Doctor visit

By Bamberg Latest Reply 2012-05-22 17:18:43 -0500
Started 2012-04-02 16:00:43 -0500

I visited my doctor this morning and she was of the opinion that type 2 diabetes can efectively be cured by diet and exercise. My numbers now are completely in the normal range. I guess a test would be to each something I shouldn't and see how long it takes for the numbers to return to normal. Any thoughts?

79 replies

Controlled 2012-05-22 17:18:43 -0500 Report

There are endless debates regarding the word "reversed" or "cured". First things first: congratulations on managing your condition. I'm sure that many are interested and inspired by what you have accomplished. Like you, I use only diet and exercise to control BG. My last several A1C's are 5.5 to 5.8. I have no interest in going any lower than that.

I want to reiterate that being on medication is not a failure. It's necessary to treat and/or control many people's health condition(s). It may lead to reducing medication, or even no longer requiring it…and it may not.

It's important not to resume behaviors that preceded your diagnosis. Once you control your condition, with or without medication, you have to manage your health for life.

It's great to read success stories like yours. People get diagnosed every day and believe they're sentenced to declining health and worse. Your story, and many others' here demonstrate that isn't true at all.

Best of luck to you.

TsalagiLenape 2012-04-09 06:23:33 -0500 Report

Yes how did you do this? What kind of eating plan did you have? Is that your primary care physician doctor or another one?

Bamberg 2012-04-09 14:23:40 -0500 Report

It was my primary care doctor. She was sceptical at first, until she saw how serious about changing my lifestyle.
I used the Weight Watcher's online program. I don't give myself any of the treats that that program allows and what bread is allowed I use 100 percent whole grain. My glucose was pretty good after a couple of weeks and it's been improving ever since. Now my average reading is less than 100. I don't count carbs so it may not work for everyone. Idecided early that weight loss would be my first goal because I had read that losing just 5 percent of my body weight could make a big difference in blood sugar for a type 2 diabetic.

Lakeland 2012-04-07 15:05:09 -0500 Report

I don't know if I'd call it cured but I would call it manageable. I haven't taken my diabetes meds for the last few days because I've been around 87, 101, but I know if I'd each a cake, I'd be up to 190, or if I eat fruit, imy numbers would spike. I brought some numbers up to my doc & he told me that if my body was working correctly, my own insulin would kick in & I'd never go over 100, so if I had a reading of 120 he would tell me see that proves your body isn't working correctly.

That's why I'm glad I can test, but I also know that if i'm on the higher side, I can go for a walk & drop my numbers 20 points. although today it would be tough I have gout in my knee so I won't be walking at all for a few days.

Best wishes

Bamberg 2012-04-05 01:30:54 -0500 Report

OK, here are my results. I work nights so that has to be factored in. At 10PM my fasting glucose was 78. Before midnight I ate a liverworst and cheese on whole grain bread. I also ate 2 packets (4 bars) of Nutrigrain oats and honey. At midnight I drank a pint of orange juice. Here are my numbers; 12:20 128, 1:10 125, 1:55 112, 2:20 104. I'm out of strips now until I get home at 8AM. While I was doing this test I also tested the bartender who came in at 176. He is going to see his doctor tomorrow. Perhaps someone here more knowledgeable than me can interpret my numbers for me.

Nick1962 2012-04-05 07:47:42 -0500 Report

Judging by that it seems that you're responding correctly. What i would be curious about is your numbers after 3 and 4 hours. That is where my problem lies (and why i think you always have D) is after a large spike , I often have a crashing drop. This isolated test seems successful, but I'd be of the opinion that if you did this daily, or three times daily as many folks would, those numbers would be far higher. Just my 2 cents.

Bamberg 2012-04-05 09:30:32 -0500 Report

At 8AM the number was 100 but that wasn't a fasting number. I couldn't do the test 3 times daily because I would be eating too much and I would begin to gain weight. If my weight got high enough then the insulin absorption problem associated with too much fat around the middle would return. Is it fair to say that my thinner self is not diabetic but if I got fat enough then my diabetes would return?

