We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE TERM ‘TYPE 2 diabetes’ is leading medical researchers astray, and resulting in suboptimal treatment for patients.
That’s according to Professor Edwin Gale, of Southmead Hospital in the UK, who believes applying the term ‘type 2 diabetes’ to the complex and varied set of symptoms that us associated with the disease is wrong.
In a Viewpoint published in The Lancet, Professor Gale said, “If you give something a name, you imply that this thing actually exists. In practice, when somebody like myself talks about type 2 diabetes, I’m saying ‘a form of diabetes for which I can find no other cause’. In other words, it’s a diagnosis of exclusion…There are various conditions, spectrums, and severities of diseases, all wrapped into this one definition.”
Type 2 diabetes is diagnosed when a patient’s body can no longer produce enough insulin, or when the insulin that is produced does not work properly, which leads to problems maintaining a normal blood glucose level.
According to Diabetes UK, type 2 diabetes is estimated to affect around 2.6 million people in the UK.
However, Professor Gale argues that because the symptoms referred to by the term ‘type 2 diabetes’ have such widely varying causes and treatments, the term is misleading both researchers and patients.
Treating type 2 diabetes as a single disease has wasted the times of young investigators says Professor Gale, by the introduction of one-size-fits-all guidelines for disease management.
Although Professor Gale says an interim solution would be to replace ‘type 2 diabetes’ with the term ‘idiopathic hyperglycaemia’, which would encourage clinicians to stop thinking about the condition as a disease in its own right, but rather as an outcome of many interacting processes.
“When a century of scientific endeavour brings us round to the conclusion that we cannot define what we are talking about, it might be time to consider adjusting our minds. It is widely appreciated that type 2 diabetes is not a uniform disease entity with a definable cause, mechanism, and treatment, so why are these terms always used?” asks Professor Gale.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
89.8% is a remarkable figure. I remember doing a study a few years back and we discovered that most charities work at around 60%. We’ve always been a very charitable country and it’s great to see that we still are, even in the “current economic climate”.
God, I hate them three words.
Chuggers are fine but when they block your path with big open arms and silly lines….aaaargh!!
I was giving a tenner a month to concern via standing order for 4 or 5 years. But, I would get annoyed at the sheer amount of junk mail sent to me. I emailed them 5 or 6 times over the course of 2 or 3 years asking them to take me off the mailing list. It didn’t happen so I cancelled the standing order and instead set one up with my local, family run animal shelter.
The amount of communists and bigots on this site is increasing every week. Is no one in ireland now able to earn more then the average wage without criticism. Everyone should be on the same wage should they???. As for this ‘charity begins at home’ comments. Actually look up what it originally meant before you spout bigotted rubbish.
It’s mostly ordinary decent people that donate to these charities but do they realize that the CEO maybe taking a huge amount in wages from this charity money that most donors could only dream about
Agreed. People seem to have this terror/jealousy of anyone who makes money now. Probably an offshoot of feeling powerless over bank bailouts but the anger people turn on charities on here is reaching ridiculous levels.
Niall, The truth hurts but its still the truth.
What truth?
How much wages does the new CEO receive
Surely someone who makes a living helping people should be as entitled (if not more entitled) to a decent salary as anyone else…
Not sure about the new CEO, but in 2011 John O’Shea was paid 98k. Concern employ 3,200 people in 25 countries,so I don’t really think It’s excessive. They have also had a pay freeze in place since 2010.
John O Shea was paid 230 thou euro plus expences and got a big pay off when he left Goal.
I think John O’Shea is with Goal and that the CEO of Concern gets about €130,000 per annum………..
Think again.
My mistake, I meant to say Tom Arnold. Even still your figures about John o Shea are way off. He founded goal as well btw, saved countless lives all over the world and in 2010 was shortlisted in an rte poll to find Ireland’s greatest person. What have you done lately?
@chris I think you’ve been PWNED !
You forgot to mention that he is also a millionaire.
