How long have your kept Type II away?

[Larry H.]

Hello All,

I recall reading on some sites when I found out I was either early type II or perhaps Pre Diabetic that a third of those who were pre diabetic would become type II in three years and the progression went on from that time frame. If I recall right it seemed that at about 10 years many of the pre's ended up as type II.

So I wondered how some of you have done, and if so how?

For my self I am coming up on Two years here next month. I started with numbers approaching the fasting levels at 125 and slightly above, once in a great while over the 130 mark, but with variations in meters its a bit hard to know for sure what that meant. My after meals were in the 150 to 190 range when I first started paying attention to what was going on, those were mostly the evening ones which always have been the highest. I started walking about a half hour a day, watching carefully what I eat. I lost 35 pounds, even though I was never really heavy, a high of 193 or so at 6 feet. After the two years I have lower numbers over all at most points, but what is obvious is that if I resort to thinking the issue is "cured" then my numbers will shock me back to my senses.

An example is that some of the evening readings had come in at as little as 115 or so if I ate low carb. But when I got lax and ate a white flour muffin along with a small low carb serving of pasta the other night and a couple other borderline items, I ended up at 170. Way above my usual readings. What this seems to say is the disease can be held in check to a pretty good degree, as long as I do my part. But thinking I can do things, even in fairly small amounts the way I used to is asking for trouble.

My journey has so far been with out the use of any medications from a doctor. I have occasionally searched out alternate items to try, and the judgement on them is pretty much up in the air. I thought the Salacia Oblonga was a fairly good product for lowering my numbers. I also liked a Blood Sugar herbal mix by Natures Way. I don't know if they were helpful in keeping the numbers down or not. I did stop taking most of them, well all lately since my numbers were pretty much under control. I would almost have to try and take some and eat something similar to what caused the higher readings to see if it actually made some real difference.

Hope to hear from some others on their journey and how its progressed.

[yannah]

do you see a doctor regularly and have you gotten some AC1's done?

[Josselyn]

Hi Larry.

With essentially those same numbers you've stated (except that I am overweight and six years younger), I've been classified by my doctor as being a Type 2...period. He apparently doen't believe in pre-diabetic conditions. His diagnosis has turned my life upside down, though I suppose I needed the "head's up."

I, too, control my glucose with diet (low carb), natural supplements, vitamins and exercise instead of my prescribed Metformin (since I still consider myself "pre diabetic"). Like you, too, I watch what I eat, but if I push it with so little as a piece of white toast, my numbers can jump to 155-170 and stay there for a couple of hours or more. My AM reading usually begins with somewhere in the one-teens to one-twenty something, then often drops to 106 or so. Pasta, even a moderate Dreamfield's serving, can keep my blood sugar in the 140s to 150s or so for a few hours before coming down to my more typical 114.

Do you know your A1c numbers? Your FBG numbers from the doc's? Researching the meaning of those readings was the beginning of a journey that, for me, began in late May. I'm now burying myself in books (Atkins, Bernstein, and Gretchen's book, The First Year, among others). I am also on Google, and this site, learning from people more experienced than I.

What I am NOT doing is rolling over and being passive about this health issue I've developed. I am not being obedient about meds. I have not developed noticable symptoms.

The diagnosis was beyond sobering for me, and I'm doing everything in my power to halt or reverse this thing...short of a prescription (maybe later).

I was in the process of buying life insurance when my doctor diagnosed me, for heaven's sake. Not even a warning (new-to-me doc)...I guess I can hang that one up for a while. But I digress...

From all that I have learned in this short amount of time, most pre-diabetics become Type 2 within ten years...but major life changes can inhibit or halt the progression.

I wish you all the best.

[GayleM]

Hi, Larry!

Going back to when I was DX'd as "pre" - there really is no such thing. If you go over 145 after eating anything at anytime you are not normal. Normal folks (that sounds silly - LOL!) never, ever go above that no matter what they eat or how much.

And, we never "heal" from a pre-DX. You always will be. You may avoid further progession (I've read the odds are 50/50) but there is no going back. I've found no time frames, just those "odds" on medical sites. Given I don't believe in being "pre" (kinda like being half pregnant - LOL) I always considered myself as a T2 from the very start. "Pre" really just tells us we are at the start of the disease and if you were peaking at 190 before changing your eating, you are diabetic.

