Joined
·
181 Posts
First, should 'Prediabetes' be a hyphenated word, like Pre-diabetes? Either way, the wavy red underline comes up, for the full word in the non-hyphenated case and only for the 'Pre' part in the hyphenated case, showing there is something wrong with the spelling whether the hyphen is there or not. Regardless, I am forging ahead without the hyphen (as with comma and other punctuation marks, my policy is to do away with the hyphen when in doubt.)
Now, let me come to the crux of the matter. I just found that Janet Ruhl (well known as Jenny of Blood Sugar 101) has recently written a nice article on Prediabetes. She appears to say that all prediabetics need not, and will not, proceed to become full blown diabetics. But those who have the defective gene will. She also seems to say that although it has been claimed that one third of the US population has prediabetes, the alarmist prediction that all these people will eventually become full blown diabetics is baseless. Full blown diabetics will remain 9% of the population in the foreseeable future as they always were in the past, she says if I understood her correctly. Read on, the article is interesting.
Regards,
Rad
Now, let me come to the crux of the matter. I just found that Janet Ruhl (well known as Jenny of Blood Sugar 101) has recently written a nice article on Prediabetes. She appears to say that all prediabetics need not, and will not, proceed to become full blown diabetics. But those who have the defective gene will. She also seems to say that although it has been claimed that one third of the US population has prediabetes, the alarmist prediction that all these people will eventually become full blown diabetics is baseless. Full blown diabetics will remain 9% of the population in the foreseeable future as they always were in the past, she says if I understood her correctly. Read on, the article is interesting.
Regards,
Rad