Lawyer Says Janklow Had Diabetic Reaction [ABC News]

[truthisfreedom]

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20031202_312.html

Lawyer Says Janklow Had Diabetic Reaction

Defense Lawyer Says Rep. Janklow Suffered Diabetic Reaction As Manslaughter Case Begins

The Associated Press

FLANDREAU, S.D. Dec. 2 — U.S. Rep Bill Janklow suffered a diabetic reaction and didn't see a stop sign at an intersection, a defense lawyer said Monday as Janklow's trial on a manslaughter charge began.

But deputy Moody County prosecutor, Roger Ellyson, said the evidence will show Janklow knowingly sped when he went through a stop sign near Trent on Aug. 16, which put his car in the path of a motorcycle driven by Randy Scott, 55, of Hardwick, Minn.

"Randy Scott was killed that Saturday afternoon as the result of Bill Janklow blowing through that blind intersection at approximately 71 mph," Ellyson told jurors in opening statements. "All because of the reckless disregard. All because of that important person driving that important-looking Cadillac."

<snip>
Circuit Judge Rodney Steele has said the case likely will take five to seven days.

Ellyson told jurors the state's witnesses will include a woman who said Janklow passed her a few miles before the accident. He went by her "as if she was standing still," Ellyson said.
He said other witnesses include law enforcement officers who said Janklow told them at the accident scene that he had to swerve to avoid a vehicle and that's why he "goosed it" through the intersection.

<snip>

If convicted of the manslaughter charge, a felony, the maximum punishment is 10 years in prison. It would also prompt the House ethics committee to investigate.

The committee's rules say representatives who plead guilty or are convicted of a crime that carries two or more years in prison should refrain from voting or taking part in committee meetings in the chamber until his or her record is cleared or until re-elected.

[General Discontent]

1. I'm absolutely shocked!

Because I thought all along that it was massive sunspot activity that created a harmonic convergence inside Janklow's vehicle, which of course would have temporarily blinded him hence causing the accident. Thank God we have finally gotten to the truth. The diabetic reaction explains absolutley everthing..... It just makes sense. :dunce:







D Wolfman

[rfranklin]

2. And it started in 1993...

when Janklow was first spotted going 93mph in a school zone.

[izzie]

3. This poor man has been treated badly

How could we have even got this in our heads.It has to be the deads my fault for being in front of the car.:silly: :silly: :silly:

[progressiverealist]

41. how much you wanna bet he SKATES?

He is, after all, a Republican. Republicans are responsible for everything good, but nothing bad. It was Clinton's dick that caused that accident!

[kayleybeth]

4. Oh, how I would LOVE

to sit on that jury. Too bad I don't live in S.D.

[Rowdyboy]

5. I think it was Hillary's fault....

Either that, or he was caught up worrying about Clinton's penis. And if Democrats hadn't filibustered so many fine judges it never would have happened. Thank God our president is fighting terrorism in Iraq so that we won't be distracted by mere manslaughter.

[ze_dscherman]

6. This could be a plausible defense

If Janklow were a diabetic under the influence of glucose lowering medication, especially insuline, hypoglucosis could well be a reason for his behaviour.

If a diabietic does not perceive the usual warning symptoms of low glucose levels (as it may happen quite often, e.g. under stress), he may react sluggish, think incoherently, act agressively or in panic. In bad cases, this condition may lead to complete loss of control, coma or even death. The brain just needs a certain level of blood sugar to function properly!

This will *not* happen with untreated diabetes. As well, it will be impossible to prove in retrospect that such a condition has occurred, unless a blood sample directly taken after the incident still exists or has been tested for glucose levels.

[kayleybeth]

9. I might buy that if this was his first offense

but Janklow has a looooooooong history of speeding and driving recklessly. I think he's gotten something like 16 speeding tickets in the last several years. He's an habitual offender. If I was on the jury I'd give him the max, regardless of his political affiliation.

[Maeve]

17. He admitted in public that when he drives, he speeds

It's frickin' on tape. Maybe his record can't be taken in as evidence, but that tape should be.

[dflprincess]

49. And it's not the first time he blew through this particular stop sign

I believe the prosecution has a witness who was nearly creamed by him at the same place a while ago.

Perhaps there's something in the air around that intersection that causes blood sugar to take sudden dives.

[LiberalFighter]

100. Even without prior record

Ellyson told jurors the state's witnesses will include a woman who said Janklow passed her a few miles before the accident. He went by her "as if she was standing still," Ellyson said.

Would a diabetic person speed irratically or smoothly by that person?
How long would their reaction last?

[sendero]

10. My wife...

... is a type I diabetes sufferer. I've seen low sugar firsthand many times. There is NO WAY this defense would fly with me, period, or anyone else who knows jack squat about diabetes.

[teryang]

19. I wouldn't say no way but

...according to the testimony of this witness he was lucid at the time and making excuses. Doens't sound like a diabetic reaction to me and I've seen quite a few in my family also.

[LiberalFighter]

101. Then it is up to the prosecutor to make it stick

If he doesn't then it was fixed.

It is strange though that the venue wasn't change to a different county instead of Janklow's hometown.

[diamond14]

29. your wife deserves better....there are good diabetic training

programs that could help you get a grip on your feelings...

[sendero]

37. my wife is happy...

.... but I hear yours isn't.

[mzmolly]

97. My Husband...

is also type 1, and this is a valid 'excuse' if you will. I myself have witnessed 'several' reactions, and I know there is no way a person can and should drive during one. Granted one should take precautions, but there are exceptions. Insulin absorbtion is vaslty different from day to day in many cases.

I don't know this mans history or the circumstances, but if he had an insulin reaction he may not know his own name. I know 'jack squat' and I know there is no way a diabetic can drive whilst having a reaction to diabetes. There are also many differences between diabetics.

However, judging from the fact that he appeared coherant *according to witnesses* after the fact, he may be full of mularky about being in the midst of a reaction.

I've seem my husband near death from a reaction to insulin, and it ain't pretty.

[fob]

50. He had an aide in the car with him. Is it not his responsibility

to tell his carmate that he's felling a little woozy and maybe he should drive instead?

What's that?

He's a Republican?

Oh, never mind then.


fob

[LiberalFighter]

99. So in that regards... Janklow can't prove that defense

[roguevalley]

102. Unfortunately for this retard, he has tape of himself joking about his

chronic speeding and there is a witness against him
that is going to tell how he nearly clipped her ENTIRE
family at the same intersection. I am sick that he's
using a legit defense for some people for his own. I
would like to know 'how long' he's 'had' diabetes.

[liberalnurse]

7. Diabetics should picket the court house.

Real diabetics have had to fight discrimination for work equality! He his lying and trashing diabetics for his own fat ass.

[diamond14]

34. use of 'diabetics' degrades by calling people a disease....

it is typical of nurses to be so nasty....

calling people 'diabetics' is simply calling them a disease...how about 'cancer-ics'? or 'allergics'?....

your use is both grammatically incorrect to use an adjective without a noun, and minimizes your patients by not even using a noun....

the proper terminology is to use "people with diabetes" (same idea behind the 'Americans with Disabilities' terminology)....diabetic diet, diabetic reaction, diabetic training program is OK, because it uses both an adjective and a noun....

calling people 'diabetics' is simply nasty... it degrades them by calling them a disease....they are people too...

[BiggJawn]

8. Bastard. I hope his wife makes him raise another man's child...

And attorneys wonder why so many people hold their profession in such low regard and contempt.

When I was active in the "Men's Movement", we had a saying, "Own Your Shit". In polite company that would be stated as "take responsibility for your own actions".Janklow is thinking only of watching his nice seat in the House, not what's right.

Guy has a big history of driving with a depleted uranium foot, and the come up with an excuse like this. I'd like to here more about this "diabetic reaction" that makes you put it to the floor and not see traffic signs.

I'm a diabetic, and *I* have never experienced anything like that. The worst thing I ever got hit with made me pull over and grab the glucose tabs out of the glove box...

[kutastha]

11. ...

Driving under the influence of meds that make you unable to drive a car properly is still driving under the influence of meds that make you unable to drive a car properly, even if it is insulin, or another hypoglycemic.

I've been Type 1 for 23 years and think this excuse is going to hurt him more than help him.

[schrodinger_I]

12. Bullshit!

<EOM>

[kutastha]

31. Why bullshit?

Can you expand on that a little more?

[LiberalFighter]

103. It is illegal

to drive when medication causes drowsiness or other conditions that impair driving. Even if it is prescribed by a doctor.

How about filing charges against any of the passengers that knew of his condition and failed to do anything?