Nick1962 2012-04-05 09:41:36 -0500 Report

I would think so. Your thinner self is no doubt using stored proteins like it should, your bigger self is just trying to keep up with getting rid of excess is my understanding.

suziesgirl 2012-04-04 21:40:43 -0500 Report

I do believe that she may be right, however, I do not think that returing to the very foods that greatly contributed to type 2 should be added back into our diets. I too am in the normal range, but would never consider going back to where I began. I think that how the normal range came about was how we as humans were meant to eat. Without tons of food additives and fake foods or best put processed foods. If we truely knew what triggered this epidemic of diabletes we would all change what we injested. It has been around for a long time, so what came first the chicken or the egg. I'm guessing it was the chicken lol. Rest assured that if we were to go back to bad eating and lifestyle habits, we would again be in the out of range catagory. I just do not want to throw away all the hard work getting to this point. What would be the point?
Congrats on you normal range.

Nick1962 2012-04-05 07:51:18 -0500 Report

I'm with you 100%. Unless i missed Bamberg's point, i think the whole purpose of this little experiment was to check reaction times, and not to see if we could return to old habits. I know I'll never return to those days, but it's nice to know that I can absorb a hit every now and then.

Nick1962 2012-04-04 07:45:46 -0500 Report

Just a thought, would it maybe be beneficial to get in to your doctor for a glucose uptake/tolerance test? You know, the one where you drink that nasty orange Tang flavored junk? It's a more controlled test.

Bamberg 2012-04-04 07:50:03 -0500 Report

Maybe. Keep in mind that there is no legitimate medical reason for doing the experiment. I think I'll play with it myself and then, if I get the results I'm looking for, involve my doctor. By then she'll be so curious she'll want to know what happens.

Nick1962 2012-04-04 08:26:54 -0500 Report

True. Tell you what, let us know what your experimental food is, and I'll do one with the same. I know Graylin has been doing someting similar. I tried pork rinds which had no effect on me whatsoever.

jayabee52 2012-04-04 01:06:08 -0500 Report

Notice that your Dr said "effectively" as opposed to ACTUALLY. There is a lot of difference in those two words. I believe I am effectively "cured" by my following of my meal plan (here ~ But I am not actually cured and I am reminded of that every time I get too enthustiac in the Buffets here in Las Vegas.

I had developed a method of finding out how certain foods or drinks affect my unique metabolism. Perhaps you can put it to use for your testing. Find this method here ~

Let me know if you think this may be of help to you or if you can modify it to work for you for this purpose.


Bamberg 2012-04-04 01:24:35 -0500 Report

Thanks, James, I will keep you informed. I am a little ashamed to admit this but now that I've got the sugar under such tight control I am having fun with the learning process. It's like a new adventure, only with health benefits.

tootsma 2012-04-06 07:49:45 -0500 Report

If i eat a slice of wheat bread my sugars are off tje wall i wish i cud eat a slice of cake Lol

jigsaw 2012-04-06 08:27:56 -0500 Report

Cake, ice cream, hot fudge and whip cream, pizza! I wish!!! I know someone on a liquid diet by no choice of their own. When I consider that diet, my low carb diet looks great! It's simply a matter of prospective.

maxshockwave 2012-04-03 18:50:27 -0500 Report

Test with something good for you anyway, fruit juice, it will give you a 'spike' see how quick you rebound by monitoring, and the vitamin's and anti-oxidants are
good for you; this is of course up to you my best wishes say not to diverse from your doctors good advise, he must be more aware of what he's doing if he feels his solution is valid!

Nick1962 2012-04-03 16:12:20 -0500 Report

Well, I had kind of this discussion with jigsaw in another thread. Depends on your definition of cured. And, also your definition of what you “shouldn’t” eat. If you eat a normal portion of a normal food, and respond normally (like a non-D), then I guess at least I’d say “controlled”. Trouble is I think we’ve really lost sight of what “normal” eating habits and foods are. Like you and I who seem to be in control, I would call us “normal” and the rest of the world way out of whack.
Congrats on the good numbers!

Bamberg 2012-04-03 17:52:54 -0500 Report

I agree, Nick. The rest of the world is way out of whack. How I eat now seems completely normal and the way I used to eat seems mildly insane. I also think that 'normal' is what a successful hunter/gatherer would be able to forage. Certainly that wouldn't include most grains. A heavy dependance on flour would be completely unnatural, for instance. That couldn't happen until the advent of agricultural societies.

