full research application If approved may be paid in stages and may be conditional.

A full research application should include:

  • Why the research is needed.
  • Aims of the research.
  • Proposed method.
  • Proposed analysis.
  • The amount of consumer involvement.
  • Estimated cost.
  • Size of the research grant requested and details of other funding received or applied for.
  • Ethics committee approval if appropriate.
  • Any areas of potential interests or conflicts of interest.

For application forms please contact:

Jenny Hirst
Co-Chair
IDDT
PO Box 294
Northampton
NN1 4XS

tel: 01604 622837
e-mail: [email protected]

Helping Developing Countries

By Uncategorized

Suspension of donations of unwanted, in-date insulin and other diabetes supplies

We are always very grateful for the donations of unwanted, in-date and unused insulin and other diabetes supplies, such as needles, lancets and test strips. This has been a great help to people with diabetes in developing countries but during and since the pandemic, we have been unable to send insulin or other items.

However, we have been and still are sending supplies to help people with diabetes in Ukraine, so if you have any unwanted, in-date, unused insulin and other diabetes items, please send them to IDDT or contact IDDT by telephone: 01604 622837 or email [email protected]


Previous Initiatives


IDDT helps poor children and young people with diabetes

Have you any unwanted, in-date insulin in your fridge?
IDDT is the UK arm of an Australian organisation, ‘Insulin for Life’ [IFL]. IFL is a not-for-profit organisation which collects unwanted, unopened, in-date insulin and test strips to send to developing countries as part of a humanitarian aid programme. Details of IFL can be found by visiting www.insulinforlife.org

Here is a true story:

Kilpana was a 5 year old little girl with diabetes who visited the Nagpur clinic regularly with her parents. One day she was brought into the clinic in a coma and ketoacidosis. Her parents had stopped giving her insulin because they simply could not afford it any longer. In desperation they had resorted to alternative medicine. Kilpana died!

If children with diabetes have adequate daily doses of insulin, they grow normally and can do things that children without diabetes can do. But if the dose is inadequate, then their growth is impaired and their quality of life is adversely affected. If insulin injections are stopped, they go into coma and this can be fatal.

In developing countries the cost of insulin for one person can be as much as 50% of a family’s income, so one of the main problems for poor families is that find it extremely difficult to afford the insulin and medical treatment for just one child in the family.

Under agreed protocols, IDDT collects and sends unwanted insulin and other diabetes supplies to clinics in developing countries for distribution to children and adults with diabetes who cannot afford insulin and treatment they need to stay alive. IDDT ensures that any insulin and supplies you donate will reach the developing countries in need of our help.

The need is for:

  • No longer needed, unopened and in-date insulin [with at least 3 months to the expiry date]
  • Syringes, lancets, needles
  • Glucose test strips

In 2010 IDDT collected and distributed over 9000 pre-filled pens, cartridges and vials of insulin to those who so desperately need them. All this unwanted insulin totalled a value of over £60,000. This cost is paid for by the NHS and would have gone to waste were it not for the Insulin for Life campaign and the kind actions of those who make the effort to send us their unwanted insulin and diabetes supplies. The sad thing is, this is only the tip of the iceberg, there is far more insulin simply being thrown away that could be used to help save lives.

Please help if you can by sending supplies in a ‘jiffy bag’ or box to:

InDependent Diabetes Trust
PO Box 294
Northampton
NN1 4XS

tel: 01604 622837
e-mail: [email protected]

Thank you, you will help people to stay alive!


Uganda

Helping people with diabetes living in Uganda

Diabetes Consultation Association (DCA) has been in operation for 16 months. DCA is a non-profit organisation that cares for, treats and educates children and teenagers living with type 1 diabetes. DCA was founded by Masereka Robert who got diabetes at age of 5 years and has thrived with it up to the age of 32yrs.

Currently DCA receives 100 patients per month at its education centre in Kasese district. 55% of type 1 patients now know how to treat themselves. DCA receives insulin from Insulin for Life USA for type1 patients. There are quite a number of people in the hard to reach villages who are suffering from type 1 diabetes and find it hard to reach our centre.

DCA has started an initiative to carry out outreaches to these poor resource settings so that we can help more people survive from this deadly condition. As the director of this organisation, Robert is fundraising to purchase a vehicle to help DCA fulfil this obligation.

The details can be found on the DCA website: www.gofundme.com/helping-diabetics-living-in-uganda


IDDT helping in Ethiopia

IDDT has been helping people in Ethiopia by supplying information to their Diabetes organisation for distribution. They have supplied it to schools so that teachers can educate the pupils about diabetes as well as to children and adults with diabetes.