[diamond14]

107. it is NOT illegal to 'drive with diabetes'....that is just a lie....

it is NOT illegal to 'drive while on insulin' or 'drive while on heart medication' and why not file charges against the doctor that signed the approval for his license and badly advised him about his insulin and care requirements?

here is link to the TRUTH about Diabetes and Drivers
http://www.diabetes.org/community/advocacy/drivers_discrim.jsp


FIGHT discrimination based on diabetes...
http://www.diabetes.org/community/advocacy/discrimination.jsp

[kutastha]

114. ...

S/he didn't say it was illegal to drive while on insulin. S/he said it was illegal to drive if the insulin interferes with your driving.

That's not a link to TRUTH about Diabetes and Drivers, it's a link to rules regarding bus driving and commercial vehicles.

[ze_dscherman]

15. Others may react different!

I'm a diabetic, too, and I can assure you that reactions may differ. I agree that usually the warning symptoms of hypoglucosis will make you grab for your glucose tabs.

However, under stress the symptoms may be neglected. A diabetic friend of a friend died this way by uncontrollably crashing his motorbike. However, he just had had an argument with his girlfriend.

I also recall the very dramatic hypoglucosis that happend to a friend. He was stumbling around uncoordinated in a garden, panicked and eventually ran away. We had to hold him with two people till the ambulance came. Although he was still conscious, we were not able to make him swallow glucosis, he even gnashed the glass with his teeth. This guy was not drugged, nor mentally unstable. Ony stupid enough to inject his insuline too early before breakfast.

My own experience (after taking insuline for almost 3 year now)is, that initially in some situations I happened to ignore hypoglucosis warning, reaching pretty low levels (<45 mg/dL) that would have seriously periled my driving capabilities. On the rare occasions I drive a car I always monitor my glucosis level very carefully and stay on the "safe" side of insuline intake, because I know my insuline tolerance varies wildly (I need only half as much insuline per carbohydrate in the afternoon, on bicycle tours even less than a quarter).

[ze_dscherman]

25. In addition: He still is responsible

I just didn't want to rule out hypoglucosis as cause of an accident. Still, he is responsible to what he does, especially if the defense is "he did not eat all day". That's not only stupid and dangerous, it's outright criminal behaviour just like DUI.

[diamond14]

32. nobody is responsible for suffering from a disability...if you

survive more years with the diabetes....it will become more apparent that diabetes doesn't get better, it only gets worse....

if you inject insulin thousands of times (which you must do to stay alive), you will find quite a varience in your skin...some parts of your injections sites may not absorb the insulin as well or too much...there is little you can do, as your skin/tissue becomes damaged....there is also 'diabetic neuropathy' (nerve damage) which sets in the longer you have the disease...

do not blame someone with diabetes for many years, who has clearly been able to funtion well for the most part....you claim to be already suffering reactions after only three years with the disease, why would you want to blame someone who also had reactions....

there are good diabetes counselors at most medical centers who help with both daily survival and the emotional needs of people with diabetes....they can help you understand the rage in your blame game...

[ze_dscherman]

48. Sorry, but

if you read my post, I cited several severe reactions on hypoglucosis, as well as the possibility one may have one without properly noticing it's onset. These could be extenuating circumstances.

Still, if one drives a car one is responsible to be physically able to do so - checking one's blood level is a matter of seconds only. Also, being on antidiabetic medication and NOT eating is playing with one's life and very irresponsible.

I won't blame him for suffering from diabetes, and not from having reactions to it. Happens to me as well. But living with a disease that's therapy might put my driving abilities in peril (and thus my life and that of others) forces me to be most cautious.

[dusty64]

13. I still can't figure out

how the "judge" ruled his prior driving record was immaterial to this case. I fear another example of our doublestandard "justice" in this country, one set of laws for the wealthy and rethuglicans and a MUCH harsher set for the rest of us. How long can this bullshit continue before EVERYONE sees our judicial system for the sham it is, and when they do what happens then?

[hayu_lol]

16. Seems to me that one of the 'great' planks of the Repugnant Party...

and echoed by Rush ad nauseum...was taking personal responsibility for the results of their own actions. Not one in the last 5 years has done this however. We know all the examples.

[Justice]

14. Digusting

How long has he had diabetes? Should he know better about eating/taking medicine? Wasn't he wrong to drive when he knew he was impaired? There were others in the car who could have driven for him.

Isn't like the drunk who drove - yes, he was impaired while driving but he took the drink and therefore he is guilty.

I also read that if he brings in this nonsense that the diabetes caused his impairment, then judge may well re-consider allowing the prosecution to bring in the past convictions/tickets.

[diamond14]

30. people do not 'choose' diabetes...while people do choose to drink

there is a BIG difference....

diabetes never gets better, it only gets worse...it is an incurable disease that KILLS over 200,000 Americans each year....

the longer someone suffers from diabetes, the harder it is to control the disease...diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage) often sets in and destroys the ability to recognize a medical emergency....

because diabetes is a serious disease...a person can do everything possible and STILL suffer medical emergencies (as noted by some people on this thread, claiming to have diabetes, they are all claiming to have seen reactions, or actually had reactions themselves)...despite all best efforts, a person with diabetes can still suffer reactions....it cannot be blamed on the person with the disability, any more than you would 'blame' someone born with spina bifida....

to blame people because they suffer from a disablity is nasty...and to compare people with disabilities to 'drunks' is really nasty....

ronald reagun took your same attitude when he fired all the air traffic controllers...it took years and lots of suffering to prove to America (in Federal courts) that reagun discriminated against people with disabilities...

[kutastha]

35. by the way

Although a precipitous drop in blood sugar can be more lethal than a comparable surge, long-term hyperglycemia, results in more deaths per year than does insulin shock. Indeed autonomic neuropathy may play a factor (though we don't know how long Janklow's had diabetes) but then he should have taken precautions before he got behind the wheel of a car.

Diabetes may not be a choice, but unlike spina bifida, it's controllable. If his condition was so severe that it would impair his ability to drive, then that ability should quite possibly be monitored.

Furthermore, if he isn't able to control his blood sugar well enough to avoid such an incident, then perhaps he and his physician should have worked together to get it under control before he drove.

Personally, I always check myself before I drive. It's not worth the risk. This man's using this as an excuse is atrocious.

[diamond14]

40. you have no choice whether you get diabetes, or spina bifida, or

any other disability...

the level of control depends on each individual medical circumstances....and nobody has a right to judge that by writing 'if, if, if....', not even allowing that this may not be any excuse, but simply a statement of fact...

in the Air Traffic Control case, where ronald reaguns FIRED all people with diabetes...your approach was DENIED and all people with diabetes were re-instated to their positions....it took many years and lots of suffering to prove in Federal Courts that reagun discriminated...and I am suddened that you will throw all that out so fast, when it benefits you by allowing you to work.....


why don't you wait until the facts come out in court, before passing such nasty judgements? There are many good diabetes programs that are designed to help your realize "diabetes is not your fault", and help you deal with those who falsely impressed that on you, and deal with your feelings...

[kutastha]

44. ...

I didn't say you didn't have a choice, I said that you can control diabetes. You can't control a meningomyleocele.

Additionally, you find it a valid excuse right off the bat even though you yourself don't know the facts of the case.

Where am I being nasty? It is not his repsonsibilty to take care of himself? If not, who's responsibile for his condition?

I've had this disease for 23 years and I don't feel sorry for myself like you seem to think I should. My last HbA1C was 5.8%. I have perfect eyes, kidneys, blood pressure and whatnot. I'm in medical school, work with the local ADA and I see diabetics every day. The ones that have the complications are the ones that do not take care of themselves. Janklow was not taking care of himself and someone is dead. All it would have taken was a 5 second blood test and that man might be alive today.

In your posts you admire diabetics for responsibility, but at the same time seem so permissive about Janklow's incident.

[diamond14]

53. insulins were filthy dirty and not human chemical structures all the

way up until about 1985....older people injecting insulin for many years used those old 'beef or pork mixures' scraped up off the rendering plant floor, and marginally purfied by today's standards, in addition, those chemical structure were very different from human insulins...these people's circulatory systems were severely affected, nerve damage (so they cannot feel an insulin reaction), kidney/liver damage from non-human chemical structures going through the de-tox organs....

nobody should hold these people responsible for their own care, when there were no blood testing strips until about 1982, and even those where inaccurate, and even their own medical caregivers may well have failed...and insulin reactions can happen (as noted by people with diabetes all over this thread) despite people's meticulous care and recombinant DNA insulins, and blood testing devices....shit happens....many times it's their medicare givers fault !!!!!


I object majorly to your admitted stealing, while using diabetes as an excuse...THAT is criminal, and hurts all people with diabetes....suffering an insulin reaction while driving a car is not criminal and may well be beyond the person's control...everyday there are people in America suffering strokes, heart attacks and other medical episodes while driving and NOBODY blames them....except here on this thread, where many people say very nasty things about people with diabetes....

