You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Communication’ category.
It’s never hard to find a source of diabetes stigma. Because sadly, it’s all around us. And right now, the source seems to be much of the discussion about the report from the Australian Parliamentary Inquiry into Diabetes.
Yes, I was very excited about the report last week when I was writing about the recommendations and accompanying content about increasing access to pumps and AID systems. That was incredible news, and it was terrific to see that the community-led efforts were met with such a positive outcome.
But the messaging more broadly hasn’t been so great and it’s very disappointing.
Disappointing, but not surprising really. After all, the inquiry was for diabetes and obesity. Last week, I said that people with T2D deserve the same attention as people with T1D when it comes to advocacy efforts and campaigns. Well, so do people living with obesity. When the inquiry was first announced, I remember reading through its terms of reference and feeling my heart sink. These are two separate and equally important health issues that need focused attention. And within that, diabetes itself comprises different types; again, all equally important and requiring specific attention.
But instead of giving diabetes the attention it deserved with an inquiry purely focused on highlighting what is needed to improve outcomes for those of us living with the condition and enhancing the health system to better serve us, we were given an inquiry that conflated two separate and significant health conditions. Something was going to get lost in this. And it seems that is diabetes.
Since the report was launched on Wednesday, a lot of media coverage has focused on one specific recommendation: the sugar tax. That was what was on the front page of The Australian, a segment on the Project and in a number of radio interviews. Also mentioned in this coverage was the recommendation about junk food advertising to children. As you can imagine, the commentary from the community has been pretty horrid and completely misinformed. If ever there was a time for not reading the comments, this is it.
I completely agree that a sugar tax is a good idea and have been saying so for years. I also believe that junk good advertising should be banned completely, especially for children, starting with TV and online advertising and extending to sponsorship of children’s sporting activities. Again, I have been involved in initiatives involving this for years. One of the reasons these measures are important is that they make healthier choices more accessible, which can reduce the risk of people developing obesity. And yes, obesity is a risk factor for T2D. However not everyone who is obese will develop T2D and not everyone who has T2D is obese. Yet this nuance is missed completely with simplistic messaging and grouping the two together.
And this nuance is important. As is pointing out that obesity is also a risk factor for many other conditions as well such as several types of cancer, liver disease, heart attack and stroke, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, osteoarthritis, sleep apnoea, mental health conditions, fertility problems and pregnancy problems. Not only T2D, so why is it included in an Inquiry about diabetes?
I shouldn’t be surprised by the media missing the mark completely, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t anger and upset me. Because efforts can be made to try to minimise harm and stigma from misreporting. I was asked to contribute to a media release this week about the AID work and I made it very clear that I would not be involved in anything where messaging could be seen as stigmatising. I provided a copy of language position statements and asked to see the release before it went out to make sure that it all aligned. I pointed out to the PR agency that I would publicly call out any media that came from this release if it was in any way stigmatising about any type of diabetes. Sadly, I don’t think there has been that level of care across PR and media groups. Without that care and attention the stigmatising tropes about diabetes, in particular T2D, are in overdrive.
But it’s not just the media. In the report itself, there is this statement: ‘There is a huge burden being placed on health resources by people with Type 2 diabetes’, a statement that clearly blames people with T2D for needing to use our underfunded, under-resourced, understaffed healthcare system. Absolutely no recognition of non-modifiable risk facts or social determinants of health. More stigma. More misinformation. More throwing people with T2D under the bus. And this impacts on all types of diabetes, whether we like it or not.
I really wish that as we are all tripping over ourselves to highlight this Inquiry report, we also stop to think about the messages about diabetes we are setting free into the world. So far, very little of what I have seen hasn’t made me cringe. Far too much has been stigmatising and harmful. We all have a role to play in ensuring that we do not contribute to diabetes stigma, especially when participating in commentary about and the media circus of a new shiny report being launched.