Always work checking out the background of the CEO and the boards. Mr MacSorley has worked with concern for over 30 years. He is running a large organisation. Any charity thought with an ex banker boss I walk away from
@killian
At the expense of the people they are helping
Not at all. Charity’s need to be run like businesses. Good salaries will attract the brightest, best and most committed to a sector where they’re badly needed.
Similar situation on the “overheads” issue. I don’t give a toss what percentage of a charity’s income is spent on overheads, because “overheads” (paying fundraisers and admin staff etc) are investments which make more money in the future. We shouldn’t be asking what percentage of their income goes to charity, but rather how much, in absolute terms goes to charity. What does it matter if 99% of your income goes to charity, if you’ve only raised 10 quid; surely it’s better to raise 10 million quid and have 70% going to charity?
Sure salaries and “overheads” make the fraction of the income going to charity smaller, but they make the income itself bigger.
Charities expect volunteers to work for free while the CEO and management earn astronomical salaries. I myself lost all faith in Concern years ago when they renovated their HQ on Camden Street with all that marble cladding (you could run a charity out of a few portacabins, and they don’t need to be in such high rent areas). An outward expression internal excesses.
Concern’s work on the ground is streets ahead of other charities. The targeted approach means that they can deliver on crucial programmes that help society as a whole.
They are an amazing group of dedicated people who place themselves in often hostile environments, simply to help those who need help the most.
Help if you can. Comment if you want. But criticism should be left to those who have gotten off their behinds and actually helped, no matter how that help is delivered.
That said, the Chuggers around Dawson St. and Nassau St. are starting to reach saturation point!
Wake up!!!!!’ Charity begins at Home!!!!
There are even charities at home that will pay your NTL. Ireland has 1st world charity issues not comparable with 3rd world.
We have been told that Donegal has least disposable income in Ireland but at the weekend the people in 2 days raised Over €100,000, in Relay for Life.
People are so generous in Ireland.
Well done everyone involved and everyone who donated.
I presume the desired accounts are on the public record? Chuggers are an unfortunate method of revenue collection. I don’t know why anyone tolerates them.
Guys I work in accounts, trust me the figure of 89% is the best one they could give you which means they defo buffed it out. Look up their full accounts to see the real story. I do not support them because they have become too big and need too much money for staffing, ads, offices and all sorts so a lot of money is dwindled away before your €10 ever sees a 3rd world country.
That said they do amazing work all around the world with the money they do eventually spend so hats off for that.
Like you, I do respect that they do great work, no quibble with that.
Recently got accosted/ambushed TWICE during my lunch hour by one of the lovely chuggers. Politely declined and was chased down the street with an agressive “What’s your problem with Concern?” to which I answered (honestly) that I don’t give money to charities who spend such a high percentage on advertising/administration. My relentless friend continued to harrass me, insisting he knew better than me, although I had politely reiterated that I do give to charity, just ensure that in doing so, every cent of every euro goes to where it’s needed.
Clearly, I’m not on Concern’s mailing list and I have learned that the only way to deal with chuggers, however well meaning they are, is to hiss and snarl. They don’t get more subtle social cues. Sad but true :(
I wonder how much of the money thats collected goes to the needy when the head of the charities get massive wages and expences.
Eh 89% id say !!
Fergus Finlay is paid 119 thousand euro per year plus expences. 89% my hat.
So the guy who runs an organisation that helps millions of people every year, probably saves countless lives too, gets paid the same amount in a year as a dentist and approx. half of what Wayne Rooney is paid in a week. And people think he’s getting too much??
Niall,yes because he is just a spokesman and has 2 other well paid jobs as well.
And Wayne Rooney kicks a bag of air around a patch of grass, what’s the point?
What’s Fergus Finlay got to do with it?
Do you not know that our nice Fergus is the spokesman for Barnardos.Wakey Wakey
This article is about concern. Wakey wakey !!!
Denise are you for real? Could anyone really be as dumb and ill informed as you continually appear to be? Fergus Finlay works for Bernardos. The figures quoted above refer to Concern. Whether you agree with them or not, they have nothing to do with Fergus Finlay, I can’t understand why you would even mention him.
Fergus Finlay is relevant to this debate because he is head of a charity.