[Lurking Dem]

59. I would like to point out here

having had diabetes for 27+ years, that "human" insulin is probably more responsible for hypoglycemic unawareness than previous damage from "dirty" animal insulins.

The action curves are different and they actually had to change the patient insert after people started crashing their cars to include "mental confusion" as an initial low blood sugar symptom. Wow. THAT'S helpful of 'em!

Human insulins were rushed through the FDA process at record pace (I think it was 3 months) while George HW Bush was, I believe, still on the board at Lilly. Class action suits were filed in England when patients started dying. 2 separate suits were kicked out of court in the US by Bush The Elder judges. There are now ugly incidents with FDA and people trying to import Beef insulin from England because they can't even use human at all. The FDA (at Lilly's insistence) is making patients do this case by case each time they need to order and sometimes letting it rot on the dock while they haggle. They have tried numerous arguments against it and have now landed on "mad cow" as a reason. (Human insulins are grown in bovine gelatin!)

I am very grateful for human insulin as I am allergic to animal mixtures and spent the first half of my life blitzed on Benadryl with huge red welts wherever I had taken a shot. But other people need animal insulins and those should be available for those who need them or cannot afford the new analog insulins.

I react very weirdly now to insulin and have a variety of complications even though I mostly maintain "tight" control of my glucose. My blood sugar can change in the blink of an eye and one blood test does not give me the information I might need to be 100% safe. (One test only tells you where you ARE not whether it is rising or falling.) That said -

Where this clown's story gets fishy is this: He has too much memory of the day, the time frame immediately before the accident, and what happened immediately after the accident for me to conclude he was actually having an insulin reaction.

[diamond14]

63. nice points showing how 'reactions' are NOT the fault of the people

with diabetes in all cases...as you point out....'reactions' can be the fault of insulin manufacturers and government policies....I would also argue that 'reactions' are frequently the fault of medical caregivers spewing out incorrect advice to their patients, which is getting worse as a result of our collapsing medical care system....

you also clearly point out how horrible the disease is...that even with 'tight' control, you are suffering 'a variety of complications'....I am certain this is NOT your fault and I hope others here will begin to appreciate that insulin reactions should NEVER be blamed on people with diabetes....if not all the issues you raised here, there are also major emotional issues (as pointed out by the person on this thread writing about STEALING, and using diabetes as an excuse, and others exhibiting anger toward their relatives because diabetes takes time/effort/modifications)...

everyone with diabetes deserved a lot of credit for STAYING ALIVE EVERYDAY...it reflects great discipline, motivation and focus that should be admired rather than blamed.....

I don't know yet what the accident story actually is...and I will always hold that people are 'innocent until proven guilty'.....I hope that other DUers feel that way, but I am afraid that many are taking the asscroft approach of 'guilty until proven innocent'.....

[kutastha]

62. Do the math

I had diabetes back then, did Janklow? Does he even have Type 1?

In addition to being a "person with diabetes", I have a PhD in molecular biology and biochemistry, and now I'm in medical school. I can say I have a pretty good understanding of the history, etiology, pathophysiology and treatment of diabetes.

But I would like you to explain to the crowd how Janklow's blood sugar uncontrollably dipped and the situations that would account for it not being his responsibility.

And also let me know if you think he has a hard time getting medical supplies.

[kutastha]

65. Does have Type 1

Two days before the accident, Janklow told reporters he "can't be better" and was in "darn good health for a guy my age." He said he was swimming, moving boxes and doing yard work.

"I'm more active than I've been in a long, long period of time," Janklow said Aug. 14.

But in 1998 and 1999, Janklow suffered life-threatening health problems and was treated at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., for diverticulitis and an inflamed pancreas.

"I have no spleen, no pancreas, and I'm missing most of my colon," Janklow said in December 2001.

Because of that pancreas void, his body no longer produces insulin to regulate body sugar, so Janklow said he takes insulin daily to control the diabetes.

And that is one condition that can cause people to faint, even when they are operating a motor vehicle, according to experts on the disease.

"That's probably the main concern. Obviously, you don't want to black out when you're driving a car," Dr. Michael Bell, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners, said.

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2003/12/02/news/janklow/news919.txt

This guy's been on insulin for two years. He should have eaten that day, or knowing that he had not eaten, should have checked his sugar before getting behind the wheel, or even have the aide drive.

[diamond14]

68. and he may not have gotten good medical care, despite his

position or insurance....

there are many failures today by the medical caregivers in treating diabetes....as you clearly point out, there's an attitude of 'do it yourself' rather than provide proper treatment (blame, blame, he should of, he should have....remind me to stay away from any medical practice you open, since you admit being a thief who blames diabetes)....

with no spleen, no pancreas, and little left of his colon, he likely has other major medical issues, way beyond diabetes....seems like just metabolizing glucose is not his only serious medical issue...this man cannot properly digest food properly, which likely severely complicates the diabetic issues.....his metabolic system probably does not fit the standard model for treating diabetes, and his caregivers could well have misinformed him about insulin needs, eating abilities, and sugar absorbtion....but you love that blame game and likely don't belong in a caregiver position....


suffering diabetes for only two years may not have given him the experience that you have benefited from....

[DrBB]

71. If he's in that bad shape, he shouldn't f-ing drive

I don't know why I'm weighing in on this again, but what the hey.

When I was diagnosed with Type I, I was told in no uncertain terms that having an insulin reaction while driving would NOT be considered exculpatory for any accident so caused. And further it was impressed on me that driving responsibly was important for the sake of other diabetics--people with diabetes, if you like--because state legislatures were occasionally inclined to consider disqualifying us from driving. I have frequently asked my wife to drive when I had reason to doubt whether my sugars were dropping. Impaired colon as well as diabetic? And he didn't eat all day? Then drove anyway? Come ON. That is irresponsible by any measure. He had an aide who could presumably drive. If his story is true--IF--then he had no business getting behind the wheel.

Why are you working so hard to defend this twit? His actions reflect badly on all diabetics, as well as himself. I also question whether your ostensibly caring attitude doesn't tend to infantilize people with this disease. He may only have had the disease for 2 years, but he is--ahem--an ADULT and is responsible for knowing about his health and the possible consequences of his medication before getting behind the wheel.

[veganwitch]

74. can i scream your post from the rooftops??

green dot.

[kutastha]

82. ditto

there's no getting through. And this coming from a thief who needs counseling for his deep-seeded issues about being diabetic and who is completely unprepared to be a physician.

And I woke up feeling pretty good about myself today. Boy was I wrong!

[bmbmd]

87. Thanks for this post-but my question is

why does he have no pancreas? Does he mean no functional pancreas, or has he had a pancreatectomy? Most surgical pancreatectomies are done for pseudocyst, chronic pancreatitis, tumor, or abscess. A concomitant colon resection would lead one to consider diverticulits with abscess and phlegmon. Biliary tract disease is, of course, a possibility. Nevertheless, I can't help but recollect that the most common cause of pancreatectomy in this country is chronic alcoholic pancreatitis with pseudocyst formation. Hmmm.

The diabetes associated with pancreatic insufficiency is indeed a variant of Type I DM. Those patients will require insulin usage. Approxiamtely 95% of the pancreas' function must be absent to cause this type of DM. In general, I would agree that type I DM is not a choice, but in this instance, the lifestyle which led to chronic pancreatitis is a choice.

I would also point out that Type II diabetes is often, but certainly not always, a disease of excesses. Too much carbohydrate, too little exercise, too many calories. Many of my "diabetics" are overweight and unwilling or unable to comply with a vigorous regimen. We do the best we can with counselling, teaching, and medication-always encouraging a healthier lifestyle. Unfortunately, many of my co-DUers would regard that as "Medical provider failure". Smoking, obesity, excessive alcohol consumption, dangerous sexual behaviour, flaunting traffic laws-all my fault.

By the way-asking for a candy bar at the scene of the accident was a brilliant strategem.

[Lurking Dem]

90. Please see post #88

Yes, asking for a candy bar was genius, if it was in fact a ploy.

Given his history behind the wheel I'm inclined to think it was a ploy.

[kutastha]

93. Good analysis

and I was wondering about his affliction as well. Alcohol's more common in chronic pancreatitis than in acute, but as you mentioned, this guy's getting portions of his pancreas removed. I'm also wondering about the splenectomy though - cirrhosis maybe?

Hasn't it been mentioned Janklow has a propensity for EtOH?

[Lurking Dem]

83. As a for instance

and please keep in mind I'm not defending this man, merely keeping an open -ish mind...

I can have an insulin reaction AFTER I EAT. That's correct. One of the complications from long term diabetes I suffer from is gastroparesis. I can eat a meal and my insulin can hit before the food ever empties from my stomach. It makes it very hard to control post prandial blood glucose and I try to do what I can by using an insulin pump and square waving my food boluses. I am not always successful because it is a variable condition. I have no physical sensations of hunger. I will hear my stomach growl but experience no pangs. I get an appetite but appetite is mental, not physical. And that's my EASY complication.