The #dedoc° symposium kicked off ATTD 2024 in the most powerful way. Four community advocates from across the globe presented on a variety of topics including access to insulin during humanitarian crises, access to diabetes care and technologies in low income settings, accessibility of technology for people with diabetes also living with disabilities, and access to research findings. You can hear the brilliant talks from #dedoc voices Leon Tribe, Tinotenda Dzitiki, NurAkca and Asra Ahmed here.
During the panel discussion, there was an important discussion about how and why it is critical for people with diabetes to be included in all conversations about diabetes. Meaningful consultation is the golden ticket here, and there were some valuable comments and suggestions about how that happens. Someone asked the question about reimbursement for lived experience expertise, an often ignored issue when it comes to people with diabetes being involved in research, programs, committees and anything else that takes our time. Our unique perspective cannot be provided by anyone else, and yet there is rarely budget to cover the costs of our participation. Sadly, it’s not routine to offer payment for our time, instead we are often made to feel that we should be grateful for a seat at the table. It’s worth reminding those who don’t value us in a financial way that WE ARE THE TABLE and without us, there wouldn’t be a place setting for anyone else.
It was clear from the conversation that diabetes advocates – even those sitting on stage at International scientific conferences – find it difficult to ask for their valuable expertise and time to be reimbursed.
I jumped off stage and made a bee line for Jazz Sethi. We do this thing at conferences that I’ve started referring to as the ‘Jazz and Renz conference special’. (You can see previous efforts here and here.) Within five minutes we’d hatched a plan for our next project, and today, we’re so excited to share it. It was clear that we need some ‘Rules of Engagement’ that provided a clear and easy way for people with diabetes and those seeking to work with us to understand not only why engagement and consultation is essential, but why it’s also essential to pay for our time.
It’s not just about reimbursement though. It’s also about recognition for that work in a multitude of ways including being included as a co-author on publications, included on programs giving presentations and having our expertise acknowledged as just as important as all other diabetes stakeholders.
And so, here are some simple guidelines that can be used by people with diabetes when working with organisations, researchers, healthcare professionals, industry and anyone else who wants out expert knowledge. Use them in your discussions with anyone who invites you to be involved in diabetes work. Print them out and take them with you when you’re meeting with anyone running a project or convening an advisory group. Share them in your networks so as many people as possible can use the information to guide discussions about ensuring our value is truly acknowledged. We hope that this will make those discussions just a little easier.
And for those who wish to work with us, have a read. If you still think that our time isn’t worth your budget, or our expertise worth real recognition, then it can only be considered that you are doing the very least to include people with diabetes. That’s tokenism. We’re not here for that anymore.
Disclosure
I was an invited speaker at ATTD 2024 where I presented on the T1D Index in my capacity as Director Community Engagement and Communications in the Global Access Team at JDRF International. I also chaired a session on access to research. ATTD covered my registration costs. My travel and accommodation were covered by #dedoc° where I am Global Head of Advocacy. I chaired the #dedoc° symposium at the conference.
Diabetes stigma is a hot button topic in the diabetes world. It has been for some time. I wrote just last month how stigma was one of the most talked about issues at ADA. That week, we also launched an Open Letter from the Diabetes Community, asking health professionals to join us in our call to stop diabetes stigma.
And behind the scenes, for all of this year, another exciting, BIG, project has been hatching and I’m so excited to share it today.
Earlier this year, in an unprecedented show of unity and determination, a group of 51 experts from 18 countries joined forces to pool our lived, research and clinical experience to address diabetes stigma and discrimination. Together, we’ve reviewed the scientific evidence and established an international consensus on 49 Statements of Evidence and Recommendations. The full report on this review has been submitted and is currently under review.
Excitingly, the group also reached a consensus on a Pledge dedicated to bringing an end to diabetes stigma and discrimination. And that’s where you come in! Everyone can sign to show your commitment stop the ingrained negative judgments, stereotypes, and prejudices that influence attitudes about diabetes, and contribute to the stigma so many of us face. This isn’t just for the community. We know there is sometimes an echo chamber as we say the same things to each other, over and over. We also know that while diabetes stigma is indeed prevalent within our community, we also need to tell the story of its harm outside the diabetes world.