Speaking of peaks, what time do you peak or test? I used to peak at 45 min. after first bite, now it's 1 hour. That can change, so worthwhile to test a bunch every few months to make sure you are testing at your peak times.

I, too, am just using exercise and diet to control my numbers. My overall average is now in the 101-110 range, but my FBG is still 90-105. Great numbers and I do not feel deprived in what I eat at all. I also keep an Excel spreadsheet where I log every morsel I eat and every blood reading. I'm so used to doing it now it takes me only 6 min a day or so.

I don't kid myself as to the progression of diabetes...it will come, I just hope to delay it as long as possible. I test 4 times a day as I have been surprised by my body suddenly not tolerating a food it once did. :)

I don't mean to sound so negative and clearly you are doing a fabulous job in controlling it!! But, I don't think any of us are well served thinking we've beat it or that "pre" isn't the same thing as "full blown" diabetes.

Again, congrats on your great progess!

[GayleM]

Hi, Josselyn!

Big congrats on jumping in and taking control of your life! :) I also applaud your Doc for not softening the blow by saying you were "pre." Since it can take time for diabetes to progress, I think most docs do us no favors not telling us the truth - you're at the start of the disease and get a grip now if your eyes, limbs and heart matter to you.

Just curious why you aren't taking your Metformin? It isn't a sign of failure, just another tool in our arsenal to make the most of what insulin management our bodies have left. It may also allow you to have more flexibility in your food choices.

On your belief you are "pre," as I told Larry, once you cross that threshold we never can go back. What was your A1C? Did you have a fasting glucose test done? I suspect if you do have the FBG test you will no use the term "pre" anymore as the numbers would remove any ambiguity. Just a thought, but to prepare for the long haul you may want to start treating yourself as a T2 and get those other tests if you need confirmation. Due to my diet and lifestyle changes I no longer have to take Metformin. I never had sypmtoms of diabetes either, but the FBG doesn't lie :( I'm just glad I found out early so I have a better chance of keeping limbs, eyes and heart doing well for the rest ofmy life :cool:

I know I sound like a harpy when I tell you that, but you sound like you want to take control, make a plan, put the plan into action and then get on with your life :) ANd with the numbers you shared, if it were me, I would be a T2 and deal with the disease accordingly.

Take care and all the best!

[GayleM]

DUH! Sorry, Josselyn...I failed to read your signature.

My dear, you are a diabetic. Not pre. Your FBG test number at 200+ removes any wiggle room in that diagnosis. And, your A1C is just an average for the past 3 months, so you were probably spiking to the 200 often as your A1C of 6.6 shows your average BG reading at 153...over what is normal and if you play with number a bit, you'll see how high you were spiking after eating...well into the diabetic range.

No intent to be nasty here, but from what you said and how your signature reads, you are in denial.

Only if we accept our diagnosis can we stick to a life plan...and this is for the rest of our lives.

[Larry H.]

Thanks for the input.

I don't think I thought that I was going to return to the day when I could eat anything I wanted and not see poor results.

If funny how every doctor here I have seen, and that is three in the past two years, feels I have no problem.. they think the numbers I am getting are fine and "don't worry about it".. Maybe that is why so many here in the country are overweight and diabetic?

I don't know for sure about the debate which rages here on the topic of is or is there not a pre diabetic diagnosis? Here is the American Diabetes Site. Seems pretty clear they think so?

Pre-Diabetes - American Diabetes Association (http://www.diabetes.org/pre-diabetes.jsp)

My one and only AC1 was about a year ago and came in at 5.8. I think it would be lower now and am about to have one done. I will let you know when I do what the results are. I could be surprised.

My thinking on it was that my morning readings have stayed away from being over the 125 that seems to be the breaking point for type II. I have only have a few of that number in the time I have tested. As to the doctor testing it. The last blood test I had done showed a 101 for the glucose. My own readings have fallen below 100 most days anymore.