I used to be an a patients' advocate for people with diabetes (I, personally, am not offended by the term "diabetic" but am sensitive to people who are) and ran a lobbying group on the Hill for diabetes cure/disease management issues. I heard every day from people of means, people with power, connected people, that they got diabetes from eating sugar or that once you had diabetes under control you had no worries. Diabetes education - of patients and the public at large is still dear to my heart. But lack of it transcends income lines or general education levels. Don't assume that because he is in an elevated position that he knows jack about self care. Too many people with diabetes don't know half of what they need to to survive.

[diamond14]

109. thanks for educatiing some of the mis-informed DUers...and the

accusations that the pancreas was removed due to alcoholism are coming from some claiming to be medical caregivers...it would certainly be horrifying to run into those caregivers in an emergency ward...so they just assumed alcoholism, when in J. case, it was an injury....or in my cousin's case, pancreatic cancer from Nickel exposure...or some get vinyl chloride exposure...if doctors diagnose by assumptions and not tests, and make a standard 'must be an alcoholic', it's no wonder the healthcare system is in such a mess today....

BTW, thanks for your patient advocate effort on the Hill..."Too many people with diabetes don't know half of what they need to to survive." and all the while, bush* cuts medical care, and enjoys the killing...right in front of All Americans...and they say nothing, nobody is outraged at all....

first they came for people with disabilities, and I said nothing, then they came for political advocates, and I said nothing, and then they came for me....and there was no one left to speak for me....

[kutastha]

116. I know I should ignore you, but this is too much

Where does it say Janklow's inflamed pancreas was from an injury?

A google search for "inflamed pancreas" (as used in the article) brings up this:

http://www.pancreatic-disorders.com/html/pancreatitis.php3

Acute pancreatitis affects over 80,000 people in the United States every year. Sixty to eighty percent of these cases can be traced to two causes: gallstones and alcohol damage

For most acute attacks, pain management with analgesics is all that is required. If infection causes the inflammation, treatment may include antibiotics. Surgery may be required to remove gallstones, drain obstructed bile ducts or remove fluid-filled cysts.

<snip>

Chronic pancreatitis is a series of recurring inflammatory attacks that gradually causes irreversible damage to the pancreas and surrounding tissue. Alcoholism is the primary cause of chronic inflammation: between seventy to eighty percent of cases can be traced to excessive, habitual alcohol consumption. Damage caused by alcoholism takes years to develop: most chronic pancreatitis symptoms don't appear until people are in their thirties or forties.

If damage to the gland is severe, enzyme supplements to aid digestion can be taken with meals. Surgical options include draining blocked ducts, and in advanced cases, removal of a portion of the gland.

<snip>

So, perhaps he has gall stones. But he could also be a chronic alcoholic, and IIRC, alcohol has been brought up with him before. A physician would take into account his history. Of course, we don't have all the information, and no one here diagnosed him as an alcoholic. But it is an interesting thing to consider.

By the way, your cousin didn't have pancreatitis, he had pancreatic cancer from nickel exposure.

[diamond14]

124. shows that ALL pancreases are NOT removed due to alcoholism

"Acute pancreatitis affects over 80,000 people in the United States every year. Sixty to eighty percent of these cases can be traced to two causes: gallstones and alcohol damage"

I never said that my cousin had pancreatitis...
that is another one of your lies (faux-news style lying)...

here is my exact remark

"in my cousin's case, pancreatic cancer from Nickel exposure "

yet you attacked me for something I never said...
-snips-

"I know I should ignore you, but this is too much....

....your cousin didn't have pancreatitis, he had pancreatic cancer from nickel exposure."

---------------------------
and I am very sad that you bragged about your stealing and lying...but there was nothing I could do to stop you...it must be a VERY important issue to YOU...if you hadn't raised it, I would never have known that you stole and lied and took advantage of kind and generous people, who thought you were having a life-threatening medical emergency while you stole from them....it is sad, and you could choose at any time to do something about it...but no one else can choose for you, it must come from your own desire, as you still write about your actions here, many years later...only you can decide to deal with that....I sincerely hope you make the right decision, so you never brag about those despicable actions again....

[Lurking Dem]

84. As a for instance

and please keep in mind I'm not defending this man, merely keeping an open -ish mind...

I can have an insulin reaction AFTER I EAT. That's correct. One of the complications from long term diabetes I suffer from is gastroparesis. I can eat a meal and my insulin can hit before the food ever empties from my stomach. It makes it very hard to control post prandial blood glucose and I try to do what I can by using an insulin pump and square waving my food boluses. I am not always successful because it is a variable condition. I have no physical sensations of hunger. I will hear my stomach growl but experience no pangs. I get an appetite but appetite is mental, not physical. And that's my EASY complication.

I used to be an a patients' advocate for people with diabetes (I, personally, am not offended by the term "diabetic" but am sensitive to people who are) and ran a lobbying group on the Hill for diabetes cure/disease management issues. I heard every day from people of means, people with power, connected people, that they got diabetes from eating sugar or that once you had diabetes under control you had no worries. Diabetes education - of patients and the public at large is still dear to my heart. But lack of it transcends income lines or general education levels. Don't assume that because he is in an elevated position that he knows jack about self care. Too many people with diabetes don't know half of what they need to to survive.

[LiberalFighter]

104. Prior convictions/tickets

Was he convicted for those? If so... why wasn't that defense used then? Or did he just recently become diabetic?

[TreasonousBastard]

18. Wait a minute!

Isn't this the same type of "sleazy" defense those law 'n order types complain about all the time?

Ox... Gored...

[DrBB]

20. Type I Diabetics unite! And WTF is a "diabetic reaction"

A. This is bullshit. I mean, not everyone reacts to insulin the same way (if it was insulin), but it is STILL your responsibility to use the stuff properly. I got Type I when I was 28, and it was made quite clear to me then that if I was in an accident caused by an insulin reaction it was still going to be my fault. The issue of whether insulin dependence should disqualify one from having a driver's license has been a live issue from time to time. This selfish crap does nothing to excuse Janklow, and does much to harm other diabetics of either type.

B. WTF is a "diabetic reaction"? There IS such a thing as an "insulin reaction"--just a term for having too much insulin in your system because you are managing it manually and it's hard to always get things right. It sounds to me like they're deliberately fudging the question whether he's on insulin or not. If he's Type II, the likelihood is that he is taking one of the oral medications, and as far as I know they do not carry the same risk of cataclysmic drop in blood sugar levels.

Janklow stopped for every other stop sign on his way from Aberdeen, Evans said. But Janklow did not see the one east of Trent because he had not eaten all day and had a diabetic reaction that can cause confusion, lethargy and fatigue, the lawyer said.

If he had REALLY "not eaten all day" and was taking insulin... well, I just can't imagine that. It isn't like you just get a little peckish or something. It's a scary and overwhelming demand that your body puts up: FEED ME NOW OR DIE.

C. I've experienced insulin reaction hundreds of times--occasionally quite severe ones. But while I have read that some people can "act drunk" or become erratic, it's never happened to me. I've had tunnel vision and grayed out, but never without sufficient advance warning to have pulled over if I was driving. This just doesn't ring true. What's worse, it's offensive because it plays on stereotypes about insulin diabetics that are exaggerated or untrue. Another reason to hate the prick.

[camero]

21. All true, I can attest

I made sure I had my reactions AT HOME. I also found out that the fight or flight response kicks in (for me anyway) and my reaction was fight.

[KansDem]

23. He is responsible!!!

Janklow stopped for every other stop sign on his way from Aberdeen, Evans said. But Janklow did not see the one east of Trent because he had not eaten all day and had a diabetic reaction that can cause confusion, lethargy and fatigue, the lawyer said.

As a newly diagnosed diabetic, I am fully aware of what happens when a diabetic does not eat "all day." What if this statement read:

Janklow stopped for every other stop sign on his way from Aberdeen, Evans said. But Janklow did not see the one east of Trent because he had been drinking all day ... that can cause confusion, lethargy and fatigue, the lawyer said.

The man is as irresponsible as a drunk driver and as such deserves jail time.

The Motorcycle:

http://www.southdakotaelections.com/Section.cfm?Type=USHouse

[LiberalFighter]

106. Every other stop sign?

So he only stop for half of the stop signs that he was suppose to.

[diamond14]

24. over 200,000 people will be dead from diabetes this year....

the nastiness on this board toward people suffering from this severe disability is disgusting....