Well, here’s an easy way to do both. Please sign the pledge and share details across your social platforms. You can sign as an individual, and we’d also love for you to see if your place of work, school, community group, hospital, church, sporting team, favourite cafe…basically anywhere that is likely to come into contact with people with diabetes (i.e. literally everyone!) would be interested in signing too.
This is a true community effort, with involvement from stakeholders from across the diabetes landscape, across the world. You won’t see logos anywhere, because this for and about all people with diabetes. The names of the people involved in the work so far is on the website.
Are you with us?
A few weeks ago, I saw a post on LinkedIn from Nick Dawson. Nick was around Twitter health communities a lot when I first joined and it was great to read his post and take a wander down Twitter’s memory lane.
The feeling of nostalgia was strong. I don’t remember joining Twitter, but I do remember when I started actually using it to connect with others with diabetes from around the globe and how my diabetes world suddenly seemed infinitely bigger. No longer was I constrained to only people in my own networks, or even my own country. I was a global citizen in the diabetes online world. And it felt great.
Twitter became the cornerstone of a lot of my own advocacy and connections online. I never missed a weekly #DSMA tweet chat, expertly moderated by Cherise Shockley. The rapid fire hour of diabetes power often included hundreds of people. Dana Lewis’ #HCSM weekly chats brought together from different health communities, opening my eyes not only to different healthcare struggles, but also to solutions that helped me with my own diabetes. I used Twitter to find people who were doing incredible things that elevated the voice of people with diabetes. It was on Twitter that I followed along with the first Roche blogger summit that brought together US social media pioneers. I used those sorts of events to shape the Australian Social Media Summit that was held at the end of 2012, coordinated by Diabetes Victoria, bringing together Australian diabetes social media folk and Kerri Sparling from the US.
I was part of the team that started the weekly #OzDOC tweet chats in July 2012, working with Cherise to help get things started close to home. Around the same time, the first #GBGoc tweet chat happened and the first #dedoc° chat, #FRDoc and #ItDOC followed soon after. Back then, those chats were brilliant at highlighting local issues, but by and large, they were indeed global.
Twitter was the tool I used to take notes at conferences, live tweeting sessions to share with those not in the room, and then pulling the information together in briefing documents at works, and writing articles here and on other platforms. And Twitter was the channel where remarkable whole community events happened. Remember Kelly Kunik’s #IWishPeopleKnewThatDiabetes and those #DayOfDiabetes discussions? Or the groundbreaking and overwhelming community event that was #Simonpalooza? It was peer support on demand. There was no need to feel alone with your diabetes if you were on Twitter!
And then, I don’t know when, Twitter changed. Or I changed. Or the community changed. It became harder to find the people who had shone so brightly and made Twitter a place of support and community. I stuck close to old friends who never advertised the Twitter following count, because who cared? I learnt the difference between an advocate and an influencer. And I started to steer completely clear of parts of the community which was so alien to what it had been like when I first joined. #DSMA chats became less frequent because Twitter chats became kind of old hat. #OzDOC chats completely stopped because there hadn’t been a sustainability plan in place and there really wasn’t anyone to take over. Perhaps this was a reflection of how the community wanted to engage and what they…what we…wanted.
For me, most of the day-to-day reaching out I used Twitter for moved to being via private channels. And that worked fine and became the same lifeline that the public space Twitter had once been.
There have absolutely been some bangers recently that have made me remember how great Twitter can be. The weekly #DiabetesChat, using Spaces, launched a new community that, although based in the UK, was very much global. Tom and the organisers went out of their way to include people from other places around the world to be interviewed and lead discussions. I loved it straight away for the beautiful open and welcome feeling that was there and embraced it. #dedoc° isn’t really a Twitter based organisation, but the #dedoc° voices use it brilliantly, and diabetes conference are so visible because of their prolific sharing.
