Introducing our smart contact lens project (for diabetics) • Hacker News Board

Re: Introducing our smart contact lens project (for diabetics)

#181

Post by bigtunacan » Sat, Jan 18, 2014, 10:59 PM UTC

Someone wrote: post #175

bigtunacan wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your last point listed here is such a big deal too. It shouldn't matter if these things are 100% effective; they need to be released and patients need to be informed that manual testing still needs to be done. If for no other reason than to help reduce the number of type 1 diabetics who die in their sleep from low blood sugars. For anyone here not familiar with this phenomenon; it is referred to as "Dead in Bed Syndr…

I found that 6% unbelievably high. A check confirms that. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10097898 : "It appears that such deaths occur in 6% of all deaths in diabetic patients below age 40 years." So, it's not that 6% of diabetics will die in their sleep before they are 40, but of those that die before they are 40, 6% die I their sleep. That makes the risk per hour of dying in your sleep about a tenth of that of…

Thanks for the link. I've seen the statistic listed several other places and it was shown as 6% of type 1 diabetics under age 40.

The importance of someway to reliably provide continuous monitoring of BGLs is still critical and could help prevent a lot of deaths as well as contribute to the overall well being of diabetics.

Re: Introducing our smart contact lens project (for diabetics)

#182

Post by BrandonMarc » Sun, Jan 19, 2014, 6:09 AM UTC

berkes wrote: post #142

mortov wrote: post #137

I'm amazed at how many people on HN are diabetic ! Could be an interesting study on cause/effect - is all this sitting at screens contributing to an epidemic or are there other factors ? Perhaps respondents are just self-selecting because of the subject matter ? It's also interesting how anyone who needs to track their blood sugars likes the idea of an easier and more convenient method - typical finger prick readings…

Please don't confuse Type I with Type II. Type II is caused by external influences, such as unhealty life-style, old age, or other medical conditions (which include genetic defects or other genetic variations). Type I is genetic. If you have the faulty genes, you get it. Regardless of lifestyle, health, country and whatnot. Another thing many people are confused with, is "severety of Diabetes". You can have "very sev…

I understand what you mean about terminology and different names. My wife has auto-immune hepatitis. I mention that to people, and too often they then ask me, "So hep-A or hep-C?" It's like the first words AUTO-IMMUNE just fly right past because all they've ever heard of is a virus causing it.

... and completely ignoring the fact that "hepatitis" simply means liver inflammation, regardless of cause. So auto-immune hepatitis is totally accurate, and still, people think "virus" when they hear it.

Re: Introducing our smart contact lens project (for diabetics)

#183

Post by ShawnBird » Wed, Jan 22, 2014, 4:29 PM UTC

samstave wrote: post #116

ShawnBird wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really comes down to phrasing. If they had said "Have you tried a ketogenic diet?" Or "Some people have found a ketogenic diet to be helpful with type 1 diabetes." it would be fine. Instead it came off as an order or command: "Switch to a ketogenic diet." One of the things about written communication is we only have your phrasing and word choice to inform us of your tone and meaning. It is vitally important to use…

> "Instead it came off as an order or command: "Switch to a ketogenic diet."" What if I told you; It is up to you to be able to not ever take anything anyone else says as an " Order or Command "

I was just trying to explain how the comment could have been misunderstood. You seemed to put the burden of understanding upon the audience and I felt compelled to elucidate the source of many commentators 'needless emotions'.

Re: Introducing our smart contact lens project (for diabetics)

#184

Post by ShawnBird » Wed, Jan 22, 2014, 4:34 PM UTC

jemfinch wrote: post #161

ShawnBird wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really comes down to phrasing. If they had said "Have you tried a ketogenic diet?" Or "Some people have found a ketogenic diet to be helpful with type 1 diabetes." it would be fine. Instead it came off as an order or command: "Switch to a ketogenic diet." One of the things about written communication is we only have your phrasing and word choice to inform us of your tone and meaning. It is vitally important to use…

From Paul Graham's "How to Disagree"[0]: DH2. Responding to Tone. The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer. The lowest form of these is to disagree with the author's tone. E.g. I can't believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion. Though better than attacking the author, this is still a weak form of disagreement. It matters much more whether the…

I wasn't disagreeing with the statement about the ketogenic diet, I was disagreeing with this statement:

"Sometimes statements are statements. People needlessly attach emotion to the written word when there is no need."

In my disagreement I explained how the author has an imperative to make sure they are understood and, since we only have the words that they posted to go on, it is important that they are clear in their wording.

Secondly, I am not responding to their tone but the clarity of their statement. It is a completely different argument.