Diabetes kills many more people EVERY YEAR than AIDS and breast cancer combined....

some here exhibit the typical 'reagun' attitude...when he fired all air traffic controllers with diabetes....it took many years and lots of money to fight that nasty attitude, and everyone got their jobs back after much suffering...the same nasty attitude now shown here on DU.....


read a little about diabetes here, educate yourselves properly rather than by the medically incorrect remarks being flung around here, and stop the nasty discriminatory attitudes...

http://www.diabetes.org/type1/complications/default.jsp

http://www.jdf.org/

[maggiemay]

26. I just re-read this thread

and I saw no "nasty attitudes" towards those with diabetes, just dismay and disbelief that a man would use the disease as a scapegoat.

[diamond14]

28. same attitude as people walk away from those needing medical

help...oh, it's just a scapegoat....they're not ill, let them die, it's their fault....

people with diabetes have serious medical issues, everyday, 24 hours a day....some will help them survive, others will claim that their own inactions are justified, afterall, they just use their disease as a 'scapegoat'....

some actual admire the stamina, discipline, motivation and focus that it takes to survive each day with diabetes....

many people attack those with diabetes because they have family or friends suffering from diabetes....and the problems that creates in relationships, work environments....so they attack....because people with diabetes have so much to overcome and struggle with EVERY SINGLE DAY, and still do well, and still get education, and still serve their communities...that it makes others feel real small...so they attack...attack....

diabetes is NOT a scapegoat...it is a REAL disease, it KILLS over 200,000 American every single year, it really does...IMO, any person with diabetes who manages to stay alive for another day deserves everyone's admiration for their discipline motivation and focus...nasty remarks 'disease as a scapegoat'....statistics show that most Americans will have the 'opportunity' to suffer a disability at sometime during their lives, from disease, old age or injury....when you get your 'opportunity', remember how you claimed that 'diabetes was a scapegoat'....

[oldcoot]

38. Yes, diabetes is a real disease

However, it is possible that Janklow's attorney is trying to use Janklow's medical condition to get his client off. In the past, Janklow has not exactly been the world's greatest driver. He has admitted that he regularly drives over the speed limit. I do not believe that he was low each time that he has driven over the speed limit. If Janklow was low, the police probably would have recognized that something was wrong. They may not have recognized that he was suffering from low blood sugar, but they would have known something was wrong. For example, they may have assumed that he was driving drunk.

Frankly, I am concerned that diabetics may suffer the consequences if Janklow is allowed to use his disease as a defense. Some may use this case as evidence that diabetics are not safe drivers and demand that they lose their driver's licenses. This would truly be unfortunate because I suspect that most (at least the diabetics I know personally) diabetics regularly check their blood sugar before driving and are very responsible drivers.

[kutastha]

39. on the other hand

What's to stop a diabetic form taking a little too much insulin and driving on the sidewalk?

As mentioned before, I've had Type 1 for quite some time (I'm only 30) and I'll claim he's using it as a scapegoat. Hell, when I was younger I'd do it to get free sodas at the theatre for my friends, or to bring in my own food to concerts, but I sure as hell wouldn't use it as an excuse if I ran someone over. It's my responsibility to care for my condition and thus, my responsibilty to make sure that I'm fit to drive.

[diamond14]

42. why not wait before passing judgement? sounds like you have

some serious issues to deal with in your own disease management...

you admit using your diabetes to steal sodas, but not everyone with diabetes are thieves....

because you admit being a thief and using diabetes as an excuse...it still doesn't prove applicability in this car accident case...why don't you wait for the facts to come out in court?

IMO, you should consider getting some counseling... please tell your doctor about your thefts and using diabetes to steal ASAP...I am certain you will get referred to good counselors....

[kutastha]

47. Woah

This is just getting outright bizarre. Your internet psychoanalytical techniques won't work here. Perhaps if I did have such an issue with my disease, they might, but you're barking up the wrong tree. I told you above the state of my condition. I came to terms with it when I was eight years old. In fact it's helped me to choose my career as an endocrinologist.

As for being a thief, I'm seeing my doctor in a half hour, I'll mention you think I need to get counseling and I'll post her repsonse.

And once again, why don't you wait for the facts as well.

[diamond14]

51. you admit using your diabetes to steal sodas, but not everyone

with diabetes uses that as an excuse to steal....

stealing is a crime...and I am saddened that you wrote about stealing, using your diabetes as an excuse...

I am certainly not trying to figure out why you did such a despicable thing....but your own writing suggests that this is very serious, and a totally inappropriate method of dealing with diabetes...

Your other writings on this thread seem to be an attempt to justify your own criminal activities....

[diamond14]

45. anything is possible, but your 'if, if, and if, may and maybe' passing

judgement and does little to help others understand and help those suffering from diabetic reactions in public....

the police often do NOT recognize that people are suffering from diabetes....lawyers try to force some police training through court cases on police brutality toward people with diabetes (much like the nastiness exhibited here on this thread)...

_________________________________

and you can search this web link for court rulings against police officers brutality toward people with diabetes....the horrors are frightening...much more police training is needed, especially in rural areas and low-populated states like Wyoming....

-snip-

ADA receives hundreds of calls and letters each month from people who want to understand their legal rights. The calls involve topics such as employment, education, incarceration, police brutality
http://www.diabetes.org/community/advocacy/legaladvocacy.jsp

[diamond14]

27. diabetic neuropathy can set in and you will not FEEL the low

blood glucose levels anymore....also, diabetes never gets better, it only gets worse...your remarks about your "grayed out" (what kind of medical term is that?, or 'diabetic reaction', simply a good description...) and 'that has never happened to me' reflect your own viewpoint....for others looking at you, the viewpoint is quite different....you may actually be speaking to them and look relatively normal, while still being 'grayed out'....

people not trained in diabetes may not recognize a "diabetic reaction" (insulin reaction) at all....that is why so many people with diabetes DIE every year, when work colleagues, police, and others simply walk away....

to an untrained person, it is easy to walk away and not recognize the major medical emergency that the person with diabetes is suffering...police have many times arrested people with diabetes, thrown them in jail, and let them die....without proper training, that is very easy to do....people with diabetes have been demanding more training for police for many years....

[kodi]

22. were janklow a black man he'd go to jail for 5 years

i dont think the jury will convict the schmuck, but it might be to the disadvantage of the GOP in general.

if this murdering bastard gets off free of jail time it will be a blatant example of the double standard of justice in amerika.

janklow will be lucky if the murdered man's family doesn't try to kill him.

what is really disgusting is that janklow, even though he has feigned remorse, did not resign his seat in congress. that alone indicates to me that he has little remorse and just wants to go on with business as usual.

[Character Assassin]

33. Ah, the 'Twinkie Defense' with a modern twist.

4 to 1 says he crashes and burns with this one.

[diamond14]

36. people don't choose 'diabetes'....they do choose 'twinkies'...

and BTW, people suffered from diabetes even while the twinkie defense went on....so there is nothing 'modern twist' about suffering from diabetes...

others on this board have compared it to drunkiness and now twinkies and other CHOICES...

diabetes is not a choice, it is a horrible disease, it is not a twinkie or booze...

nobody would ever CHOOSE to suffer from diabetes....every year, diabetes KILLS over 200,000 American people....more than AIDS and breast cancer combined....

and your arguments about CHOOSING diabetes, like choosing booze or twinkies are simply nasty....

[Character Assassin]

46. That's not the point. People do choose transparently dishonest defenses

people don't choose 'diabetes'....they do choose 'twinkies' and BTW, people suffered from diabetes even while the twinkie defense went on....

No shit? Did you go to college?

so there is nothing 'modern twist' about suffering from diabetes...

That's not the point.

others on this board have compared it to drunkiness and now twinkies and other CHOICES...

diabetes is not a choice, it is a horrible disease, it is not a twinkie or booze...

nobody would ever CHOOSE to suffer from diabetes....every year, diabetes KILLS over 200,000 American people....more than AIDS and breast cancer combined....

and your arguments about CHOOSING diabetes, like choosing booze or twinkies are simply nasty....

Don't be so thick: I'm not arguing that he CHOSE diabetes, I'm suggesting that he's using it as an excuse in a dishonest manner.

[Sideways]

52. OK So He Has Diabetes Why The Fuck Are You Defending Him?

On this charge? The fucking jerk has a track record of "reckless driving" and that is being nice. He is a fucking road menace and an asshole. So I ask again why the fuck are you defending him on a side issue?

This is not about diabetes and you know it. It is about an ASS-HAT Repug whore driving at great speed with no regard to humanity no regard to safety no regard to anything but HIM.

Sorry the diabetes debate is a waste of space here. He is a FUCKING CRIMINAL. Send his scummy Repug ass to jail.

I'd love to play tennis, ping pong, or squash with some of the posters here. Don't you realize that you can't take your eye off the ball?

Diabetes has fucking clouded your view?

