[frombc]

Hi all,

I bought myself a meter a couple of years ago after deciding that my BG was a little high. My Dr. laughed at me, but this something I wanted to do for myself.

The test I had done at the lab was 103 fasting and 119 (at 2 hours) after a 75g load of glucose. The Dr. told me that's perfectly normal.

I did some reading online and found that while in Canada up to 110 is considered normal, 103 is on the high side. That's when I bought the meter.

I've tested myself at all different times. Usually fasting, then 2 hours after meals. My after meal numbers are usually around 100 or just a little over. This is after eating whole wheat spaghetti, turkey burger on a whole wheat bun, rice with meals etc, even an A&W burger and onion rings. The highest I've ever been, and it was only 1 time is 158 at 2 hours. . That was after eating a filet 'o fish and fries at McDonalds (lots of sugar in that ****). The odd time it's been 130ish, but rarely.

I test for a week or so every few months to see what's going on...checking for changes. For months now my fasting has been steady at 84. Two hours after meals is usually 95-110.

I just started one of my testing phases again last week, and suddenly my fasting numbers are 90-100.

I'm wondering why the sudden little increase. Mind you I checked back in my records, and found that I did have 100 fasting in Feb 08 on occasion. Unfortunately I didn't keep records from Feb 08 until last week, but when I did test, I was always 84. I suppose there could have been times in there when I wasn't keeping records that there was an increase, but I guess I'll never know if small increases were a pattern for me.

Here's the part that really confuses me though. I always do my fasting test as soon as I get up. Today I decided to test it again 1.5 hours later (still in fasting state) and it had gone up from 97 to 106. This would explain why my fasting at the lab is always higher than my home fasting test. Why does it go up after you've been up and around for a while? My fasting numbers aren't as good as I thought they were if they're going up like that before eating anything in the morning.

I'm not freaking out or anything, but this does put me closer to being considered pre-diabetic. What do you all think? Would I be considered pre-diabetic with my postprandial numbers being as good as they are?

You read stuff my Dr. Bernstein or the "What they don't tell you about diabetes" website and they say truly normal people never, ever go above 120 no matter what they eat, normal people are from 70-85 fasting and that your A1C should be 4.7 at the most.

How many more people would be considered Glucose intolerant if the medical community adopted those standards?

I guess I'm just really confused as to what normal really is. There's so much conflicting information out there. Some of it almost seems militant in it's tone. I was adopted, so I don't have any family history to go by. It can make you feel like you're flying blind when it comes to health issues at times.

If anyone can answer my question about fasting numbers going up after you've been up for a while, that would be great. It seems fasting numbers aren't very accurate if they depend on when you take them. If they jump that much, you could think your normal, but you would actually be considered pre-diabetic.

Thanks for taking the time to read.

[jps]

I work in a lab, I've logged my numbers over the years. There was a very gradual increase in FBS for me. Actually, upon diagnosis I was 299 fast... 6 months prior I was in the 110's.

Basically, you should use it as a warning sign IMO. I wish I did. Just start eating right, cutting back on the "bad" carbs such as pastas, breads, potatoes, rice, sweets, etc. Not eliminate, just cut back and see how things go. Your pancreas is probably starting to work a little bit heavy right now to keep your sugars in line, not extremely hard, but harder than it needs to be working. Give it a break, let those beta cells regenerate.

This is just my opinion obviously.

My personal belief is that regardless of what we are told, a fasting in the 100's is a definite warning sign and NOT normal.

[Mothernature]

The one thing I will say. If you are worried about diabetes, McDonalds and A&W (outside of a salad or grilled chicken breast) are bad ideas. Not only for blood sugar but for heart health.

I've read several sources that non-diabetic's blood sugar can spike to 180 after a very high carbo meal. I think this is why the ADA publishes this as the high limit.

I am a bit confused as well. We are going through this with my husband. His fasting number is <100 but his A1C was 6.3. I expect the NP to give us a definitive answer in a week.

[frombc]

Thanks for your post jps.

Actually there hasn't been any increase in my FBG. The first test I ever had was in Mar/06 (at the lab) and it was 103. In Sep/07 it was 104. I started testing myself at home in Nov/07.

Since I've had the meter, by FBG has actually gone down. They're usually 84 (even if you add the increase after being up and around for a while it would probably still be under 100).

I realize this is high normal, but it hasn't increased over the last 3 years at all. I don't eat tons of them now, but will definitely see if decreasing my carb intake helps with the fasting numbers.

[frombc]

Hi Mothernature, I agree McD's and A&W arent' good for anyone. It's not a usual thing I eat. When I ate the McDs I actually did it out of curiousity to see what it would do to my BG. Fast food is something we have few and far between.

I'm certainly not the typical profile of someone who gets type 2. I'm a 50 yr old female, 5'6" and weigh 130. My blood pressure is 90/60 and my cholestorol is excellent (high HDL, low triglycerides).

I sometimes wonder if my relatives have type 2 and maybe my beta cells are not working at 100%. If this is true, being aware of my BG will certainly help keep diabetes at bay.

[ShottleBop]

Originally Posted by Mothernature

The one thing I will say. If you are worried about diabetes, McDonalds and A&W (outside of a salad or grilled chicken breast) are bad ideas. Not only for blood sugar but for heart health.

I've read several sources that non-diabetic's blood sugar can spike to 180 after a very high carbo meal. I think this is why the ADA publishes this as the high limit.

I am a bit confused as well. We are going through this with my husband. His fasting number is <100 but his A1C was 6.3. I expect the NP to give us a definitive answer in a week.

Your fasting numbers aren't always a good indication. Post-prandial numbers can be elevated for a long time before you see a rise in your fasting numbers.