Nick1962 2012-04-03 18:35:34 -0500 Report

i don't know that I'd go back to the Paleolithic days to define normal necessarily, even when the agricultural societies popped up, there was still less evidence of disease. I guess for me any diet that gives you the proper nutrition through readily available whole foods (those you could grow or raise yourself without further manufacture) would be my closest definition if your numbers stayed with in the good range.
So for someone like me who consumes (mostly) whole foods and meats, doesn't rely on supplements or other esoteric foods or substitutions, and controls those foods to avoid spikes and lows, then I guess cured is just a matter of semantics if you can keep it up the rest of your life (I see you shaking your head no jigsaw).

jigsaw 2012-04-03 19:06:40 -0500 Report

I don't think so but…maybe??? Never met anyone who could prove it can't be done! The question that entered my mind is, what do you consider the rest of your life. It could be 6 mos ( hopefully not ) a year, or maybe another 50 ! If it's a 6 mos time span, then I'll go along with you. If it's 50 years, you probably won't even remember if you had it, let alone cured it. Anything in between, we'll just have to wait and see!!!

Nick1962 2012-04-03 19:12:13 -0500 Report

Agreed 100%, that's why I'm not jumping on the cured bandwagon. Too many variables, and with age, like you point out, it is a sliding scale. 6 months is an easy amount of time to stave off D, but 50? Well, I'll give it my best shot.

Bamberg 2012-04-03 18:42:04 -0500 Report

I just mean that our nutritional needs were probably set before the advent of agriculture. It would seem logical that foods that only became common through farming shouldn't be indulged in too much. It also occurs to me that those foods we diabetics have to cut back on tend to be those that were introduced late in our evolutionary history.

Dev 2012-04-05 09:02:28 -0500 Report

I don't agree. for us in India, our traditional diet has way less protein than what I have seen in US. I can't imagine a person eating a slab of meat like I have seen people eating here.

We were told not to increase the protein in our diet beyond a certain degree may it be through beans or non-vegetarian means because we cannot process large amount of protein. For generations we have had that diet and our bodies are not adapt to pick up the ratio of protein to carbs that an american person can manage easily.

I also don't agree to the assumption of old being better. There is always some good and some bad practice at every time and it also depends on the context of that time. One can't bring a practice from another age and say it will work in some other age.

Also, your assumption of grains being unavailable to hunter gatherers is also wrong. In India, wild rice was normal part of the diet even before agriculture became a norm. The gathering part (in hunter gatherer) was mostly grains, fruits, roots and such things all high carb items.

Bamberg 2012-04-09 14:28:40 -0500 Report

Dev, I don't think that grains were available to hunter/gatherers in the volume that they are available in agricultural societies.

Nick1962 2012-04-05 09:56:25 -0500 Report

Dev, thanks for adding your perspective. In one similar discussion I did qualify that a person’s ancestral diet was pretty much dependent on geography. My German ancestors, (lets only go back a few hundred years), didn’t have rice or a lot of grains. They were mostly meat eaters (cattle farmers) and many foods were seasonal. Wheat was our major grain, but since a majority of it was used as cattle feed, breads were not a big factor in our foods. Potatoes were our main starch.
I do agree with your assessment on protein, and admit that from your perspective we in the US way over-consume it. A 16oz. steak must seem like sheer gluttony to you, but I assure you that’s not how most healthy folks eat. I do find myself limiting my protein for the reasons you cite, but again, that goes counter to my upbringing (damaging as it may seem), so it was a challenge. Going back to the old ways for me means before processed and convenience foods.

jigsaw 2012-04-03 19:37:51 -0500 Report

You're covering a vast amount of time. I think most mammals, especially humans can adapt to some degree, to the kind of changes that your talking about. There is very likely some truth to your point of view also.
My understanding is, the most harmful and even destructive foods came with the advent of industrialization and processed foods. Type II diabetes has become much more prevalent during this time period and reached even epidemic proportions. Then again, diabetes is indicated almost as long as man has been recording history.

Nick1962 2012-04-03 18:49:38 -0500 Report

I can agree to that. before we got here the Native American population did just fine off the land, it was our introduction of 'civilized" foods (and of course reducing their farmable land) that killed many off. I wasn't aware until I started studying D that alcohol was not part of the Native American diet at all, and many, not having any form of alcohol tolerance, died of alcohol poisoning when they started embibing in the habit.

Young1s 2012-04-02 16:25:19 -0500 Report

Well…I guess the "the only way to find out is to try" rule could apply. Question is, is it worth the curiosity to you?

Bamberg 2012-04-02 16:35:56 -0500 Report

Curiosity is my curse. And the more I know about this desease the better.