He is a fucking criminal. Send his ass up the river.

[diamond14]

54. then anyone having a stoke, heart attack while driving gets same

treatment????

I am not defending criminal actions, and in America, one is charged, and then remains 'innocent until proven guilty'....

Having an insulin reaction while driving a car is NOT criminal...and neither is it a crime to have a heart attack, stroke, repiratory emergency while driving....

Most times, having an insulin reaction is the fault of 'medical care-givers' who advise these people on their care (how much insulin, what kinds, when to inject, how much food, excercise, how to adjust medicines under stress, how to deal with infections) (and with our collapsing medical system, people with diabetes are suffering and dying at over 200,000 deaths a year)....nobody knows yet if this claim is true or not...but I truly hope people on DU still believe 'innocent until proven guilty'.....

[Sideways]

57. Janlow Is A Lying Sack Of Crap Shit Po Po and Tripe

I repeat this has NOTHING to do with diabetes. He and his totally ugly and reptilian team of amoral legal thugs have thrown the diabetes card into the ring as their fucking last resort.

What part of HE IS AN ASS-HAT LOOKING FOR AN ANGLE don't you get?

My fucking Gawd you don't see how he is playing this? If you don't then I feel very sorry for you.

[BiggJawn]

55. Please climb down off your cross. Somebody else needs the wood

BTW, "DIABETIC" is how I refer to myself as, because
"Person Suffering from Diabetes" is too damn long to fit on the tag.

I'm sorry, but your whole damn argument here has focussed on a stereotype of Liberals as being all concerned about "proper speech" and not offending others, i.e. "Don't say 'Crippled', say 'Differently Abled'..." ad nauseum.

FWIW, I seriously DOUBT that Janklow IS a "person suffering from Diabetes" (god, but that took so much longer to type than "diabetic") in the FIRST place. If they drew blood at the hospital, I'll bet they checked it for BAC only, and now the samples have mysteriously "vannished".

He's being dishonest, and so's his lawyer, and they BOTH need to own their own shit. You gotta problem with that statement?

[diamond14]

56. if he has diabetes, there will be a lot of medical records....

and those records will be reviewed by the court....

and it is still NOT a crime to suffer an insulin reaction while driving...it is not a crime to suffer a heart-attack or stroke while driving either....



--------------------------------------

BTW, you could put the correct terms into context which would help your shorten it....

separate the person from the disease....sadly, as you mention, many people do call themselves a disease when referring to their condition...the terms came directly from the medical community and create difficult self-esteem issues for those suffering from diabetes....


examples.....(BTW, your efforts will help others)

'Diabetes causes serious reactions unexpectedly'

instead of

"Diabetics have serious reactions unexpectedly" (which degrades people by calling them a disease, and also is gramatically incorrect in that it lacks a noun and substitutes only an adjective)

(easy, just separted the disease from the person)

--------------------------------------------

or substitute the shorter

"people with diabetes"

instead of your longer

'people suffering from diabetes'

-------------------------------------------
or

"I seriously DOUBT that Janklow IS a "person suffering from Diabetes"

could be shortened to

"I seriously DOUBT that Janklow HAS diabetes"

(one can HAVE a disease, without BEING a disease)

[BiggJawn]

61. I gotta better idea...

I'll call myself a "Diabetic" and you can call me whatever floats your boat.
I am not my disease. but at the same time, I am NOT some trendy, P-C term for what I have, either.

[kutastha]

64. I am not my disease

No better way to put it.

[diamond14]

66. your language choice does make it more difficult for others, since

you have diabetes, others look to you to guide them in appropriate standards of conduct...just like people who have cancer, and help others react to their disability...sometimes others join the cancer patients by everyone shaving their heads, while the patient goes through chemotherapy...sometimes others join with those having diabetes, by ONLY eating a diabetic diet and thereby sharing....

it is not just trendy PC....since you have diabetes, you are telling the world that it is OK to call others a 'disease', in fact, you are leading that effort....when you refer to yourself as disease, it leads others to treat you that way and most tragically, to treat other people with diabetes that as real inferiors, diseases....I am pleased that you can view yourself as 'not my disease', but others may not be able to when it drummed into them everyday (mememememe)....

we do not live in a vacuum, and your decisions are certainly impacting others....I am certain that if you stopped referring to yourself as a disease, others would follow your example.....

[kutastha]

67. How long have you had diabetes, amen1234?

n/t

[diamond14]

70. N/A... you admit stealing and using your disability as an excuse

to steal stuff for your friends...you wrote it on this thread...


IMO, there is something real wrong with that....

[kutastha]

79. Strawman

Using? This didn't happen last week chief. It was 16 years ago when I was 14 years old. It happened once and completely irrelevant to the discussion about control of diabetics.

Furthermore, you preach about being judgemental yet in this thread you criticized me for stealing a $2 soda 16 years ago, use it as a judge on my character, tell me I need counseling, I have issues with being diabetic comment how we should about being diabetic, what we should call ourselves and so on. And then you say "N/A" and use a strawman as a reason? I think it's appropriate to know if you yourself are a diabetic since you're so apt to judge.

But I'm sure you'll respond saying it's irrelevant because I'm a thief.

The theatre's closed down now, but feel free to contact the City of Orange PD. Then maybe I can get on with my life and confront these deep deep issues I have over the heinous crime I commited 16 years ago. At least I didn't run anyone over, eh?

[diamond14]

112. now it's changed to ONE soda? before it was 'sodas' (quote)

"As mentioned before, I've had Type 1 for quite some time (I'm only 30) and I'll claim he's using it as a scapegoat. Hell, when I was younger I'd do it to get free sodas at the theatre for my friends..."


just because YOU lied is no reason to assume that other people with diabetes would also lie in order to steal...a total kick-in-the-teeth to those kind and generous people, who reach out to help others in medical emergencies....

what you do is totally up to you.....lying that you are suffering an insulin reaction to steal for your friends is wrong on many many levels.....

you brought it up in a bragging sort of way, and so it must be 'relevant to the discussion' for you....

[kutastha]

120. Jesus

Give it a rest.

[MrsMatt]

121. Sorry to inform you

but it will never rest as far as she is concerned.

[kutastha]

122. Yeah

I know. The good point is that I got a major boost in my post numbers after just mostly reading for two years. :)

[veganwitch]

81. and using your diabetic status to get you off a murder case is ok??

IMO, there is something really (usuing proper grammar) wrong with that...

[diamond14]

110. 'status'?....it's wrong to use diabetes as an excuse to steal or kill

but 'driving with diabetes' is NOT criminal....and suffering an insulin reaction while driving is NOT criminal...and suffering a heart attack/stroke while driving is NOT criminal, even if you are taking medication and well aware of your medical condition....

FIGHT discrimination based on diabetes....
http://www.diabetes.org/community/advocacy/discrimination.jsp

[MrsMatt]

111. Methinks you should

take some of your own advice and see a counselor to help you work through your hostility issues with the medical profession.

[NickB79]

98. You never stole ANYTHING as a child?

Every kid I know has grabbed a candybar or sweet from the local store from time to time. Yes, it was wrong, but we were kids, kids screw up and do stupid things, and we learn from it and move on. Most of us have grown up to become successful adults who never steal again. Jesus Christ, you're harping on something he did when he was a KID!?!? Why is that so amazingly important to you? Reading through this thread, it looks like you're just using this as an ad hominem attack to deflect attention away from the fact that you don't have a reply for his points.

[diamond14]

115. NO. BTW, not all children are thieves....and a 14 year old is hardly

a small child grabbing a candybar at a store...the poster bragged about deliberate LIES to steal sodas for friends at 14 years old...taking advantage of kind generous people who reacted to a lie about a life-threatening medical emergency...

it's wrong on lots of different levels, and it's not a child grabbing a candybar at a store.....

the thief bragged about those despicable actions, because the thief perceived that it was really 'amazingly important'....I didn't bring it up....

[kutastha]

117. ...

LOL. You're too much. What would you have to go off on tangents about if I never mentioned the soda story?

Did you contact the Orange PD yet? :D

[MrsMatt]

119. Amazingly unimportant

That anecdote was not germaine to the discussion, which I THOUGHT was about Janklow using his illness as his excuse for blowing through a stop sign and killing a motorcyclist. You, on the other hand, have attempted to highjack this thread for your own obscure purpose, primarily railing against the "Reaguns" and the "Medicare". Stick to the subject at hand.

[NickB79]

125. Wow

Ok, here's the plan. I'll bring the tar, you bring the feathers, and we'll hunt this hardened criminal down. Better pack some heat too, ya never know with theives of this magnitude, it could get ugly.

Can you seriously be so delusional as to continue to go off over a 14-yr old conning someone out of free soda 16 yrs ago? Holy crap man, who's the one in need of therapy here? This ranks right up there with such crimes as jaywalking and spitting on the sidewalk.