In the last few days, a new Twitter-like app called Threads has been launched and I tentatively signed up and had a nosy look around. It felt like Twitter in 2012. Friendly. Fun. Open. I’ve found Threads friends (thriends?) who I’ve not seen around the Twitter traps for years and have re-engaged. I’ve managed to steer clear from the parts of diabetes Twitter that I’ve actively avoided over recent years.
It’s not perfect. There needs to be an option for people to add ALT text to photos, because that’s not there yet. Apparently it is coming. (But, you know, accessibility should have been a first level consideration, not an after thought…) A desktop version would be useful – it’s annoying only having the option to type on a phone keypad. The lack of hashtags is annoying. (Just today, I went back and read the tweets from that first Australian social media summit by searching the hashtag. What a treasure trove!) Again, this is said to be on the cards. As is the capability to see only threads from people you’re following rather than the mishmash right now. Having said that, sprinkled in amongst the predominantly diabetes focused threads I’ve been seeing, I’m not too disappointed with the cat pics, recipes and book recommendations that I’m seeing a lot of. Also pleasing is that I’ve managed to avoid so much as a hint of the crappy, manipulative, misogynist side of the diabetes world that clouded my Twitter experience for a while before I worked out how to block it out completely.
Is this the future of Twitter? Over here on this new app? Threads feels like the nostalgia Nick wrote about. It really does feel like the ghost of Twitter past and I like it a whole lot more than the ghouls of Twitter present. Come and visit if you’re not there already. I’m @RenzaS and you’ll see me sharing diabetes stuff, pet photos, books. And asking people about their diabetes experiences to help me make sense of my own. I hope to see you there!
All too frequently, when talking about meaningful lived experience engagement, I hear about ‘Hard to Reach Communities’. A number of years ago, I called rubbish on that, putting a stop to any discussion that used the term as a get out of jail free card to excuse lack of diversity in lived experience perspectives.
‘People with type 2 diabetes don’t want to be case studies’ or ‘Young people with diabetes don’t respond to our call outs for surveys’ or ‘People from culturally and linguistically diverse communities won’t share their stories’ or ‘Folks in rural areas don’t come to our events’. These are just some real life examples I heard when asking why there was no diversity in the stories I was seeing.
See how the blame there is all on the people with diabetes? They don’t want, don’t respond, won’t share, won’t attends. It’s them. They’re the problem. It’s them.
I stood on stage at EASD in Stockholm last year and challenged the audience to stop using the term ‘hard to reach’. Because that’s not the case at all. The truth is that in most cases, the same old, uninventive methods are always employed. And those methods only work for a very narrow segment of the community.
I recently heard someone begrudge that all applicants who responded to a recent call out for a new committee were the same: white, had type 1 diabetes, city-dwelling. ‘Of course they are,’ I said. ‘That’s the group that loves a community advisory council and responds to an expression of interest call out on socials. They are able to attend meetings when they are scheduled, are confident to speak up and are willing to share their story, because they probably have before and received positive feedback for doing so Plus, they’re expecting everyone else at the table will look and sound just like them.’
But the lack of diversity isn’t the problem of the people who didn’t respond. It’s the problem of whoever is putting out a call and expecting people to reply because that’s how it’s Always Been Done.
This was a discussion at a meeting during last week’s American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions. The #dedoc° voices were meeting with the ADA’s Chief Scientific Officer, Dr Bob Gabbay, and Vice President in Science & Health Care, Dr Nicole Johnson. The question about how to reach a broad audience was asked. At #dedoc°, efforts have been made to attract a diverse group of people to our scholarship program, and have, to a degree there as been some success. A glance at any one of the #docday° events, or scholarship alumni will see people who had not previously been given a platform within the diabetes community. But there is always more than can be done.
