Welcome To The Mannkind HUB On AGORACOM

Edit this title from the Fast Facts Section

Free
Message: a different look at mkc 171

afrezzauser so good to have you here! really great. glad to see you are having improvement with your diabetes as well, and not just from a stockholder perspective. I just got on here too- lot's of good folks.

so you are going to be in a position on this board where you might get asked some halfway personal questions at times and you don't have to answer questions about your numbers or your health. just shrug off a question if you don't like it, or tell me to eff off i'm cool with that. so you don't have to answer my questions, or you can be as specific as you feel like.

as you know, BMI is calculated by weight(kg)/height^2(m). it says on clinicaltrials.gov that the BMI on mkc 171 has to be at least 38 on the inclusion criteria. do you mind me asking what your BMI was when you entered the study? it sounds like your's must not be 38, or you must be super muscular, which the BMI doesn't take into effect. when i used to be in shape my BMI was 28 and considered "obese", yet by body fat was like 7%. like i said before it's possible that's a typo on the website and a < should have been present instead of a =. you illustrate my point that most true type 1 diabetics are thinner people and that's why i was so shocked to see a BMI requirement of 38. and i doubt they have a study of all super muscular weight lifters, you know? it's confusing me. basically if you have a BMI of less than 38, how are you in the study?

also, do you happen to know your initial c-peptide levels? they require a level that is pretty much normal for the study, which again, is confusing if they are looking for only true type 1s.

i too initially thought that mkc 171 was a trial about strictly true type 1s, but the inclusion criteria suggest otherwise. unless of course they meant to put a < sign on both the BMI and c-peptide restrictions. this all might sound like it's nit picky numbers stuff but its actually fundamental info.

and yeah it's crap they can't pay you for a huge time commitment. i realize why they do that but still throw a few bones to ppl giving up sooo much time!

again awesome to have your input on here!!

chad

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply