The Media Accurately Portrays Diabetes? Say It Ain't So....
Well, I suppose the reason the New York Times provides accurate information about diabetes is because that's what the article is about.
I received two emails about this NYT article just today, one from Moira McCarthy Stanford (one of JDRF's best super mom advocates) and a friend in Eugene.
Go read the article and then come back to read my review:
Beyond "I'm a Diabetic," Little Common Ground
I loved this article because it discusses the difference in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes- discussing who gets it and why, and the differences in lifestyle. It also goes over some of the similarities between the two diseases and why both need funding. But most importantly, in my opinion, it points out the Type 1s are often mistaken for having Type 2 - which has been a heated topic of debate for, well, ever.
The quotes are brilliant and some really hit the head on the main point of contention for people living with both types of diabetes.
My favorite line: "The confusion between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes exists despite the fact that, as a matter of science, the diseases are quite distinct."
Hallelujah, somebody finally wrote it down and published it in an place where more than 5 people will actually read it!
I also thought they did a good job of making sure to present both diseases as serious problems, because it's true. Type 2 diabetes isn't a walk in the park, and I'm glad Howard Steinburg (producer of dLife and a Type 1 himself) points this out.
They also bring up a new debate of which deserves more funding: type 1 or type 2? There are more Type 2, but Type 1 may (or may not) be cured earlier. It also mentions that some people with Type 2 have similar qualities to Type 1s, which has sparked that whole Type 1 1/2 phenomenon.
Edit: Just to be clear, I am so not advocating the decrease of Type 1 funding. We've worked hard enough to get the funding we have! However, I have always been a little wary of this "one-upping" when it comes to the necessity of disease funding. ALL diseases need to be funded, and the fact we have "other" priorites (::cough::Iraq::cough::) irriates the H-E-double-hockey-sticks out of me. I just don't want anyone to get the crazy idea I'm anti-Type 1 cure funding...
For a piece of journalistic work, this is fabulous. Not perfect, obviously. There are still a few factual errors and assumptions made. But the overall tone and message of the story, I thought, was good. The only thing that really bugged me is the fact they kept writing "juvenile diabetes foundation" instead of the title "Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation." Is capitalization and that one extra word really so difficult? Ok, I suppose I shouldn't complain, but still... This is the New York Times, you should at least have the freaking organization's name correct. Ah well, at least they had it right in the beginning.
(Oh, and it should be noted that this was part 2 in a 2-part series. Yesterday's was an article about the falling budget despite the rise in diabetes cases.)
I received two emails about this NYT article just today, one from Moira McCarthy Stanford (one of JDRF's best super mom advocates) and a friend in Eugene.
Go read the article and then come back to read my review:
Beyond "I'm a Diabetic," Little Common Ground
I loved this article because it discusses the difference in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes- discussing who gets it and why, and the differences in lifestyle. It also goes over some of the similarities between the two diseases and why both need funding. But most importantly, in my opinion, it points out the Type 1s are often mistaken for having Type 2 - which has been a heated topic of debate for, well, ever.
The quotes are brilliant and some really hit the head on the main point of contention for people living with both types of diabetes.
My favorite line: "The confusion between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes exists despite the fact that, as a matter of science, the diseases are quite distinct."
Hallelujah, somebody finally wrote it down and published it in an place where more than 5 people will actually read it!
I also thought they did a good job of making sure to present both diseases as serious problems, because it's true. Type 2 diabetes isn't a walk in the park, and I'm glad Howard Steinburg (producer of dLife and a Type 1 himself) points this out.
They also bring up a new debate of which deserves more funding: type 1 or type 2? There are more Type 2, but Type 1 may (or may not) be cured earlier. It also mentions that some people with Type 2 have similar qualities to Type 1s, which has sparked that whole Type 1 1/2 phenomenon.
Edit: Just to be clear, I am so not advocating the decrease of Type 1 funding. We've worked hard enough to get the funding we have! However, I have always been a little wary of this "one-upping" when it comes to the necessity of disease funding. ALL diseases need to be funded, and the fact we have "other" priorites (::cough::Iraq::cough::) irriates the H-E-double-hockey-sticks out of me. I just don't want anyone to get the crazy idea I'm anti-Type 1 cure funding...
For a piece of journalistic work, this is fabulous. Not perfect, obviously. There are still a few factual errors and assumptions made. But the overall tone and message of the story, I thought, was good. The only thing that really bugged me is the fact they kept writing "juvenile diabetes foundation" instead of the title "Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation." Is capitalization and that one extra word really so difficult? Ok, I suppose I shouldn't complain, but still... This is the New York Times, you should at least have the freaking organization's name correct. Ah well, at least they had it right in the beginning.
(Oh, and it should be noted that this was part 2 in a 2-part series. Yesterday's was an article about the falling budget despite the rise in diabetes cases.)
posted by Allison at 2:46 PM
4 Comments:
Well, it's good to see that they got the really important stuff right. Still, blowing JDRF seems rediculous for a publication of that stature.
Allison, your gift arrived today. Thanks so much! I can't wait to read it.
I liked the article as well for the same reasons you mentioned. High time it gets placed somewhere people will read.
I am gonna print that out and send that to my friends and family. That is a really good article. Thanks for sharing!
I wonder if Lauren Stanford got the diabetes from her mom Moria Mcacarthy stanford who is morbidly obese. Obesity is a cause of diabetes.
Post a Comment
<< Home