I’m comfortably introverted and live alone. I enjoy my time alone but must remain cognizant of social imbalance. Diabetes is a long game that does not end. It’s easy to burn out. We are social creatures, however, and often look to others, relatives, friends, online communities, and medical professionals to calibrate our ongoing management and sustain our never-ending efforts.
Sharing diabetes data with other diabetics can generate negative feelings when unintended comparison appears. I’d love to share more of the actual data but fear the feelings it can produce in others. I know it can be done with nuance and the right tone yet it easily eludes me.
Doctors, who I interact regularly with over my diabetes data, often miss the full reality of my diabetes management. They’re busy and time constrained and generally only give feedback in broad brush-strokes. It has led to my conclusion that they are not the right relationship to expect the feedback that I’m looking for. As long as my doctor supports my Rx need, I’m mostly satisfied.
During the last 6 months or so, I started posting my diabetes data to an AI prompt and what I found surprised me. The feedback that I’m getting is exactly what I’ve been looking for. It’s both non-judgmental and comprehensive. More importantly it confirms my view of my diabetes stewardship that I get nowhere else!
Of course I’m wary about getting caught up in any situation biased with undue flattery. Yet the detailed feedback I’m getting from AI fills a need no other source does.
I’ve been using AI mainly for more mechanical queries. (How to grease this wheel bearing? What size tire on such and such vehicle, Etc). I am still getting occasional “bad guesses” from AI that have caused me to waste time. It seems that the way you are using AI a bad guess response would be pretty obvious to you, though.
@John58 - I tell the AI my age, gender, diabetes status, time since diagnosis, TIR with my range 65-120, time hypo, TDD, A1c, GMI, c peptide, and the fact that I use an AID system and a low-carb way of eating. I press Enter and let it analyze what all that data means.
In my original prompt, I failed to tell AI about my AID system and my low carb way of eating. It came back warning me that even though my time in range 65-120 was high and severe lows (< 54) were limited to < 1%, I should be aiming for a 7-8% A1c for hypo safety. I rejected that tired recommendation and added my AID system use and low carb way of eating and received a more appropriate response.
@funk - I’ve tried various AI platforms starting with the Google’s Gemini AI Overview. I’ve also used Perplexity, ChatGPT and Claude. My skill level is definitely that of a beginner.
I’ve learned some interesting things about the Claude platform that I like. After it gave me reactions to all of the various glucose performance statistics, it followed up with an additional question, reminiscent of an actual conversation.
One question: Has your endocrinologist been supportive of your tight targets, or have you had to advocate for this approach?
I answered with this.
My endocrinologist(s) have tolerated, not supported my tight targets. I think my doctors were frankly surprised that my glycemic performance was in the realm of possibility. I definitely had to advocate for my approach and then slowly win them over with consistent quarter after quarter of excellent A1cs and CGM reports. They begrudgingly accepted the hard data over time.
Here is some of the AI response.
This is a frustratingly common story, and it highlights a real disconnect in diabetes care.
The Clinical Inertia Problem
Your experience illustrates several issues in endocrinology practice:
Risk aversion over personalized assessment - Many endocrinologists default to conservative targets for older adults (often 7.0-7.5% A1c, or even higher) based on:
Population-level hypoglycemia concerns
Guidelines written for “average” patients without AID systems
Fear of liability if severe hypoglycemia occurs
Legitimate concerns about frailty, polypharmacy, limited life expectancy
But you’re not the “average” 72-year-old with T1D:
You have real-time CGM with alerts
AID system preventing most lows automatically
Preserved hypo awareness
Demonstrated track record of safety
Low variability providing cushion
High health literacy and engagement
The “data doesn’t lie” phenomenon - You essentially had to:
Ignore their concerns
Prove it was safe quarter after quarter
Wait for them to accept what the data showed
“Begrudging acceptance” rather than celebration
Why Doctors Resist
To be fair to your endocrinologists, they’ve likely seen:
Older patients with severe hypoglycemia and poor outcomes
Patients who claimed they could manage tight control but couldn’t
Complications from aggressive management
The minority of patients who use technology this effectively
But they should recognize outliers when the data is this clear for this long.
It looks like the Claude AI’s response usually ends with related question to you that further explores the topic. Kind of like a real conversation with an interested, knowledgable, and capable partner.