[diamond14]

129. continues to brag about stealing/lying, and also used it to attack

others who suffer insulin reactions...it's more than "a fourteen year old conning someone out of a soda"...this is using the disability to take advantage of kind and generous people, who thought that a life-threatening medical emergency was occurring, when actually, the liar was stealing from them....and still bragging about it TODAY at the age of 30....which could mislead other good samaritans TODAY, realizing that they may also be robbed while helping...

most people with diabetes would NEVER take advantage of those who try to help...here on DU today, this bragging thief makes readers think NOT to help when a medical emergency occurs, oh hell, someone might just be lying to steal from you...."nothing will stop a diabetic"...from, oh hell, stealing from you and lying to you, this thief leads the way for others to WALK AWAY from life-threatening medical emergencies...and I am very VERY concerned about that....rather than scaring people away from helping, there should be an effort to encourage people to help...because helping people with diabetes survive is still not done by enough people...over 200,000 Americans are KILLED from diabetes every single year, some because too many people walk away from these medical emergencies...maybe they think they'll be robbed if they help....and more people DIE....it is a very serious issue, way beyond a little conning for a soda (BTW, the thief said 'sodas', not 'soda')....

_________________________________________________

here, read the exact quote (post #39)

"on the other hand
What's to stop a diabetic form taking a little too much insulin and driving on the sidewalk?

As mentioned before, I've had Type 1 for quite some time (I'm only 30) and I'll claim he's using it as a scapegoat. Hell, when I was younger I'd do it to get free sodas at the theatre for my friends..."

___________________________________________________

[BiggJawn]

78. I'm no Effin' "Role Model", either!

People who "look to me to guide them" are very likely to wind up lost.

I don't give a fuck HOW people view my diabetes. NOR my Hypertension, NOR my fatigue and other medication side-effect-induced problems.

"..just like people who have cancer, and help others react to their disability...sometimes others join the cancer patients by everyone shaving their heads, while the patient goes through chemotherapy...sometimes others join with those having diabetes, by ONLY eating a diabetic diet and thereby sharing...."

If THAT isn't trendy PC, then I can't say what is. So, if you knew some people who had caught the Clap, would YOU go make "Ouch! Ouch!" noises when you urinate as a "show of support"?

You wanna eat a 2,000 calorie-unrefined carbohydrate diet, you go right ahead. Fact is, I would encourage it for everyone, because it would be healthier for all. but don't do it in some ofay "Show of Solidarity" for me. I don't need the noise, and it Ain't gonna find a Cure...

You wanna help people like me? Would you REALLY like to know what *I*, as a DIABETIC, would like the people of this country to do?

Get on your congress-critters. Demand that they restore Stem Cell research and reverse Dumbya's "Dark Ages" sop to the Fundies so maybe they can learn how to make new pancreas' for the Type-Ones and find a cure to insulin resistance for Type-Twos like me.

Spare me the gawd-damn PC "walk-a-thon" platitudes.

[diamond14]

118. Great Idea !!!!....here's the link for congressional action....

"Government Relations and Advocacy at the American Diabetes Association works to improve access to quality care, eliminate discrimination against people because of their diabetes, and make sure the federal government is adequately funding diabetes research and programs."

http://www.diabetes.org/community/advocacy/default.jsp

[Rex]

113. LOL!

I'm trying hard to remember where I heard that saying.

[NickB79]

91. He CHOSE not to eat or monitor his condition during the day

That is the choice he made that puts him in the same league as alcoholics who drive: both CHOOSE to drive while in a dangerous state. He is effectively saying with this defense that he knowingly allowed his blood sugar to reach a dangerous level and put others on the road at risk by not eating all day. Pretty much the same effect as if he chose to drink, only in this case he denied his body needed substances.

[camero]

43. One question

I assume he was transported to the hospital where blood tests were done that would have indicated a hypoglycemic attack. Were these tests done.

[librechik]

58. Yeah, and diabetics aren't allowed to have alcohol

so if he did, it was additionally reckless.

Diabetic? My great aunt Fanny.

Hope the victim's family sues his ass.

[diamond14]

60. wrong, here's a link to Amer. Diabetes Assoc. 'alcohol' info

of course, a person with diabetes can enjoy alcohol, like many other Americans do....and use of alcohol by a person with diabetes is NOT reckless as you claim....although there are always people who abuse alcohol (more than 3 drinks a day)...some may have diabetes, but most abusers don't....

that is quite different than drinking and driving, which is criminal (not just reckless), but easily confirmed for the criminal court....


read here about the American Diabetes Association information on "Alcohol" for those with diabetes....

http://www.diabetes.org/health/nutrition/alcohol/alcohol.jsp

[camero]

69. I was gonna say that, thanks

most diabetics are limited to 1 drink a day. (Well, that's what my doc told me). I lay off of it because beer has carbs and I control my sugar better without it.

[BiggJawn]

80. Well, something we can agree upon.

Yes, I can drink, but as my Nutritionist layed it out for me, I've got a "budget" of only so many calories and Carbs a day. Now, should I have 3 beers, or the equivalent in good fish, hummus, veggies, and whole-grain pita bread?

Alcohol is "empty calories".

Me, I choose not to drink.

[camero]

76. Does anybody know what the results of these tests were?

It could be a sleazy defense or it could be that his sugar dropped too far too fast. We don't know as of yet and speculation does not help.

[bvar22]

72. According to Amen's posts:

Diabetics can not be held responsible for their choice to drive and kill people on the highways. If Amen is correct, then no diabetics should be allowed to drive, operate ANY machinery that could cause harm or damage, or be emoplyed in ANY position like ATC, medic, firefighter, where others could be harmed by lack of attention.

The comparison to stroke or heart attack is not valid because Janklow was WELL AWARE of his condition.

Janklow is RESPONSIBLE for the death of the motorcyclist. His diabetic condidion is NO EXCUSE and in no way alleviates him from this responsibility.

I have watched the tape where he brags about his speeding and wreckless driving. His attitude is MORE than ARROGANT...it is bigoted. In trying to defend his irresponsible behavior, he states: "Hey, when I get caught, I pay my fines!!"
This is a bigoted rich republican attitude of entitlement! He is saying , in effect, that since he has a high disposable income, he is entitled to break the law, that the laws should apply only to those who have difficulty in paying the fines.

IMHO, he should be prosecuted to the FULLEST EXTENT of the LAW. He has already admitted that mere financial penalties are not enough to change his behavion.....He deserves PRISON TIME!!! Diabetic or not!

[diamond14]

75. this is a faux-news distortion and mis-representation of my words

here's a summary of all my posts....

I still believe in 'innocent until proven guilty'....

Driving with diabetes is NOT a crime....

Suffering an insulin reaction while driving a car is NOT a crime...

and it is NOT a crime to suffer a heart attack or stroke while driving either...

...if one senses an upcoming insulin reaction, then one takes action and PREVENTS it, so it doesn't happen....however, a brief inspection of this thread shows many people claiming to have had or seen insulin reactions, and these are as unexpected as having a heart attack...people expecting insulin reactions do something about it and it never happens...just like people expecting heart attacks or strokes... if nothing is done, it is because the insulin reaction WAS UNEXPECTED !!!!

It is a valid comparison, since people who have heart attacks while driving are often fully aware of their heart disease and are on medications...it is the heart attack or insulin reaction which is unexpected, not the knowledge of the disease which caused the medical problem...


ronald reagun tried to stop people with diabetes from working as air traffic controllers, and I fully agree with the court decisions to put all those people back to work....

your faux-news distortion is real sick....I never suggested that people with diabetes be denied the right to work or drive....

[camero]

77. I've had insulin reactions

and I mean <25. At that point( I was not aware of it until I got really weak all of a sudden) it could still drop even after eating or glucose until there is enough glucose in the system to make it start rising again. Which means that even glucose tablets don't just make you pop right back up. I've noticed this because I test liberally.

That being said, he had no business speeding and I think that more than anything was the real cause of this accident. But I'm speculating. I don't have the facts that the jury has.

[Lurking Dem]

86. "Not aware of it"

can also mean no symptoms at all until you fall unconscious. Frankly I would give my right arm to "feel weak all of a sudden". I used to. I remember that. But it rarely happens that way anymore. At this point I can be <25 and be functioning so normally that no one in the room even suspects my sugar is low.

I have fallen unconscious alone and spontaneously recovered 5 times. They give me little hope for a 6th.

[camero]

94. Diabetes sucks

I've been really lucky so far. Plus like I said, I test alot. My own family has walked away from me when I was in that state. I haven't passed out yet though. My dog kept me from going there once.