The discussion in that meeting at ADA mirrored many that happened throughout the week. And it’s not surprising that US diabetes advocate Chelcie Rice came up with the perfect way to explain how to do better at engaging with the who have previously been dismissed as ‘hard to reach’. He said: ‘You can’t just put pie in the middle of the table. Deliver the pie to where they are.’ And he’s right. Those tried and true methods that work for only one narrow segment of the community have been all about putting pie in the middle of the table, knowing that there will be some people ready with a plate and a fork. But a lot of people are not already at the table, or comfortable holding out their plate. Or maybe they don’t even like that pie. But we never find out because no effort is really made.
Chelcie once said ‘If you’re not given a seat at the table, bring your own chair‘ and I’ve repeated that quote dozens, if not hundreds of times. And his words ring very true for people like me who have felt very comfortable dragging my own chair, and one for someone else and insisting that others scramble to make room for us. But that metaphorical table isn’t enough anymore. Not everyone wants to sit at a table and we need to stop expecting that. Instead, it’s time to find people where they are – the places, the settings, the environments they feel comfortable and at home. That’s how you do engagement.
On day 2 of the American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions, rushing between meetings, I overhead another attendee say this: ‘I’ve never heard so many people talking about diabetes stigma’. I turned to them, a bright smile on my face and said, ‘I know, right?’, (a phrase I only ever utter when I’m in the US).
Just a few hours earlier, Jazz Sethi and I had tweeted simultaneously, setting free an open letter from the diabetes community about diabetes-related stigma. You may have seen it; thousands of people have. And others have shared, commented and even translated it into different languages (I think we’re at 6 translations and counting). Here it is!
When we first asked advocates from the community if they would like to add their logo to the letter we were surprised by the quick response. Almost everyone we went to said yes. We hadn’t gone out too widely – we wanted to test the waters first. The first version of the open letter includes advocates and peer support groups from across the world. Amazing!
And after our very low-key, (i.e. a couple of tweets from unverified Twitter accounts, so who knows what the algorithm did with them!), we were once again inundated by people asking for us to add their logos. (We haven’t managed to add them yet, but absolutely will in coming weeks. Please give us time if you’ve shared your logo. We’ll get there. And I’ll update this post with the new final page when that happens.)
There is something magic about these sorts of very grassroots, very community, very inclusive initiatives. Not only are they great because they collaboratively offer a narrative from people with diabetes, highlighting an issue that is of great importance to many. They also show you just how powerful and united our community is while also pointing to individuals and groups who are keen to work together, support each other and power the importance of lived experience. And that’s pretty special!
Imagine a community where people come together to make things happen. You don’t have to look far, really. Just look at the diabetes community!
Here’s something new from some folks (Jazz Sethi, me and Partha Kar) who are desperately trying to reshape the way diabetes is spoken about, and how fortunate I feel to have been involved in this project!
The thinking behind these particular language resources is to truly centre the person with diabetes when thinking about communication about the condition. In this series, we’ve highlighted three groups where we know (because these are the discussions we see in the diabetes community) language can sometimes be stigmatising and judgemental. This isn’t a finger-pointing exercise. Rather it’s an opportunity to highlight how to make sure that the words, images, body language – all communication – doesn’t impact negatively on people with diabetes.
A massive thanks to Jazz and Partha. Working together, and with the community, to create and get these out there has been a joy. (As was sneaking into the ATTD Exhibition Hall before opening time so we could get a coffee and find a comfortable seat to work before the crowds made their way in!) And a super extra special nod to Jazz who pulled together the design and made our words look so bright pretty! And a super, super, super special thanks to Jazz for designing my new logo which is getting its first run on the back of these guides.
You can access these and share directly from the Language Matters Diabetes website. These don’t belong to anyone other than the diabetes community, so please reach out if you would like to provide any commentary or be involved in future efforts. There’s always more to do!