He’s the head of a completely different charity, it has no relevance here. The article tells us how much of the money concern receives is spent on charity. How is the salary of an employee of a different charity relevant?
89.8% of €147m spent on charitable causes, leaves about €15m spent on what? Is that’s how much it costs to run Concern? If so, that’s €1.4m per month!!!
So?
They employ 3,200 people.
So,the man is correct.
Do the 3,200 people get paid I bet the majority of these people do this work of their own free will and fair dues to them they do wonderful work its not these people that are the problem. It’s the people at the top of the chain who make it a business for themselves. How can anyone justify taking 100,000 plus Euros from a charity when the money being collected is supposed to help the poor of the world do these people have any morals
I assume they do. The 3,200 are employees. If you’re a volunteer you are not an employee. After costs they still provided appx. €132 million for charitable purposes. That’s still a serious amount of wedge!
My point was the fact that their “employees” are volunteers (or at least that’s what I thought) so I was wondering what kind of expenses could they have that cost them over €1m per month? How much more good could they do with another €15m in the pot?
Chuggers in 2011 got paid over 10 euro an hour…..
It’s mad that you get a negative score for questioning the questionable slant on the concern advert.
3,200 salaries, building rental, building maintenance, electricity bills, various insurances, various travel expenses, advertising, etc, etc… Do I need to go on? For god’s sake 11% on running costs is fantastic, stop looking for excuses to moan.
I taught concern was a charity?
It is, so keeping on teaching that.
Sorry but I don’t believe that… I have been told for a fact by several individuals who have worked signing people up for donations that the first year of any subscriptions paid goes to the outsourced sales/collection firm. I also suspect the average life of a donor to be somewhere between 3 and 5 years max.
I assume you’re quoting that income as net of the collection firm which as they are outsourced can cover their costs themselves before reporting what’s left as net donations to the concern parent company.
Thats true of other charitys bot concern or Amnesty as they are in house and dont work for a private agency
Bot = not. Damn autocorrect switching to Italian!
You have been told for a fact? I’ve been told many things “for a fact” but that doesn’t make them true. I’m sorry but hearsay and your suspicions aren’t really much to go on!
All the chuggers have turned me off supporting concern. They seem to be unable to hear the words ‘no thanks’ and plague elderly people who can’t walk away fast enough. I am beginning to put them in the same bracket as those vile ‘pro-lifers’ as another reason to stay away from town.
Not sure about the percent there what I would like to know is why they need such a huge office in Camden St ?
They are a WORLD WIDE NGO, working in 26 countries including the DRC, Afganistan, Burundi and Haiti which are some of the worst places in Earth for living -and they are there, representing YOU. Here in the US, I work with refugees from Congo, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Guinea and they all say the same: the Irish are the best, most trustworthy, intelligent and caring of all they have met in their struggles as refugees. I am ver proud of that and what our NGOs do on behalf of the Irish people. We are everywhere and it takes a huge skill, time, talent and tact to navigate the cutthroat and ruthless world of non-partisan, diplomatic aid in some of these countries that are being run by thugs and gangs. We’re there cos we are trusted to have no allegiance except to the People in Need. So, in order to maintain that reputation and gave the organization at its best it meeds not only to attract the best, but pay what the reputation of that group has developed. I know it’s hard to understand that when you’ve got something stuck up the proverbial but try!
So it cost 16 milliion euro to run Concern that year, I asked on of there chuggers in Cork recently and he very reluctantly told me he is paid €13 per hour, In my opinion all charities should be run by volunteers and collections done by volunteers, Concern is a money making machine for those at the top and i will never give to a charity that takes 16 million a year for so caled “Running costs” and constantly bombards us looking for money
Will you take a full time volunteer position with them micheal?
Where did the other €16,000,000 go?
The heads of charities in this country is a very lucrative earner , Amazingly they are very coy about how much they pay there execs whilest constantly asking for more donations,
The more I think about charity the more I think it can do more bad than good sometimes. It distorts the markets, props up failed regimes and puts people in long term poverty traps.
Fair play for people for giving to charity and for people who work for charities their hearts are on the right place.
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say