Another thing that makes me think that indeed there is some difference in the way some react and others don't, is that I can eat things in moderation such as whole wheat low carb sandwiches nearly every lunch along with some no fat chips, low carb ice cream and often come in around 125 or so at two hours after. Things like too many beans, or the dreaded rice and white flour or real sugar items can throw my numbers up too, but again not so much as what I see other say happens to them.

There is some evidence on the net that thinks that if caught in the early stages of damage, that by reducing your carb intake your body may be able to recover some of its ability to use the sugars somewhat. I can't say that is the case though, just interesting as a prospect.

[Larry H.]

Oh also I forgot the respond to why not take the medication which was suggested by the first doctor who saw the initial 128 reading that started this.

I have lots of pills to take already, I had no insurance at the time and the reports I read mostly say that diet and exercise in the more manageable cases works better than pills. And if pressed many in the medical profession will say that the medicines that stimulate your pancreas eventually wear it out much faster. I prefer not too. And if I can see reasonably good results without taking them I think I am the better off for it.

[dbaratta]

Hi, Larry!

I don't mean to sound so negative and clearly you are doing a fabulous job in controlling it!! But, I don't think any of us are well served thinking we've beat it or that "pre" isn't the same thing as "full blown" diabetes.

Again, congrats on your great progess!

Doc tells me diabetes is progressive.....no way around it. But some people, (and I know a lot), are just insulin resistant and once they lose some weight they can control with diet and exercise. That's not me......so I deal. I was hypoglycemic most of my life and I knew I would be diabetic one day and it finally happened, took over 20 years so I should not complain. :T

[Larry H.]

Yes I tried to stay away from the "insulin resistant" issue since I think many will feel its not a real situation.

When I first was explaining what I was seeing in readings I had a couple people, not doctors, who are alternative type providers, mention that I sounded like I was insulin resistant more than diabetic. That gave me pause to wonder if there was such a thing, but so far I don't really know. Perhaps time will tell.

[dbaratta]

Yes I tried to stay away from the "insulin resistant" issue since I think many will feel its not a real situation.

When I first was explaining what I was seeing in readings I had a couple people, not doctors, who are alternative type providers, mention that I sounded like I was insulin resistant more than diabetic. That gave me pause to wonder if there was such a thing, but so far I don't really know. Perhaps time will tell.

I know people who are insulin resistant. An example was a guy at work, they had him on metformin for a while, he dropped a bunch of weight and watched his diet close but not too close and he doesn't even have to take the meds. I am told that if you can drop weight and get a lot better with the BG numbers that is more resistant because extra fat in the body makes the body resistant. This is just what my doc told me and I am repeating........it is all still a mystery as far as I am concerned.

[sumi]

Hi Larry, welcome.
It sounds like you are doing a great job on control.
I don't think anyone really knows how long you can go without worsening symptoms. My guess is decades, if you are aware and careful.
As to the 'insulin resistant' issue, that is the main issue with type 2's. In general, we keep making more and more insulin to keep bg's in control, until our pancreas can no longer keep up with the demand. At this point, our bg's start to rise, even though we may have 3 times the amount of insulin circulating that a non-D would have. If we continue with high bg's, eventually our beta cells will wear out. I agree with your comment on drugs that stimulate insulin production, they probably accelerate this process, however metformin, the most common first prescription does not do this.

[Larry H.]

Yes I forgot about that fact on the Metformin works though the digestive system I think? From what I have read the Salacia Oblonga that comes from the bark of trees in India and is widely used to lower both glucose and cholesterol over there is what the Metformin was based on. Both create a gassy effect that can be quite difficult at times and I backed off using it all the time as well. Oddly when I had the last blood work up I have the lowest cholesterol and the best good to bad ratio I have ever seen. My triglycerides were the lowest ever, way below good and they used to be very high. I don't know if the Salacia was responsible or not but it made me wonder? That with lots of walking and watching my diet.

This morning my fasting was 92 so the trend of seeing better numbers is continuing.