[jps]

The good news is that whether or not you have a problem, you are trying to figure it out and take precaution if need be. That's awesome. Learn as much as you can. If you are one to be lucky enough to escape it, perhaps you can help somebody else.

I've attached a thread here to help you keep an eye out. It's some things, in retrospect, that I noticed going on with me when I was going from non-diabetic to pre-diabetic to full blown diabetic. Just an FYI...

I should post this here... personal timeline from normal to prediabetes to diabetes

[frombc]

Originally Posted by ShottleBop

Your fasting numbers aren't always a good indication. Post-prandial numbers can be elevated for a long time before you see a rise in your fasting numbers.

That's why I think it's criminal that the medical community uses the FBG test without giving you a carb challenge.

My PP numbers are usually pretty good 95-110. They're actually about the same as my FBG numbers.

[Ronin]

Hi Frombc!

A few thoughts on your initial post (I've been quite busy lately and not keeping up on these threads).

Dr. Bernstein is either a saint of the devil, depending on who you talk to. Some of his assertions on what is "normal" are based on a single study of a handful of highly fit, highly active, 20-somethings from a Scandinavian country. Okay, they never had BG levels above 120 and hovered in the 70's most of the time. From what I could glean from reading about the initial study (I've never found the original documents) their diet was something like what a ultra-pure devotee of Dr. Atkins would eat -- mostly protien with almost zero carbs.

The other thing is the Berstein is very smart, but driven by his own demons, particularly a childhood before the invention of BG meters, massive doses of insulin were the norm, and wild swings in BG levels were common. His research has resulted in micro-dosing of insulin and eventually led to (albeit not invented by him) insulin pumps. So we all owe him a debt of gratitiude, but we don't have to practice his religion of ultra strict diet control.

If (and the if is still active in your case) you are Pre-Diabetic, you have caught this quite early. With most adult onset diagnosis of Pre-D Diet modification (a.k.a., changing the way you eat for the rest of your life) as well as regular aerobic and anerobic exercise will get the glucose management under control.

I looked at your public profile and didn't find anything so it is hard to say what other risk factors you might have.

[frombc]

Thanks for your reply Ronin,

Some of the stuff I've been reading does seem a little extreme to me. Is the study you're referrring to the same one that's on the "What they don't tell you about diabetes" website?

What is a Normal Blood Sugar?

In some of the things I've read, they make it sound like all "normal" peoples' bodies react the same way to food without much deviation at all. If that were the case, BG would be the only body function that would apply to.

Yet they say diabetics react very differently from each other. Seems to me we all react differently to things, diabetic or not.

I know in that study I referenced they chose people that had A1Cs from 4.3 to 5.4. This is their version of normal. If you included people with higher A1C that are not diabetic this would give you a diiferent group to study, so the outcome would be different.

These studies depend on who they choose to include, no?

You asked about other risk factors I might have.
I'm a 50 year old female, 5'6" weighing 130lbs. My blood pressure is 90/60 and my cholestorol is excellent...high HDL, low trigs. I don't know family history, so I can't say whether there would be a risk factor there.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm not sure whether to worry or not and it seems the more I read the less I understand.

[Ronin]

Hi Frombc!

It is not at all unusual to try an out-think the process. Everyone has a bodily system that works just a bit differently than the person next to them. Age also seems to be a factor but few in the diabetic community will acknowledge that fact. However, the reality is that we cannot eat like a teenager for the rest of our lives without becoming grossly overweight. (I have friends with teenagers who try and are grossly overweight.)

The HbA1c is the best test going as it shows your average BG level over time. The claim is 90 days but I have seen shifts in my own over four week periods. So, at least for me, the A1c is a weighted average trended to the past four weeks.

I have also learned that the timing of carbs make a huge difference. As long as I keep my carb consumption within an hour before or after (not before "and" after) aerobic exercise it has mininal effect on my BG levels. However, days when I don't get the exercise show raises in my FBG's almost instantly if I don't watch my eating very closely.

My medical folks tell me I'm just fine, but they don't realize the amount of control I exert on a daily basis to maintain the A1c's.

Your question is probably: "Should I be worried?" Yes, and no. Unless you get a difinitive answer with an OGTT you will never be sure. However, changing your lifestyle is a good thing regardless. Do that to feel better, live better and generally be more healthy. Take a few tests (I do two per day an FBG and a post breakfast) as long as these are in my normal range I don't get upset. Even if one day is higher than I want I don't panic unless I see a pattern. Heck, I'm over 60, very active, but somtimes have a down day. My A1c's are fine and I just feel better exercising the control.

[jwags]

If you're eating that kind of food and getting those numbers you are not diabetic or even prediabetic. But as the others say, use this as an exuce to change your eating habits. Fast food with transfats and sugar lead to a lot of other problems besides diabetes. Try to avoid processed carbs and eat lots of fruits and veggies.

[yannah]

all i know is anything 100 and over is above the threshhold.
and mine was 100 ayear before diagnosis and 108 6 months before diagnosis and in the 300's at diagnosis with an AC of 10.5.

yeah.

so i don't know.

my fbs rises in the morning without food. your liver can dump glucose if it feels it needs to.

[frombc]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

Ronin, In my OP I did mention my OGTT test that I had in 2006. It came back at 119 at 2 hours. This is not considered prediabetic in Canada. Neither were my fasting of 103.

I sometimes wonder about LADA because of my high normal nos. and profile, but figured if that were the case my nos. probably would have gone up over the last 3 1/2 years. Anyone know the answer to that? I asked in the 1.5 forum, but only one person answered and suggested I get the GAD and other tests.

I'm not even on my Drs radar as far as Diabetes goes, so to ask for these tests probably isn't an option.

I know there's nothing I can do if it's LADA I'm headed for, but just knowing would put my mind at ease. Maybe I shouldn't even be worried about D at all. I really don't know anymore.