Here are some photographs of the presentations to the pupils:

 


News from Tanzania

For the last few years IDDT has been working with the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and the Tanzania Diabetes Federation (TDA) to provide much needed aid to children and young adults with type 1 diabetes in Tanzania. The TDA started its child sponsorship program in 2005, supported by organisations like IDDT and the IDF, who collect and send on vital supplies, including syringes and blood glucose testing equipment.

The vast majority of families of children with type 1 diabetes live on very low incomes and simply cannot afford to provide adequate food for their children, let alone purchase the insulin and equipment they need. This very often means that parents discourage their children from having daily multiple insulin injections, resulting in high rates of hospital admissions of children with diabetic ketoacidosis. It also means that the children also have HbA1c levels that are very high, thus increasing the risk of developing the complications of diabetes. Add to this the fact that many families cannot afford the costs of travelling to and from their clinic, simply makes the situation even worse.

The sponsorship program was started in 2005 by Dr Kaushik Ramaiya at the Muhimbili National Hospital with just 30 children. Since then the project has continued to expand and now supports 260 children in 5 hospitals. The program has been able to support the training of doctors and nursing staff, as well as develop a comprehensive education program for children and their families. Thanks to this the program has made some major achievements, including:

  • A reduction in the incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis.
  • A reduction in the number and duration of hospital admissions.
  • A decrease in mortality rates.
  • A decrease in the number of school days lost.
  • An increase in body weight of children with type 1 diabetes.

In addition to building on these achievements, the TDA is looking to secure funding to help towards the travel costs of poor families who need to attend the clinics, further helping to improve their quality of life.
Here are some of the childrens’ stories in their own words:

Evance Mmasi


Age 8

Age 10

My name is Evance Mmasi, 14 years old male. I am the 11th born in the family of twelve. I am in standard three now. Currently I am staying with my elder brother, my parents are in Moshi. They are so poor that they could not afford to take care of my condition because I had recurrent admissions with similar complaints most of the time and no diagnosis was reached. Finally I was diagnosed as having diabetes in October 2005, when I was admitted at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Moshi .Since then I’ve been taking insulin. No one has Diabetes in my family. Insulin was so expensive for the two months I used it. Fortunately my brother was told about this program, I thank you so much for your support. There are other children out of Dar who are facing similar condition like I had. Please extend your support to other parts of Tanzania!

Anita Bulindi


Age 10

Age 15

My name is Anita John Bulindi, I am 15 years old female. I am the second born in the family of three. I have lived with diabetes for 10years; I am in Form Four at Shaban Robert Secondary School.There is a family history of Diabetes (My paternal uncle).In 1999, I was admitted with diabetes ketoacidosis that is when I was diagnosed as having diabetes. Since then I was started on Insulin.Unfortunately I can not afford Insulin and my mother has developed mental illness in 2007. I thank the child sponsorship program, for the help they are giving us. They give us medicines and carry out regular laboratory investigations. Please keep it up.

Mariam Hassan


Age 16

Age 19

I am 19 years old. I am the 3rd born in the family of 6 Children. I have completed standard seven now. I have joined the microfinance program from TDA. I am going to establish small business. I was diagnosed with diabetes in October 2005.No one in the family has diabetes mellitus. My family can not afford to buy insulin, so I have to move all the way from the outskirt of Dar es Salaam to come to this diabetes clinic to get Insulin. At least the transport fare is far cheaper than the cost of insulin. Thank you so much for the support. I wish this support is extended to other areas out of Dar es Salaam so that other children with Diabetes can benefit too.

How You can help:
There are two ways in which YOU can help.

  • Perhaps you have recently changed your insulin or equipment and now have supplies that you no longer need – then send them direct to us and we will ensure that they are sent to those that need them.
  • Ask for one of our “Look in Your Fridge” posters to give to your doctor and/or nurse and ask them to send us any unwanted insulin or equipment that they have.

InDependent Diabetes Trust
PO Box 294
Northampton
NN1 4XS

tel: 01604 622837
e-mail: [email protected]


Sponsor a child

We would like to thank everyone who has been sponsoring a child at Dream Trust in India. This has been welcomed by Dr Pendsey over many years.

The Bank of India has twice changed the rules for transferring funds from businesses (including charities) in the UK to India and we have struggled to make transfers for a considerable period of time. Unfortunately, we can no longer guarantee that our donations will actually reach the bank account of Dream Trust in India and therefore, we believe that it is only right that we stop the Sponsor a Child scheme from the end of July 2023 when our final payment will be made.