[Ronin]

Everyone:

I don't want to brag but in the two-plus years my numbers have actually improved. My health care people have suggested that the initial diagnosis was wrong, but when I tell them about my life-style changes and what I am doing to maintain they all agree that I'm holding off the onset. How long is yet to be determined but for now I'm doing just fine over two years in and better numbers than when I started this journey.

[Larry H.]

Ronin,

Yes that is my finding. It becomes then rather a chore to have to insist to the doctors that I can't just eat what I want or ignore the problem. That seems to be the catch 22 of diabetes. If you do something early to reduce the effects, as long as possible, you get no coverage and little to no encouragement at least not from my doctors who seem oblivious to what it takes to keep the numbers lowered. It was only the first young doctor who saw my initial numbers and warned me I was headed for trouble if I didn't proactively do something to slow it. After he went on to of all things, become a diabetes specialist, I lost my only real support in that office.

Larry

[GayleM]

Larry, you point out something very, very important. Most of the forums I read are full of horror stories of the lack of ability for GP's and dieticians to have ever gone past the basics they learned in med school. The dietician I was sent to was a certified diabetes educator, but she started me on that "3 servings of this a day and use your palm as measurement" crappola. My monitor quickly told me otherwise. My doc, whom I respect alot, didn't know enough either. Only after I proved to her through my aggressive approach that I was controlling it did she agree to refer me to an endo. He was a young person (in doc years - LOL) and so he was up to date on the latest and greatest and sees me as a partner in all decisions and analysis. Heck, he even send me med papers he gets on diabetes! :)

It's our bodies and I will fire my doc if he ever stops engaging me. I don't blindly follow anyone on anything outside of health issues and I see no reason to do so there. It's a pain to spend so many hours researching and trying to learn about something so out of my realm of expertise, but NO ONE will ever care about my health as much as I do :D

If they buck you, ask for the glucose tolerance test again and you CAN do those yourself (you can buy the glucose at the same level) AND you can do your own A1C as well. It's out of pocket to you, but frankly, until we get our screwed up medical insurance situation straightened out there is nothing wrong with your official record showing "pre." Your monitor will continue to tell you all you need to know about how you are doing and from where I sit, your willingness to jump in and take control of your own health is brilliant :)

Oh, and if you ever think you may have beaten it or don't need to be so tight on control, give yourself the glucose tolerance test...I had gotten cocky once about how low my numbers were staying, then thought I'd better really check. Well, that took care of my cockiness. It WAS better, but still without a doubt diabetic. I got back with the program and never looked back again ;)
Take care!

[Larry H.]

I agree 100%. Even though I can keep numbers down if I push it too much, I will get a rude awakening.. so I try for the most part to keep the carbs low and the exercise up..

I don't quite understand how it is that doctors have such a weird lack of knowledge on it, but they do. I was even quite surprised when I attended the local hospital diabetes group one night because they had the American Diabetes Associations local rep to the hospital there for a talk.. He didn't even know what the guidelines that were suggested by them were. He seemed surprised to hear that they considered 200 a normal range after eating. There were other things, but I slept since and can't recall, but I remember the woman from the hospital said she even had to check the literature from the ADA they had outside the room to be sure what I said was right, as he didn't know. The blind leading the blind.

I could understand the first doctor I had, (before the young one), he is basically retired and he is guided by 40 year old knowledge, but the younger one now is about 50 and even he is not up on it as far as what is involved in keeping your numbers good. I hear all the time on the Radio that if your AC1 is over 7 you may need help, well I thought it was 6, but all the wrong information is rampant and were left to fend for ourselves for the most part.

[Larry H.]

As a rule lately I haven't checked too regularly to see where I am at in the morning. But today since the topic of how are numbers doing after two years questioned what I am seeing I thought I would add this..

I had my usual Kellogg's Special K protein plus, 10g protein, 9 carbs and 5 fiber, listed as a total of 20 carbs less 5 for fiber for a 3/4 cup serving. I have that with no fat milk, half a banana, some red raspberries and a few walnuts broken up with splenda sprinkled over it.. At two hours I had a 89 with no exercise in between. Frankly that was even better than I thought considering the fact I eat a small cereal bowl of it. So to me things are better after two years. At one time I would have gotten more near the 125 or so mark with a similar breakfast.. Oh and I drink about 4 mugs of coffee too..