There’s been quite a bit of discussion after yesterday’s post about a recent consultation I did with a creative agency looking to develop a campaign about diabetes-related complications. I try to be solutions oriented and offer ideas, rather than just swoop in and be critical, so with that in mind, I’ve put together a couple of checklists that may be of some assistance when thinking about ways to talk about complications.
Of course, as always, these are just my suggestions and others may completely disagree with them, or having more to add. But this is a start that can be considered, shared and built on. And it comes with the ever present reminder that people with diabetes deserve to see themselves represented in ways that don’t make us want to run for the hills or hide under the doona (duvet) and never come out. That’s always a really good place to start!
‘What would the ideal campaign about diabetes complications look like?’
What a loaded question, I thought. I was in a room full of creative consultants who wanted to have a chat with me about a new campaign they had been commissioned to develop. I felt like I was being interrogated. I was on one side of a huge table in a cavernous boardroom and opposite me, sat half a dozen consultants with digital notepads, dozens of questions, and eager, smiley looks on their faces. And very little idea of what living with diabetes is truly about, or just how fraught discussions about diabetes complications can be.
I sighed. I already had an idea of what their campaign would look like. I knew because more than two decades working as a diabetes advocate means I’ve seen a lot of it before.
‘Well,’ I started circling back to their question. ‘Probably nothing like what you have on those storyboards over there’. I indicated to the easels that had been placed around the room, each holding a covered-over poster. The huge smiles hardened a little.
Honestly, I have no idea why I get invited to these consultations. I make things very hard for the people on the other side of the table (or Zoom screen, or panel, or wherever these discussions take place).
I suppose I get brought in because I am known for being pretty direct and have lots of experience. And I don’t care about being popular or pleasing people. There is rarely ambiguity in my comments, and I can get to the crux of issue very quickly. Plus, consulting means getting paid by the hour and I can sum things up in minutes rather than an afternoon of workshops, and that means they get me in and out of the door without needing to feed me. I think the industry term for it is getting more bang for their buck.
I suggested that we start with a different question. And that question is this: ‘How do you feel when it is time for a diabetes complication screening’.
One of the consultants asked why that was a better question. I explained that it was important to understand just how people feel when it comes to discussions about complications and from there, learn how people feel when it’s time to be screened for them.
‘The two go hand in hand. I mean, if you are going to highlight the scary details of diabetes complications, surely you understand that will translate into people not necessarily rushing to find out more details.’
I told them the story I’ve told hundreds of times before – the story of my diagnosis and the images I was shown to convey all the terrible things that my life had in store now. Twenty-five years later, dozens and dozens of screening checks behind me, and no significant complication diagnosis to date, and yet, the anxiety I feel when I know it’s time for me to get my kidneys screened, or my eyes checked sends me into a spiral of fret and worry that hasn’t diminished at all over time. In fact, if anything, it has increased because of the way that we are reminded that the longer we have diabetes, the more likely we are to get complications. There is no good news here!
‘But people aren’t getting checked. They know they should, and they don’t. And some don’t know they need to. Or even that there are complications,’ came the reply from the other side of the table.
Now it was me whose face hardened.
‘Let’s unpack that for a moment,’ I said. ‘You have just made a very judgemental statement about people with diabetes. I don’t do judgement in diabetes, but if you want to lay blame, where should it lie? If you’re telling me that people don’t know they need to get checked or that there are diabetes complications, whose fault is that?’
I waited.
‘Blaming people or finding fault does nothing. That’s not going to help us here. You’ve been tasked to develop something that informs people with diabetes about complications – scary, terrifying, horrible, often painful – complications. Do you really want to open that discussion by blaming people?’
Yes, I know that not everyone with diabetes knows all about complications, and there genuinely are people out there who do not fully understand why screening is important, or what screening looks like. The spectrum of diabetes lived experience means there are people with a lot of knowledge and people with very little. But regardless of where people sit on that spectrum, complications must be spoken about with sensitivity and care.