 

Synthetic ‘human’ insulin versus natural animal insulin

By Uncategorized

IDDT campaigning

Pork and beef insulins available in the UK
Synthetic ‘human’ insulin versus natural animal insulin
Animal insulin – Minister’s letter
Limiting availability of blood glucose test strips

 

Back to Here to Help
horizontaldots

Synthetic ‘human’ insulin versus natural animal insulin

IDDT has campaigned for the continued availability of pork and beef insulins since its formation in 1994 when significant numbers of people experienced adverse effects from synthetic human insulins. The continued availability of animal insulins was threatened which would deny people the insulin they need to remain healthy. The major insulin manufacturers ignored the needs of this significant minority of people with diabetes and in 2007 they discontinued manufacture of animal insulin. However, thanks to a smaller supplier, Wockhardt UK, the UK is one of the very few countries where pork and beef insulins are still available.
By the late 1990s  the major insulin manufacturers introduced insulin analogues and these synthetic insulins also caused some people to have adverse effects, all too often not acknowledged by their doctors and diabetes team.

Below is a summary of the lobbying campaign carried out by IDDT and its members – it’s a record of how we did it!

The Campaign Aims:

  • full recognition of the adverse effects of ‘human’ insulin in some people
  • an indefinite availability of pork and beef insulins to suit the needs of ALL people requiring insulin therapy
  • that all people receiving insulin treatment are given an informed choice of treatment, including the risks and benefits of ALL types of insulin.

    Discontinuation of animal insulin has already happened in most EU countries – it is likely to happen in the UK unless we ACT!

Facts during this time

  • Discontinuation of animal insulins is for commercial reasons and this means that insulin treatment choices are being dictated by pharmaceutical companies and NOT the medical profession or patient need.
  • Animal insulins have been used safely and effectively for over 70years. There is no evidence to show that synthetic GM ‘human’ insulins are better than animal insulins [Cochrane Review 2003]
  • Comparison of regular ‘human’ insulin and short-acting insulin analogues showed only minor benefit with analogues in some people [Cochrane Review, May 2004] but due to fears of potentially carcinogenic and proliferative effects, most studies to date have excluded patients with advanced diabetic complications.
  • Both Cochrane reviews showed that majority of this research to compare the above insulins was ‘methodologically poor’ and importantly for patients, there has been no research to compare patient-oriented outcomes such as mortality and complication rates and quality of life [Cochrane Reviews 2003 and 2004].

Campaign Update

The campaign achievements so far…
Thank you to everyone who has written and re-written to their MPs and MEPs about Novo Nordisk’s possible discontinuation of animal insulin. Your help has been invaluable in the campaign and has given credibility and support to the many Westminster meetings the Trustees have had with MPs of all parties. IDDT is also very grateful to the many MPs and MEPs for their understanding and support and for taking up the issues in the House of Commons, directly with the Minister of Health and with the insulin manufacturers.

Understandably many people have felt angry and frustrated at some of the replies your MPs have received from Rosie Winterton, Minister of Health, and Lord Warner, the Under Secretary of State for Health. But by continuing to respond through your MP, you are putting our case more strongly and sending the message that we are not going to be fobbed off with half-truths and spin on the evidence.

Parliamentary Questions
Over 30 Parliamentary Questions have been asked of the Minister of Health, Rosie Winterton. One of the many supportive MPs, Tim Loughton, has been very supportive and asked many PQs on our behalf and is to pursue the following points:

  1. Government research into comparing animal and synthetic insulins
  2. Why doctors are not giving patients a fully informed choice of insulins
  3. Why the NHS is paying more for synthetic insulins that are not superior to animal insulins for the majority of patients
  4. That there must be a better education programme for people with diabetes and this MUST include patients being given a fully informed choice of ALL insulins.

Novo Nordisk agree some people can’t tolerate GM insulin and delay their decision
Novo Nordisk has agreed to delay their final decision about future availability of animal insulin until summer 2005 so supplies should continue until the end of 2006 or into 2007. In a statement from their Chief Executive in the UK, Novo Nordisk acknowledged that some people can’t tolerate synthetic insulin and the importance of this statement must not be underestimated. “The company is aware that there are people with diabetes who are only able to tolerate animal insulins.”

  • It has taken 20years and pressure from you and your MPs to achieve this acknowledgement and the importance of this statement must not be underestimated:
  • It directly supports our lobbying for the indefinite supply of animal insulin for the people “who are only able to tolerate animal insulin”. With a statement like this, if the government doesn’t ensure continued supplies, they are knowingly condemning people to a treatment they can’t tolerate and this is an unthinkable position.
  • It questions the safety and medical ethics of transferring patients “who are only able to tolerate animal insulin” to any synthetic GM insulin, including insulin analogues.
  • It leaves doctors who prescribe any of the synthetic insulins to patients “only able to tolerate animal insulin” in a very vulnerable and unenviable position, a similar position to prescribing penicillin for a patient known to be allergic to it.

Meeting with Dept of Health civil servants, May 2004
IDDT expressed our concerns that CP Pharmaceuticals [now Wockhardt UK], the other animal insulin manufacturer in the UK, may not be able to meet the increased demand for pork insulin should Novo Nordisk decide to discontinue their pork insulin. This was discussed at a meeting with the Dept of Health in May and since then Lord Warner has stated:
“CP have given assurances that it currently has no plans to stop the supply of animal insulin. CP have confirmed to the Dept officials that they could meet any increased demand for animal insulin within a maximum of three to four months.”