[GayleM]

Wow, Larry! Good for you! That breakfast would knock me out of the park :) I calculated it was about 30 carbs in total. I wonder what you spiked at? With 89 at two hours it would suggest maybe 130? (just going by how fast I come down, totally NOT a scientific guess) And do I remember right that you don't take Metformin all the time?

Nice work - I love reading about successes!!

Take care!

[Larry H.]

I have never taken prescription drugs for diabetes as yet. As to the testing times, I am following what most people seem to feel is the proper timing of two hours from the first bite. I haven't really looked to see what I had earlier as readings in a long time. That might be of interest, but if so then why are we testing later? Seems like there is a consensus that what we need to know more than a very quick spike is what the effects are over a bit more time?

[GayleM]

yes, this board seems to follow the 2 hour testing. My GP who DX'd me said two hours, but the "coming down" reason confused me since I thought my goal was to lower my average into normal range, and if I peak too high that will raise my average BG, hence a high A1C. (and the A1C is our source for knowing effects over time)

I wanted more expertise than my GP, so I got and endo and he is the one who encouraged me to test at my peak and I found that is also what the ADA forum follows. I do the peak time because my goal is to always stay in normal BG ranges. I know I come down, my A1C's and morning fastings show my averages are excellent and within normal range. So, my focus has been on learning how different foods affect me and eating to keep my max glucose at normal ranges.

Before I started testing at peak times I was consistently in the 80's at 2 hours. I found, for me, that eating the same foods and testing at my peak sometimes was putting me up to 180, way over normal, even though I was int he 80's at 2 hours (with no exercise). Since it is still debated if we damage beta cells any time we go over 145, I opt to keep in normal range all the time. So I changed my food choices accordingly. I further confirm by doing 3 or 4 random tests during the week and since I do have a mid-day and evening snack that pretty much confirms that I stay in the 80's around that 2 hour point as well.

Long story as to why I like peak and that pretty much mimics what my endo as has said. Conservative and aggressive, for sure. You might ask over at the ADA forum and see what they say as to why those forum members adhere to the peak time testing. My reason is certainly not the word of God :) I don't post there as my neighbor does and we compare notes that way so neither of us has to spend hours on the PC :) But, there is a gent named "Alan" there that has a wonderful blog that I found very helpful.

No right or wrong, whatever works!

Take care!

[Larry H.]

Gayle,

I wonder if perhaps your in the stages of glucose intolerance that some feel is something like and maybe the precursor for diabetes? Since your numbers are so good at the two hour point over time it might seem like a quick reaction to the glucose rather than a long term continuing issue like type II. It most likely would eventually maybe lead to that if unchecked?

Well this is all speculation on my part and bits and pieces of all the things I have seen on the net over the past couple years. From what I have read a real type II would seem to have a much higher two hour reading than your seeing, at least the ones I know are.. Many have fasting over 200 and reading in the 300 and up range after eating. I don't think either of us qualifies for that as yet? The fact that your getting numbers so low must mean your body is still functioning fairly well unless your just not eating?

[GayleM]

Hi Larry!

I am in the earlier stages of it, for sure. I was probably only diabetic for a year before it was caught. But, my old A1C, GTT and fasting numbers were solidly in the diabetic range and I did have one major symptom.

Like you, I've been able to go off meds and keep such great numbers now through having lost 75 pounds, regular and vigorous working out and while I enjoy a varied choice of foods (even small amounts of pasta, rice, bread and other higher carb foods) I watch my portion control and know what times of day some foods don't work for my long term goal of normal BG ranges through testing at my peak :( I am never hungry, have near perfect lipids now (I was basically a solid before - LOL) and feel better at 57 than I did at 27 :D

That improvement did not happen overnight, but it honestly didn't take long once I changed my food choice, started working out and lost weight.

Your observations are very good and I greatly appreciate your reply!