That's where I have a problem with the "it's your problem" posts. I liken it to seeing domestic violence. I mean, what are you gonna do, stand and watch it? I myself, when I see an emergency situation, have to do something about it. And alot of people blame the victim for domestic violence too because it can be 'controlled'.

[bvar22]

73. Additionally:

Alcohol in ANY quantity affects the Central Nervous System. Alcohol impairs judgement and slows reactions! There are NO exceptions. Operating a motor vehicle under low BAC may be legal, but it is ALWAYS irresponsible.

[veganwitch]

85. does janklow have type 1 or type 2

because amen1234 has been saying that no one chooses diabetes. but type 2 (also called adult onset diabetes) has been linked, in some cases and im not an expert on this, with sedentary and other lifestyle choices. my mother was obese and here doctor told her to lose weight or start shooting insulin. she is working to lose the weight thus avoiding type 2 diabetes.

[Lurking Dem]

88. bullshit

If obesity caused diabetes then everyone who was obese would have it. Instead only 20% of obese people have type 2.

Hyperinsulinemia is a precurser to type 2 diabetes. Insulin is a fat growth hormone. When people make too much of it (because of a genetic abnormality that makes it not work effectively) they get fat. Adipose causes insulin resistance. They get fat, their blood sugars become clinical. That is one of the reasons the ADA just lowered the blood glucose level for diagnostics of type 2.

Doctors then say "if you didn't get fat you wouldn't have diabetes" when in fact they got fat because they had subclinical diabetes and the reason they have such a hard time losing weight is because they produce so much insulin.

/Cart /Horse

[veganwitch]

95. i said in some cases (specifically type 2)...

and there were lifestyle choices one can make if there is a history of diabetes. and i also said i was not an expert on it. i only know what i have read, which in the cases of diabetes is not much.

edit: i would add what was stated by bmbmd up there.


"I would also point out that Type II diabetes is often, but certainly not always, a disease of excesses. Too much carbohydrate, too little exercise, too many calories. Many of my "diabetics" are overweight and unwilling or unable to comply with a vigorous regimen. We do the best we can with counselling, teaching, and medication-always encouraging a healthier lifestyle. Unfortunately, many of my co-DUers would regard that as "Medical provider failure". Smoking, obesity, excessive alcohol consumption, dangerous sexual behaviour, flaunting traffic laws-all my fault."

[camero]

96. Not in my case

And believe me I asked. I found out it was prevalent on my dads side After I got it. Doctors did not check for it as part of a normal physical. If they had, I MAY have avoided it but I may not have.

There is a Prediabetic state and even when I asked to be checked,I was not given a glucose tolerance test. Just a $300 lab test for fasting that could have been done at home for $20. Also which I was never told.

[diamond14]

123. same DUers on another thread want those tests STOPPED (link)

read it and weap...it is just another indication that there are DUers who want people with disabilities to go away and DIE, quietly without any bothersome noise....it's really getting worse too....when simple tests might stop the killing, and not only do others not care, they fight on this board against any further expenditures.....Diabetes KILLS over 200,000 Americans every single year, more than AIDS and breast cancer combined...but some DUers argue against that simple test that could SAVE a life, pushing lies that kill....

-snips-

So, already if one has a fsting of 100 and is now pre-diabetic--a test is ordered that significantly adds to the costs.

Seeing that the bar was also lowered on the diagnosis of diabetes from a fasting of 140, to today's 126, causing the numbers of persons diagnosed with diabetes to rise greatly, and the numbers of pills and all of the diagnostic tools, as well as doctor visits, nursing , foot care, and much else,...There is no long term data on how many people who have a fasting of 100 eventually do develop diabetes.

So I am wondering with this 100 fasting BG now lowered if those persons who do develop diabetes, will be in some way held accountable and eventually penalized for letting themselves get diabetes--ie they were overweight and they did not lose weight. Their fault!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=810090&mesg_id=811087&page=

[camero]

126. In this society, they might be.

And genetics is the predetermining factor of diabetes (it was in my case anyway). They may also be treating people for diabetes who do not have it and then develop it from the drugs. That's why I am iffy about lowering the bar. The Glucose Tolerance test is the one test that shows diabetes.

We actually need a single payer system with National standards but it's for another thread, my apologies.

[kutastha]

89. Type 1, iatrogenic

Check out my post here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=248331#249083

[GRocky]

92. Janklow is a true patriot

You commie jerks have no idea what's up! Janklow is a true, patriotic American. He knows what's right for us. It's the dumb motorcyler's fault that he drove into Janklow's car. Didn't you know? Republicans always have the right of way, especially if they're true patriots like Janklow.

He's always a man to accept responsibility for his actions. Those of you that disagree are clearly too busy being stupid partisan Demoncrats obsessed with playing politics and talking trash.

[roguevalley]

105. Commie jerks? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

Free republic must be closed for its daily enema.

Frankly, thank you diabetic folks for the education. Its a new disease in my family and you helped alot.

Frankly also, I hope Janklow and his little buddy here, GRocky, go up the river for a million years. GRocky, because he won't stay in his playpen/padded room and Janklow because HE KILLED A MAN.

Also, I thought you needed a pancreas to stay alive. Any information on that, you informative people? How can you get along without one?

RV, learning something every day. <God, I wish the freepers would stay up on the news. Commies? That is like so ten years ago. Morons.>

[GRocky]

108. I guess I'll have to stiffen up my sarcasm a little bit ;) (nmi)

[Djinn]

128. when DOES a driver have to take responsiblity

amen1234 - it's also not my friends fault that she has poor eyesight and she certainly didn't choose it but if she drives at night and kills someone her disability is no excuse.

If diabetes can you make you flake out without warning then like my friend there should be qualifications to licences.

if he'd never before had an "episode" or did not know he was diabetic then maybe this defense could fly - would you accept an "it was an accident" plea if someone was killed after being hit by a speeding (not sure how diabetes made his foot plant on the accelerator but anyway) driver who had pre-diagnosed narcolepsy and fell asleep at the wheel?

[diamond14]

130. there may be any number of law violations, but it is not criminal to

'drive with diabetes', it is also not criminal to have an insulin reaction while driving....in many states, there is a form that must be filled out by a medical doctor, stating that a person with diabetes can safely drive and is under medical care (but often the doctor doesn't spend the time to properly examine or help with a proper long-term care program, HMO's are ten minute appointments anymore)...eyesight is checked at time of licensing which prevents the scenerio you describe, but as noted in several posts above, the medical care for people with diabetes is getting much much worse during the bush* era....even rich republicans cannot get the help they need...and the medical caregivers are not well-trained in diabetes, and often give out very poor treatment and suggest inappropriate treatment regiments, which are faithfully followed by duped patients....you can blame bush* and his failed health care policies for a lot of it....

One of my friends had an epileptic seizure while driving on 6th avenue freeway in Denver (a major expressway through the city)....he had pressed onto the pedal as he convulsed and the car went everywhere...a kind person took action, pulled his truck in front of my friend's car, and dramatically stopped the car with his truck...the story made the front page of the Denver Post around 1987...that was the FIRST and only epileptic seizure he ever experienced, nobody was permanently injured, which was really amazing....

anything can happen to anybody unexpectedly, and heart attack/strokes while driving are much more common than insulin reactions....as several people noted, insulin reactions are unexpected, like most heart attacks or strokes...in heart attacks, strokes, or insulin reactions, the suffering person could easily become unconscious onto the pedal and accelerate....it's very sad that these horrible medical emergencies do happen, but it could really happen to anyone....and most people do their very best to be responsible and safe....the only criminals are those deciding to drink and drive and their friends who enable them by not stopping them, drunks cause the majority of fatal accidents...it is very rare occurance when a person having an insulin reaction causes an accident, and that speaks very highly for the admirable efforts made by people with diabetes as noted on this board....healthy people could certainly show more empathy when the occasional diabetes-caused accident occurs, rather than just openly attack them and blatantly encourage discrimination...it's been ugly here....

[BiggJawn]

127. How do you get along w/o a Pancreas?

Shoot insulin. When your pancreas quits producing Insulin, that's Type One Diabetes.

When your body can't use the Insulin your Pancreas produces, thet's Type Two, TDFKA (The disease formerly known as) "Adult Onset" Diabetes, now being seen in children as young as 10.

I have Type 2, my dad has it, it killed my mother and I ride my daughter like a boot camp bosun to move more and drop some poundage, lest she carry on the "family tradition"...

Had I been told 15 years ago that I needed to lose a LOT of weight, eat healthier, and cut down on the drinking, or else I was going to wind up like this, would have I?

Possibly. now that the horse has split, it's hell getting the barn door closed.

[DemExpat]

131. Please keep LBN excerpts to 3-4 paragaraphs

as stated in the DU Copyright Rules:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html#copyright

Thanks for your cooperation!

DemEx_pat
DU Moderator