Report: Treating depression extends life for older people with diabetes
I just read a report from The Well on the New York Times that covers a recent study which shows that treating depression in older patients with diabetes may prolong their lives.Suprisingly "the researchers found that treatment of depression did not influence death rates among the otherwise healthy patients. But death rates among the diabetic patients were affected: the group who had received care from case managers were half as likely to die as those who had received less intensive care...". It's an important finding that taking care of depression can both improve the lives of people with diabetes and help them to live longer.
One thing that bothers me about this investigation, which was also reported on MedPage Today, is that it's not clear which type of diabetes is being talked about.
Are these older patients with Type 2 diabetes, or patients with Type 1 diabetes who are now older? To me, this is a really important distinction. I find it shocking that the reports that I read on this research don't bother to point this out.
I don't know whether to blame the authors of the original research, or just sloppy reporting on the part of the New York Times and others. To me all parties are equally responsible.
I do hope that journalists soon start to realize that Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes are completely different diseases and that what helps or affects one group may be of little use to another.
posted by Bernard @ 9:24 PM
3 Comments:
I think after a certain point in life (somewhere between 55-65), there wouldn't be a need for distinction.
1. Older people have more depression anyways.
2. By the time the distinction is made (assuming age 65), most people have been living with either type for long enough for it to make an impact on their lives. (Ok, so maybe type 2's haven't known it THAT long, but their bodies have known it.)
This is the one of the main reasons I regularly try to cite the actual scientific or medical journal in which the studies are published, largely because there is no substitution for the facts. I try to not to rely on the mass media to make such a distinction because after more than 80 years of reporting, they have proven themselves to be incapable of doing so on a consistent basis.
It is my # 1 diabetes pet peve (sp)that journalists, both in print and on television don't differentiate between type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.
As someone who has been a Type 1 for the past 30 years and who worked for both a magazine and Newspaper after I graduated college, it amazes me that journalists just refuse to acknowledge the difference between the two when they do their research.
Bernard - This is my first time on your blog and I think it's great!
I'm really glad I took the time to check it out!!
Kelly Kunik
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home