By the same logic, there's no such thing as "cancer", a "cold" (or more accurately: upper respiritory illness), or a broken leg, since each of these have many distinct causes.
All models are wrong, some models are useful. And some are based in at least part on historical accident and sequence of understanding. Diabetes (etymology, Greek diabetes, excessive discharge of urine), is one such of these.
Of the multiple distinct types of diabetes currently recognised (types 1 & 2, which you note, gestational, MODY, 5, and possibly several others), there is a commonality of primary symptoms (unregulated, often high, blood sugar), treatments (most must or may be treated with supplemental insulin), monitoring (of blood glucose levels typically by finger stick or CGM, as well as HgA1C for longer-term status and progression), of healthcare providers specialising in the diseases (generally endocrinologists), and of long-term complications: high blood pressure, heart disease and failure, neuropathy, poor circulation, various infections, and often peripheral limb amputations.
Thus the medical literature notes that diabetes is a group of common endocrine diseases all sharing high blood sugar levels, though of distinct types having distinct causes but largely similar treatments.
In the same sense, treatment for a broken leg largely doesn't distinguish on the cause of the fracture (blunt trauma, falls, osteoperosis, gunshot), treatment of respiratory illnesses is similar despite different infectious agents, and cancers, whilst varying greatly in prognosis and treatment, share the commonality of unregulated growth and metastases, with similar end-stage consequences.
All labels and concepts are human constructs to simplify a complex world. Absolutism over definitions tends not to be especially enlightening. Or useful.
I'm not nitpicking. Using "diabetes" instead of "type 1 diabetes" or "type 2 diabetes" really hurts people with type 1 diabetes. It's a dangerous confusion.
By default, people assume "type 2" when they hear "diabetes." They don't understand that type 1 is a completely different disease - and an absolutely terrifying one. Type 1 and type 2 are as different as day and night. It's like having runny nose vs having no nose.
This confusion harms awareness of type 1 diabetes. It undermines the urgency of finding a cure and shifts attention away from type 1.
When people are diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (or, more often, when their toddlers or children are), they get furious that this confusion exists at all - and that they knew nothing about type 1 diabetes beforehand.
All models are wrong, some models are useful. And some are based in at least part on historical accident and sequence of understanding. Diabetes (etymology, Greek diabetes, excessive discharge of urine), is one such of these.
Of the multiple distinct types of diabetes currently recognised (types 1 & 2, which you note, gestational, MODY, 5, and possibly several others), there is a commonality of primary symptoms (unregulated, often high, blood sugar), treatments (most must or may be treated with supplemental insulin), monitoring (of blood glucose levels typically by finger stick or CGM, as well as HgA1C for longer-term status and progression), of healthcare providers specialising in the diseases (generally endocrinologists), and of long-term complications: high blood pressure, heart disease and failure, neuropathy, poor circulation, various infections, and often peripheral limb amputations.
Thus the medical literature notes that diabetes is a group of common endocrine diseases all sharing high blood sugar levels, though of distinct types having distinct causes but largely similar treatments.
In the same sense, treatment for a broken leg largely doesn't distinguish on the cause of the fracture (blunt trauma, falls, osteoperosis, gunshot), treatment of respiratory illnesses is similar despite different infectious agents, and cancers, whilst varying greatly in prognosis and treatment, share the commonality of unregulated growth and metastases, with similar end-stage consequences.
All labels and concepts are human constructs to simplify a complex world. Absolutism over definitions tends not to be especially enlightening. Or useful.