Young1s 2012-04-02 17:02:53 -0500 Report

I hear you on that one. If you do try, just pace yourself just in case. Don't want you to end up with a scary high because of it. I'm pulling for you. Keep us posted.

Bamberg 2012-04-02 16:01:27 -0500 Report

I mean eat something.

jigsaw 2012-04-03 16:57:17 -0500 Report

My wife could eat an ice cream cone, wash it down with 8 to 16 ounces of coke and snack on some jelly beans ans still maintain a bg below 110 ! BET You a dollar that you can't !!! I know what would happen if I tried…:::::::::…CRASH!!!

Bamberg 2012-04-03 18:47:19 -0500 Report

My wife was the same. She could eat a box of chocolates every night and her weight never went above 110. That all changed when she went on steroids to help her tolerate chemotherapy.

jigsaw 2012-04-03 20:15:36 -0500 Report

Well, I'm glad to hear your doing well, managing your diabetes. One thing I know for sure, you'll definitely live a longer healthier life with good mgmt.
I hope your wife is managing her situation and doing well! You both have my best wishes for a long and healthy life!

Bamberg 2012-04-03 23:23:58 -0500 Report

Unfortunately my wife died about 18 months ago. She lived 10 years after a diagnosis of stage 4 breast cancer. I am grateful for those 10 years.

Caroltoo 2012-04-04 20:24:18 -0500 Report

That longevity is amazing. She must have really wanted to stay with you.

Yes, we do have special gratitude for those last years when we know we are losing a beloved spouse. I feel that way with my hubby who is 10 years into Alzheimer's when the average life span past diagnosis is 7 years.

jigsaw 2012-04-05 08:37:14 -0500 Report

My mother was diagnosed with dementia at about age 70. She lived to age 87. I could never get a more exact diagnosis from the doctors that saw her. I don't know if her dementia was Alzheimers. I suspect she had a few ischemic attacks (mini strokes) that may have contributed or even caused her condition. How do they determine Alzheimers from other forms of dementia?

Graylin Bee
Graylin Bee 2012-04-20 21:40:46 -0500 Report

Some of the diagnosis can be determined by how the symptoms exhibit.
If the onset of the dementia is rapid it could be vascular dementia.
If some symptoms appear before others that can indicate what type of demensia it is. For instance, Pics disease and Alzheimers' have different patterns in what parts of the brain lose their abilities during the early and late stages of the disease. The two run almost opposite of each other. With Pics the socially appropriate behavior vanish much sooner than the language skills.
How the person responds to certain medications can also vary due to the cause of the dementia.
Even another disease, medication, poor nutrition, or dehydration can cause dementia like symptoms. Dementia itself is really a symptom rather than the disease. With new imaging techniques they can determine what is happening with the brain. Some areas of the brain shrink due to the disease process. But traditionally only an autopsy of the brain can show the plagues and tangles that are the mark of Alzheimers. I read something over a year ago about the use of Ultra Sound to help determine how the brain was functioning. They were able to see how fluid moved between brain cells. They were hoping to learn more about how Alzheimers' attacked and hindered brain function.

jigsaw 2012-04-21 09:30:09 -0500 Report

Thankyou! You condensed quite a bit of interesting info into a small space. I don't believe that she had Alzheimers, since her symptoms became evident very suddenly. I have also heard that the very early stages of Alzheimers can be difficult to detect. Also, I read that some people can hide the early symptoms. My mother lived alone, so I couldn't observe her closely enough on a daily bases, to notice subtle changes that may have taken place in her personality or disposition. She did have very high blood pressure, and I suspect she stopped taking her meds. Her cholesteral became very high towards the tail end of her life also. All of this probably contributed to her circumstances. I did get her medical care for many years on a daily basis, but by that time to much damage had taken place.
By the way, Pics seems to fit the description more closely.

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 12:16:02 -0500 Report

While living, it's a rule out diagnosis: there is no evidence of strokes, or excessive alcohol causing demetia, or any of the other forms possible, so it must be A's. Firm diagnosis comes with autopsy.

