Name change and misdiagnosis issue

So, I was dx’d back in 1983 a couple of weeks after turning 28. I was pretty shocked. I had the standard reaction: “I thought only kids got that!” But onset had been rapid over the course of maybe six weeks tops, had all the acute symptoms. The doc said “Probably your wife wouldn’t have been able to wake you up tomorrow morning,” and went on to explain that current science indicated age of onset wasn’t seen as a determining factor anymore because of cases like mine. In fact, they were changing the whole terminology to reflect that fact. Soon it would be called “type 1” or “type 2,” precisely to eliminate that confusion. But it hadn’t been made official yet, so it went into my chart as “diabetes mellitus, juvenile type.”

For a long time I had no idea how lucky I was to be correctly diagnosed. It was only decades later, with the onset of the Diabetic Online Community, that I started encountering many, many people who had been and were still being diagnosed Type 2 merely on the basis of age of onset, and mis-treated for extended periods because “You’re too old to have ‘type 1.’” Pause to reflect on the irony of that all-too common statement.

And this is still going on.

I couldn’t find a better category for this post, but I only recently came upon the fact of the JDRF’s re-branding, and I’m needing to register my disappointment at what I was hoping to see and didn’t, and what a missed opportunity this seems to me to be.

Because misdiagnosis due to age of onset is a medical problem, not just a public-relations one. I help run a popular diabetes website and I have a direct window onto the fact that people are still being misdiagnosed on the basis of YTOTHT1. So I approached this new site with some hope of seeing evidence of action to go along with the (gotta say, really belated) recognition that the old name didn’t reflect medical/scientific reality. The JDRF was and is an important and venerable institution, but that very success has been partly responsible for embedding the old “juvenile” association so deeply in the popular—and medical—mindset that the misperception lives on as a kind of zombie fact. It’s depressing to see so many patients over so many years telling appalling stories about undergoing misdiagnosis, and seeing so little—if ANY—awareness on the part of the medical or institutional community that this is anything they need to DO anything about. And the really insane thing is that it would only take some small practical steps to change this. In other countries–Spain for instance–antibody and c-peptide testing is a routine part of diagnosis for adults presenting with symptoms of diabetes. “Well but tests are expensive” the insurers say. Sure. So is going for months, even years, with the wrong diagnosis and a treatment regimen that doesn’t address the actual condition. People getting scolded for being “Noncompliant” when metformin, diet n exercise isn’t producing any results. “You’re just not working hard enough at it!”

Speaking as one dx’d as an adult, I am grateful to see that that experience has more space here. But I have looked in vain for any initiatives or advocacy around changing behavior of the medical profession to reflect the issue the terminology change was instituted to address, some 40 years ago. The JDRF’s rebranding seems like an incredible opportunity to draw attention to that issue and push for change in diagnostic practice to correct it. 40 years ago I was told “Don’t worry, we think a cure is just five years off.” Still waiting on that one—hey, it’s a hard nut to crack. But there’s no excuse for the misdiagnosis issue to still be with us that same length of time later. Seems like Breakthrough (née JDRF) could be using the opportunity of their branding change to take a stronger, more direct role in changing behavior, not just nomenclature, than I’ve seen here. If I am missing something I would be gratified to be corrected.

Hi @DrBB . I am not qualified to speak on behalf of the Foundation, but wanted to point out that there is some discussion about the various types of diabetes embedded in discussions. It’s not what you are looking for but change is gradual and the recognition that there are several different types may be just the start. Perhaps the @adadmission site designers might consider creating a category called “Diabetes Types” at some point?

Type 2, which is usually caused by certain lifestyles usually follows in families because of habits, eating choices, etc. are developed by imitation. Also, MODY Diabetes which is neither TypeOne nor Type 2 diabetes but rather caused by an inherited gene pattern is passed from generation to generation; i.e., inherited.
[/quote]

1 Like

@DrBB Welcome William to this Community Forum dedicated to those living with Autoimmune Diabetes, and those persons affected by diabetes. All people are welcome here and living with diabetes - regardless of name, is not required.

Since my diagnosis in 1950 my “type” diabetes has not changed, it was autoimmune then and it continues to be autoimmune diabetes to this day - BUT, the familiar or “press name” has changed several times - I’ve lost count of the names.**** Who cares what a condition is called as long as we manage our condition effectively and live a full life. When this Community Forum was launched near the begging of the century, it was called JuveNation.

The real issue brought up is not a naming issue but rather an education issue. Yes, education of Medical Professionals - doctors. It isn’t always easy to identify the source of a patients apparent DM condition - symptoms alone don’t always tell us, and most certainly diagnosis should not be based on date of birth.

I am going to tag @Pookiemom Kristin on this one because she might be able to share the messaging that BreakthroughT1D is doing with clinicians, researchers, companies and governments that we the patients wouldn’t be seeing. Or possibly invite one of the other Directors to join us to talk about BreakthroughT1D’s work with clinicians on reducing misdiagnoses?

2 Likes

That would be super helpful, thanks. Like I say I help administer one D forum and participate on several others where misdiagnosis based on age of onset is a frequent and persistent part of people’s stories. Over the years I have seen many individuals trying to bring attention to the problem but no concerted effort on the side of high-profile organizations who can swing more weight about this kind of thing. The JDRF brand change made me hopeful I might find something along those lines here that I could bring back to some of the communities I participate with.

I’m sorry if I sounded a little strident but this has been such a prominent and consistent topic among patients in the DOC for so long without making the leap to a change in standards of care that there’s a lot of frustration around it. To my mind it seems relatively simple: just make a c-pep test routine for adult patients presenting with diabetes symptoms. Are these tests so expensive as to preclude this being a standard-of-care norm? Like many, I had to get one to “prove” I was T1 when I went on Medicare a couple years ago. I can speculate as to the reasons this isn’t the routine but I would love to hear from someone on the medical side of the question.

Thanks to all for your responses!

Chris @spdif, William @DrBB, two very handy locations where BreakthroughT2D publishes and lists studies which it funds as well as other Breakthrough projects are available right from here:

  • Tap on the Home Icon, top left and you will be led to the principal home page. There look at the Research section for detailed information.
  • While at the Home Page, register your email address to receive current information. One regular email sent me is “pipeline” which provides me with brief description of research projects and invitations to participate in studies.

I don’t know about either of you, but personally I have benefitted greatly by participating in diabetes research - I dare say that four of the “successful studies” in which I participated have benefitted you and a majority of the Members in this Community.

1 Like

Hi @DrBB and thank you for the post–and the great conversation that it has sparked. The move to Breakthrough T1D does of course recognize that the “juvenile” designation is not accurate and has not helped people who are diagnosed as adults find the resources they need. And you are correct that the misnomer has contributed to the knowledge barrier and creates confusion. Early detection through autoantibody screening is a tremendous focus for Breakthrough T1D for both the general public and healthcare professionals. Stay tuned as more resources come forward.

2 Likes