One thing to consider - the numbers you are talking are those of someone who most likely has been diabetic longer and is not managing their disease. You will find alot of folks just don't worry about managing the disease as well as you or I. That's their choice, but fasting numbers in the 200's and postprandial numbers of 300 on an ongoing basis is more than enough to bring on neuropathy, retinopothy and is without question killing their beta cells. They don't have to be at that point if they don't want to. I chose not to let that happen. It does require discipline and I know full well that I can't cure this, and if the day comes when my lifestyle choices don't keep my numbers low, I have no problem doing meds or insulin.

We don't start out as diabetics with those 200 & 300 numbers. It is a progressive disease and there is no doubt that I was pretty early in the game, but still had most likely been a T2 for at least a year before DX. And some people don't learn until they are well advanced that they are diabetic and have those numbers, which is much harder to bring down without meds.

Again, good observation and I thank you for your comments!

Take care!

[Larry H.]

Gayle;

Yes It would seem we share a pretty similar story.. Obviously here not all have found the same path so far. And as I think I and now you have mentioned, there seems to be great apathy amongst many in the diabetic community at large, especially here in the small towns where I live. Little to no reductions in weight or added exercise like we have done. I really don't know what to make of it except that those little pills seem to lull many into thinking its the cure and back to eating as usual.

Just for a sampler today, (and I was a bit apprehensive about even checking it), I checked what is not always a typical lunch by any means but I have a feeling one that would have sent some much higher and would have had higher results for me too a year or more ago.

My mom fixed three pieces of french toast which we used the Sara Lee light bread, two slices for 18 carbs.. On those I had a sprinkling of splenda, about a teaspoon of no sugar added jelly and yet another tablespoon of sugar free syrup. For desert (yes we had that after wards), we had piece of pie she made of no fat or sugar fudge chocolate pudding on a graham cracker crust. I have found I can't get by with that so I left most of the crust.. On that we had some fresh strawberries an a scoop of low carb beyers vanilla ice cream to boot..

At just about exactly two hours I checked and had a 121, I just had to go back in and recheck the result to be sure!

I don't give these readings as a prideful thing but as a encouragement for the fact that as you, active work and vigilance in the early stages seem to give one some freedom to eat reasonably compared to not trying at all. Again this is not necessarily the same for all.

[GayleM]

Larry, you may want to check my calculations, but guessing your portions were equal to 1 serving that lunch had over 70 carbs and I didn't even count the jelly :) Sugar free does not mean low carb, for example 1 oz. of sugar free syrup is approx. 25.6 carbs. I sure would have liked to know how high your BG actually got - no telling how fast you come down, but if your peak was 145 or less that would be brilliant!!!

When did you last have an A1C? That would be something to have in your toolkit as well to confirm that you are not spiking much higher and just coming down farily quickly.

Regardless, I am envious of your lunch because I know I couldn't do that....it sounds sooooo good!!! :D

Enjoy!!!

[Gozelle]

This is helpful to me. I am trying so hard and doing all things right. Walking, small portions, few carbs, meds, etc.

And while I have made some progress . . . I guess way down deep inside I think my efforts will reverse the diagnoses. I was pre for years but did not understand . . .
I see you A1c at 5.5 and think that is normal. I understand it is "normal" only with a great deal of dilegence.

[GayleM]

This is helpful to me. I am trying so hard and doing all things right. Walking, small portions, few carbs, meds, etc.

And while I have made some progress . . . I guess way down deep inside I think my efforts will reverse the diagnoses. I was pre for years but did not understand . . .
I see you A1c at 5.5 and think that is normal. I understand it is "normal" only with a great deal of dilegence.

Gozelle, you deserve a big BRAVO for all you are doing! It does take a bit of time to digest it all, but you are already far ahead of the game by taking the steps to learn how your body reacts and what will manage the disease for you.

I was DX'd as "pre" long before I got to where I couldn't deny it anymore. All my doc at the time said was "cut out sugar and eat less carbs." Sheesh! That was good for nothing! LOL She didn't make a big deal about it so I didn't...even when I started getting boils that wouldn't heal, she never brought it up again. Most of us see general practitioners unless we have a specific need for a specialist. And most GP's know just what they learned in class at med school. I hope the medical community gets a big wake up call on how they should educate us and drop that silly diet they always push of "1 serving of fruits, 2 of carbs, etc." which often does more harm than good.