Some of the brain imaging techniques available now are used to rule in or out stroke related dementia because of evidence/or lack of it of stroke left in the brain. So far, haven't heard of any definitive imaging that is conclusive of A's.

jigsaw 2012-04-05 14:46:53 -0500 Report

That's pretty much the impression I was under. I know my mother had very high cholesterol, and high bp. Before the dementia became obvious, she was living alone. I don't believe she was taking her meds. Eventually, I found out that she started having seizures, which I never observed. The obvious change in her ability to function normally, seemed rather sudden. Her mental funtions and some of her physical abilities actually improved a bit over the years with medical care. So the bottom line is I'll probably never know, what really took place.

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 14:59:19 -0500 Report

True, but it does fit the pattern of a stroke and possibly stroke induced dementia. So, I hope you are paying attention to your bp and various readings—you've mentioned many, tests but we are usually talking about diabetes not heart/brain related issues.

jigsaw 2012-04-05 15:27:34 -0500 Report

Thanks, I get everything checked on a regular bases. I see the endo every 4 mos and my primary every 6 mos unless there is a problem. Cholesterol, Bp, triglycerides, a1c, albumen, thyroid, testosterone, prostrate, liver enzymes and who knows what else, all check good. Only thing wrong is diabetes and the pseudo cyst that I've discussed with you. So the way I see it, if neither one of those get me, then I'll probably look ridiculous one day, lying in the hospital dieing from nothing!

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 15:52:00 -0500 Report

Glad to hear you are doing so well. Genetics don't determine our fate, but sounds like you are keeping an eye out which is a great approach. Sounds grea!

jigsaw 2012-04-05 17:45:11 -0500 Report

While we're off the discussion topic, genetics do play a role in determining our fate. That role can vary greatly, and sometimes totally! What do you think?

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 17:47:40 -0500 Report

The flukiness of what we inherit or don't inherit certain can determine the parameters that we function in, but what we choose to do within those boundaries is a function of who and how we are in the world.

jigsaw 2012-04-05 18:16:28 -0500 Report

Help me clear up the semantics here, because I think we're talking about two different things. We can inherit a deadly disorder that will kill and seal ones fate. Pancreatic cancer often has absolutely no symptoms and can be inherited. Once diagnosed, there is often nothing that will save that persons life. Now I agree with your statement of functioning within parameters and choosing what we do within those boundaries. But is this person who will die in months from an inherited genetic disorder not have a sealed fate?

Nick1962 2012-04-06 17:02:15 -0500 Report

Now I don’t think I agree with that 100%. Just yesterday I was reading in the latest AARP magazine, an article stating that cancer survivorship has quadrupled since 1971 when Nixon signed the National Cancer Act. Article here
Breakthroughs, pioneer drugs, technology have been responsible for so much improvement in health, disease and cancer treatments. Back in ’73 I lost a younger sister to Leukemia. At the time the NMDP (National Marrow Donor Program) was still 13 years away, so marrow donors had to be matched one by one, and usually within the family or community. Now, if a transplant is needed, a match can be made in seconds, and a patient can have donor marrow that’s often less than 7 days old. Of the things that sealed my sisters fate that nearly 40 years ago, given the same prognosis today, she stands a much better chance at surviving.
Genetic predisposition isn’t always black and white either. Things aren’t always passed “at full strength” and depending on one’s health and lifestyle, sometimes not at all. Heck, if genetic predisposition was any type of indicator at all, my wife and I shouldn’t have bought that new car, because neither of us will live to pay it off, judging by our family histories.
As it relates to diabetes (just to bring it back to the topic of the thread), just think, this diet you, I, Bamberg, Carol, and James all share wasn’t around in 1980, the ADA isn’t pushing it, and the person who showed me this plan never said anything about it even affecting diabetes, but it’s helping us. It’s true that “we shall see” if it is long term, but could it quite possibly be that we’re the pioneers here?

jigsaw 2012-04-06 19:14:17 -0500 Report

A very informative link! I found it quite interesting because I lost my father and sister to different types of cancer. I have had a couple of scares myself, but so far things turned out ok. So I learned a few interesting points.
I'm not sure exactly what it is that you don't agree with 100%. If you read both of my prior posts, I said that genetics do play a (ROLE) in determining our fate. On the other hand I don't believe that genetics alone determine our fate. Two completely different statements. So I'm saying in other words that genes are part of the ingredients, but certainly not the only factor. If you don't agree, then we can have an interesting debate!
I really gained a few very valuable points from your link. Thanks!

I also have some interesting info to share about how I cut my meds, and managed to get my bg under control. Maybe the Kidney cancer discovery with Actos was a blessing in diguise. That will be another discussion!