The covers came off the posters around the room, and I was right. I’d seen it all before. There were stats showing rates of complications. More stats of how much complications cost. More stats of how many people are not getting screened for complications. More stats showing how complications can be prevented if only people got screened.
‘Thanks, I hate it,’ I thought to myself silently.
I spent the next half an hour tearing to shreds everything on those storyboards. We talked about putting humanity into the campaign and remembering that people with diabetes are already dealing with a whole lot, and adding worry and mental burden is not the way to go. I reminded them that telling us again and again and again, over and over and over the awful things that will happen to us is counterproductive. It doesn’t motivate us. It doesn’t encourage us to connect with our healthcare team. And it certainly doesn’t enamour us to whoever it is behind the campaign.
I wrapped my feedback in a bow and sent a summary email to the consultants the following day, emphatically pointing out that I am only one person with diabetes and that my comments shouldn’t be taken as gospel. Rather they should speak with lots of people with diabetes to get a sense of how many people feel. I urged them again to resist using scare tactics, or meaningless statistics. I reminded them that all aspects of the campaign – even those that might not be directed at people with diabetes – will be seen by us and we will be impacted by it. I asked that they centre people with diabetes in their work about diabetes.
But mostly, I reminded that anything to do with complications has real implications for people with diabetes. What may be a jaunt in the circus of media and PR for creative agencies is our real life. And our real life is not a media stunt.
Disclosure
I operate a freelance health consultancy. I was paid for this work because my expertise, just as the expertise of everyone with lived experience, is worth its weight in gold and we should be compensated (i.e. paid!) for it.
Four weeks. That’s about how long ago it was that the first murmurings of Fiasp being withdrawn from the PBS were heard in the Australian diabetes community.
It’s been a pretty wild ride in those four weeks, hasn’t it? I never should be surprised at the dedication and never-say-die attitude of diabetes communities, but what we saw from the Australian community was next level! And it went beyond that, with Aussie advocates rallying our friends from overseas (hello #dedoc° Voices!) to amplify our efforts here.
And today, news of a reprieve. Fiasp would be available on the PBS for another 6 months for anyone with a script dated prior to 1 April 2023. (That’s the catch – you need a script before that date, or you will have to pay the private prescription cost.)
This is a great result. It gives everyone with diabetes using Fiasp some breathing space to make plans for what happens if we need to change insulins.
There are a lot of beautiful things about grassroots advocacy. Firstly, it can be incredibly responsive. It takes just one person to share, and the community response is often instantaneous.
We saw that here, didn’t we. As soon as it was just a hint about what was going on with Fiasp, people with diabetes in Australia took to it. This was even before the Minister’s office was aware of what was happening! From a petition (amazing, Belinda!), blog posts and discussions in social media groups, to standing around conference exhibition halls (this is exactly what was going on at ATTD with Aussie advocates!) the momentum started and picked up speed.
It is undeniable that the best results happen when everyone works together, and as I said in my post about this issue a couple of weeks ago, …Community advocacy is often the starting point of rumblings that, combined with strong advocacy from diabetes organisations, leads to policy change.
This is a dazzling example of exactly that! A community of all stakeholders coming together, led by community. Doesn’t THAT make you feel all warm and fuzzy? And today, people with diabetes have celebrated in great ways – the people who should be centred in this win for their efforts. This was my tweet about that earlier today:
Some final thoughts
Celebrate the win and cheer with other community advocates. I’ve loved seeing the commentary in online community groups today! Our celebrations are so meaningful because it is our fridges that were going to be bare of Fiasp if this didn’t come through!!
I know it’s tempting to stockpile, but please don’t! There are 14,000 Australians using Fiasp and hopefully everyone who needs to get a script filled over the next six months will be able to do so effortlessly. Of course there is the human urge to make sure we don’t run out but remember that if you have a year’s supply in the fridge, that might mean someone can’t get their next week’s supply.
This isn’t done yet! Six months is AWESOME but keep the pressure up with the grassroots efforts that worked this time.
Diabetogenic 