Shame on me for not questioning my doc more OR doing my own research. Ignorance was bliss for me. But hey, I am doing really well now and feel great so I never look back, nor should you. It's what we do now that counts :)

Keep up the good work and take care!

[Larry H.]

This is helpful to me. I am trying so hard and doing all things right. Walking, small portions, few carbs, meds, etc.

And while I have made some progress . . . I guess way down deep inside I think my efforts will reverse the diagnoses. I was pre for years but did not understand . . .
I see you A1c at 5.5 and think that is normal. I understand it is "normal" only with a great deal of dilegence.

Its all so subjective, it really seems to vary from person to person.. I jumped in with both feet and without the denial stage, I was to frightened at first not too, to be truthful. Maybe the point I reached was not as progressed as some others since I do seem to be experiencing somewhat better results than others at times.

You didn't say, and I am not familiar with your history so not sure what kind of readings your seeing now and before. I too have been keen to notice some who have come here with AC1 readings up pretty high and showing nearly normal for now. But its deceptive as it only shows that if your doing your part well, which fortunately many here are. I am expecting, but could be wrong, that my year ago one and only AC1 will be better this time but if Gayles theory is right, I might be in for a disappointment.

I am still a bit interested in the idea that some people are glucose intolerant , what ever that means, some feel its a different situation and is not actual diabetes? No clue though.

[GayleM]

I am expecting, but could be wrong, that my year ago one and only AC1 will be better this time but if Gayles theory is right, I might be in for a disappointment.


Hey, Larry!
Your A1C could (and I think should) show good improvement unless you are consistently spiking far, far higher than your 2 hour (unlikely given what you come down to). If you experience high peaks they would appear not to be in long duration at all and if I recall correctly you've talked about consistently good 2 hour readings - in the 120's?.

There are different rating grids used, but my endo uses the one where a 5=100-134 avg mean BG and 6=135-166 avg mean BG. True to form, I actually use the most conservative grid for my own evaluation and management :o

I have mine again next month and since I have seen a dramatic lowering of numbers in the last 90 days I fully expect mine to be a 5.3 or so.

Please share your numbers when you have it done so we can celebrate with you! :)

[Larry H.]

Gayle

Well it might be good and it might not.. What prompted me to start doing readings a bit more was the fact that after eating some things that sent my numbers up considerably, like 178 the other night, I got to thinking about the fact, sort of like maybe you said, sometimes we hope, or think were cured..

It still takes watching no matter how good some readings are it would seem. It may be that certain foods are really difficult for me and others and those are going to give me numbers I don't want. Those I have to watch. In honesty the day I had the rather high for me lately reading, we had been out and got stuck with only a Hardees as a food choice and it was almost three hours after my lunch time.. since things had been looking pretty good I said the heck with it and had a Little thick Burger and Fries. I recalled seeing on their nutrition chart that the amount of carbs in that bun were high, but I ate it anyway. I must admit it was good! But that night after a meal with some beans it I ended up that reading.. It could have been partly a effect of throwing my numbers even higher after overdoing it earlier, but not sure.

On that lunch today. I find the bread we used to usually not bother me much. I know some say they can't have any, but it really hasn't ever been one of my foods that cause a big raise. The total for the three slices should have been about 27 for the bread, we used egg beaters for the egg and splenda for the sweeting. How much the jams had I don't know for sure and I think it can depend on which artificial sweeteners they used as to the reaction. I read here where some can eat them and some can't so again a variance is possible. The ice cream is rated at 4 carbs so it shouldn't have done a lot either. Sometime I will have to figure out exactly what all the carbs were, but for now they do not appear to give me a whole lot of trouble. I don't doubt some would find the meal a problem for sure.

[GayleM]

Take heart, Larry...somewhere in my research I recall that with A1C's, if you are on your target range at least 90-94% (I think?) of the time that the occasional splurge won't affect the average mean. Any statistician's on here? :D

I am as far from a mathematician as one can get, but it seems sensible that to calcuate the avg. mean within your target would not require 100% compliance to the target number.

Interesting stuff! I'll let you know how mine turns out, too.

Take care!