Nick1962 2012-04-06 20:23:31 -0500 Report

Jigsaw buddy, a debate with you is welcomed and enjoyable. I wish we could sit down with a nice cigar and glass of congiac. What I don't agree with 100%, and I may have misinterpreted your post, is that being diagnosed with a cancer or disease today means you'll suffer the same fate as someone with the same diagnosis even 20 years ago.

jigsaw 2012-04-06 21:23:05 -0500 Report

I think we agree on all points mentioned! Obviously, cures and treatments are continually being discovered for various types of cancer. So I agree that this changes the outcome for some. Not sure if possibly I was not clear, or if you simply misinterpreted, but we obviously are in agreement, on the mentioned issue! So break out the bottle, here's to agreeing!!! You too Carol, get your glass, bottoms up!

Nick1962 2012-04-06 19:53:36 -0500 Report

Well, I may be overly optimistic, but when I consider I carry on a single chip the size of my baby finger nail 4,554,752 times the computing power Apollo 11 used to reach the moon, I can't help but think things will improve.
From what I can see, diabetes education has been pretty consistent over the years, and it's always been up to the individual to discover how to properly control it (for T2's). I know many on Atkins for weight loss, and have a few Paleo following friends for health and "ecological" reasons. Even on other sites, I don't see discussions such as ours regarding diets, which for us seems to be the one big factor in control. I do really think we might be on to something here.

Caroltoo 2012-04-06 20:02:28 -0500 Report

So true! I would like to believe it could also work for others. It seems like too many of us have arrived at a similar position though coming over different routes for it to not be real.

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 19:42:39 -0500 Report

Al, Sure they do. Go back a few posts here and you will see what I was saying was that I was glad your mother's genetics hadn't apparently sealed your fate meaning that you apparently did not inherit her cardiovascular issues.

jigsaw 2012-04-05 19:56:40 -0500 Report

Thankyou, I like that!!! Now about the big hairy spider, did he ever come back? Just kidding, I know it's a different discussion! (-;

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 19:59:03 -0500 Report

No, either the Raid killed him later or he learned not to tangle with odd two legged critter living in the house. Never saw him again! Did meet another one in a different location, but it was outdoors and not a problem cause it ran…actually was being chased by a mongoose.

Caroltoo 2012-04-05 21:44:52 -0500 Report

There are no snakes in Hawaii. Don't recall which critter they were imported to chase, but he found something that looked like his lunch.

jigsaw 2012-04-04 05:28:35 -0500 Report

I'm terribly sorry to hear that! I'm sure she lives on within your heart and remains with you in spirit. I hope you have found the inner strength, necessary to live your life in a comfortable manner.

jigsaw 2012-04-04 20:07:22 -0500 Report

Having children is a wonderful blessing! You are very lucky and blessed to have them, I'm sure.

Bamberg 2012-04-07 17:38:47 -0500 Report

I was following the discussion above. When my wife was first diagnosed her prognosis was 2 years. Advances came so quickly that she lasted 10 years. People are living longer with cancer.Progress is being made.

jigsaw 2012-04-07 21:21:35 -0500 Report

Let me clarify my point! My point was that genetics play a role in our fate! I also stated that genetics by themselves do not determine our fate. I used an example of pancreatic cancer in an attempt to make this point. The point of my conversation was not about cancer or whether there were advances in medicine that could or will cure it. That would be a totally different subject!

jigsaw 2012-04-07 17:56:12 -0500 Report

Absolutely, I personally know people that have been cured of cancers that were considered deadly only a few years ago. My father outlived his prognoses by years also. Did you interpret my post to say otherwise also. I hope not. I guess my example of pancreatic cancer is what through Nick.

Caroltoo 2012-04-07 17:53:49 -0500 Report

That is encouraging to hear. My hubby has has prostate cancer for over 7 years. They don't call it in remission but his PSA is .014, so it's surely not very active either. Stats say that cancer is something a large number of us will face. Knowing there is progress is encouraging.

Knowing what Wayne says to me about being "ready" to die and yet not wanting to leave me, colors my perspective, but I really am convinced that for some at least there is an element of personal determination to remain that keeps our loved ones here sometimes beyond medical expectations.

Bamberg 2012-04-07 18:24:35 -0500 Report

Carol, I couldn't agree more. My wife was very religious. She wasn't afraid to die. She just didn't want to leave us.

Next Discussion: Chocolate Math »