Zimmet et al. are the authors of the scholarly article that will be summarized here. This includes total summary of the article as well as a commentary on some aspects which these authors explored in the paper they titled “Global and societal implications of the diabetes epidemic”. In addition, this summary will highlight the areas which relate to the learning objectives of this project as a whole.
Zimmet et al. (2001) begin by introducing a few facts about diabetes which have changed over the years; that diabetes, unlike in the past, poses a threat to human life and that more people have been diagnosed with diabetes in recent years in comparison to the last twenty years. This has been a result of changes in peoples’ lifestyle and the incidence of diabetes is set to go higher in the world. Type 2 diabetes affects people of all age groups equally whereas type 1 diabetes is associated with children and adolescents mostly. However, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising all over the world. Zimmet et al. claim that diabetes is capable of causing morbidity and mortality unless interventions are put in place for the patient (2001).
The authors however argue that in spite of implementation of intervention in sufferers, there is need for action for prevention of the disease (Koenig, 1997). Prevention of type2 diabetes however is ridden by social cultural perspectives; for example that lazy people and overeaters are at highest risk of developing the disease. Diabetes type 1 is the result of the triggering of innate predisposing factors by the environment. Diabetes in general however has been linked to obesity, metabolic syndrome, and sedentary lifestyles among other causes. The authors conclude their study by stating that diabetes type 2 is not only a disease; but also an indicator of a larger international problem that encompasses various aspects of our lives today. Thus development of interventions and policies to prevent and manage diabetes is of importance to prevent further escalations of the numbers of people suffering from the disease (Zimmet et al., 2001).
The main aim of the authors of this article seems to be alerting the reader on the consequences of diabetes to the society and to the whole world. The authors of this study have done remarkably well in raising the case for diabetes awareness. This paper is simple, yet detailed enough to be understood by both health care practitioners and the general public. They have accomplished this by detailing the two types of diabetes, their causes, as well as relevant and credible statistics. This enables any reader of the paper to be more likely to take it seriously and consequently, take proactive action to reduce the risk of diabetes; at least for himself or herself if not among the people he/she interacts with daily (Skinner, 1953).
Unfortunately on the other hand, the paper offers no new insights concerning diabetes. Most of the information from the paper seems to stem from secondary research which indicates that the authors aim is to raise concern as far as diabetes is concerned in contrast to bringing new information concerning diabetes to the table (Koenig, 1997). This would have taken the current body of knowledge on diabetes a step ahead. In spite of the study lacking in original research, the writers have managed to highlight further areas of research in the field of diabetes. These include differentiation between type1 and type2 diabetes in children, and the exact causes of diabetes. In addition, the paper lacks a discussion on the impact of diabetes on an individual (Rosdahl & Mary 2007).
This would have made it more relevant to the amateur readers and give them a vivid direction in which to channel their own attempts towards avoiding diabetes. Additionally, it would have enabled the paper to look less like it was written for policy makers and the movers and shakers in the field of health (Koenig, 1997). In conclusion, this paper is written well enough to cause its readers to think about ways of preventing diabetes in their lives and in the lives of their loved ones (Hahn, 1995). However, the paper offers no direction to the general public and may make more sense for the health personnel.
References
Hahn, R. (1995). Sickness and healing: An anthropological perspective. London: Yale University Press.
Koenig, G. (1997). Is religion good for your health? New York: Haworth Pastoral Press, Binghamton.
Rosdahl, C. & Mary T, K. (2007). Textbook of Basic Nursing. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. MacMillan: New York.
Zimmet, P., Alberti,K., & Shaw, J. (2001). Global and societal implications of the diabetes epidemic. Nature 414, 782-787.