Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Have T1 diabetes, have been part of a clinical study during the "honeymoon stage" (when you are still producing a little insulin), to see if this phase can be prolonged, it didn't, still have T1 and my pancreas is about as useful as a meringue dildo.

Edit : "much better glucose levels were achieved with this approach compared with standard care that included use of continuous glucose monitoring; however, unfortunately a benefit on the pancreas was not observed."

This sentence completely contradicts the heading.

[removed]

[removed]

That sentence was preceded by this one: > In addition to evaluating verapamil, the trial also assessed whether an intensive glucose management approach that included use of an automated insulin delivery system to try to get glucose levels as close to normal as possible could have a beneficial effect on the pancreas’ insulin secretion.

So I read it that the glucose management had no benefit to the pancreas, whereas the Verapamil did. Though it’s not very clear.

[removed]

Title contradictions in the article is so common nowadays! :(