Through their MPs IDDT members persisted in expressing their concerns about only having one supplier and in August 2004 Lord Warner made the following statement:
“Should one of the two companies supplying animal insulin in the UK decide to withdraw their product, the Dept of Health will take whatever steps are necessary to help ensure that patients continue to receive the treatment they need.”

This undoubtedly is progress. It answers goes some way to answer the key question we asked the Dept of Health about who is responsible for ensuring that UK citizens have the essential medicines they require. Lord Warner certainly suggests that the Dept of Health is responsible but what does he mean by ‘treatment’? All insulins lower blood glucose levels and simply lowering blood sugars could be classed as the treatment so we need greater clarification as follows:

  • We need a categorical statement that this promised treatment will in fact be with animal insulin. We cannot risk that this decision will be in the hands of the doctors and nurses who have never believed that there are adverse reactions to synthetic GM insulin. We need to be categorically assured that we, as patients, will be actively involved in this decision and that this will not be a battleground where patients have to be assertive to continue to receive animal insulin.
  • We need to be assured that animal insulins remain available as a choice of treatment for everyone requiring insulin. The phrase “patients continue to receive the treatment they need” suggests that all the Department will do is ensure those already using animal insulin will continue to receive it. This is not good enough. IDDT continues to receive new reports of adverse reactions with ‘human’ insulin and with all the new analogues and if animal insulins are not freely available now and in the future, these people will be forced to remain on a type of insulin that adversely affects their health and lives.
  • Animal insulin must remain available now and in the future and for everyone, not just for those presently using it.
  • We need steps to be taken to ensure that everyone requiring insulin is made fully aware that animal insulin is available and that synthetic GM insulins do cause adverse reactions in some people. It is essential that this is done by hospital clinics and not by a charity.

Adjournment Debate, November 16th 2004
David Amess MP led an Adjournment Debate on Diabetes and requested assurances about future supplies of animal insulin. Dr Stephen Ladyman, Parliamentary Under-secretary of State for Health responded for the Government with: “Were we to become aware of such plans [to discontinue], we would, of course, express a view, and our clear view is that which type of insulin a patient receives should be a clinical decision. That decision certainly should not be controlled by commercial considerations or issues of availability.”

Meeting with the Minister, December 7th 2004
Thanks to David Hinchliffe MP, Chairman of the Health Select Committee, a meeting was arranged between IDDT with the Minister of Health, Rosie Winterton. The Minister:
[i] supported the statement made by Dr Ladyman that choice of insulin treatment should not be dictated by commercial considerations or availability.
[ii] agreed to look into the ability of CP Pharmaceuticals to meet the increased demand for animal insulin in the event that Novo Nordisk decides to discontinue production, especially in the light of their recent out-of-stock position.
[iii] agreed patients must have an informed choice of treatment and steps would be taken, such to try to ensure that both patients and healthcare professionals are made aware of the availability of animal insulin eg information on the Dept of Health website. IDDT made the point that this information should be full and complete and include the fact that both human and analogue insulins have the potential for carcinogenic effects with analogues having the greater potential, and that animal insulins have no such effects.

We are making progress and it is encouraging that we now have supportive MPs who clearly recognise that some people cannot tolerate synthetic insulins. Like many of us, they see the unfairness and the risks associated with denying people the insulin they need and they have difficulty in finding an explanation, especially when a known 30,000 people is not an in significant number.

We ask everyone who cares about people with diabetes to join our campaign to ensure that the choice of natural animal insulins remain available for the people who need it and cannot tolerate the only alternative -synthetic GM insulin. But our campaign has wider implications as it clearly demonstrates that it is the very powerful pharmaceutical industry that can dictate treatment choices irrespective of doctors and patients’ needs and wishes.

Discontinuation of animal insulin has already happened in most EU countries – it is likely to happen in the UK unless we ACT NOW!

Please help! We will supply you with a lobbying pack.

Meeting with Health Minister, Rt Hon Jane Kennedy, 2005
After continued lobbying by IDDT and our members, a meeting was held with the then Health Minister and Dept of Health civil servants. As a result of this meeting, Jane Kennedy conformed that ‘some people are better suited to animal insulins and so they must continue to be available.’

2005 onwards
Pork and beef insulins from Wockhardt UK [formerly CP Pharmaceuticals] have continued to available in the UK. IDDT keeps a watchful eye on this situation but should the situation change in anyway, then in no uncertain terms, we will remind the government of the 2005 statement by the then Heath Minister, Jane Kennedy.

InDependent Diabetes Trust
IDDT