[Mack Khelly]

If I eat a high Carbs lunch, such as pasta or rice, when would be the best time after that to do my workout to be the most effective in burning the sugar. right after lunch, one hour later or 2 hours later, or any other time? Thanks

[ant hill]

Maybe 1 hour after your last bight of your meal. Don't go at it like a steam trian full of steam as Time is the key I think.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by Mack Khelly

If I eat a high Carbs lunch, such as pasta or rice, when would be the best time after that to do my workout to be the most effective in burning the sugar. ...

It probably doesn't make that much difference. The body can't store glucose. Glycogen reserves are topped up when you eat, and what isn't used for energy at the time of eating is quickly stored as fat. Most of the calories you burn while exercising come from fat anyway.

[DCaplinger]

Just remember, the exercises you do don't just burn energy while you are performing them. The burnoff continues for several hours afterward.

Your body will usually try to burn the available glucose before it starts tapping into it's fat reserves. During a nominal workout, your body should burn both glucose and fats from your diet. If you really push it, your body will eventually start tapping into it's fat stores.

Regards,

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by DCaplinger

... Your body will usually try to burn the available glucose before it starts tapping into it's fat reserves. ....

My understanding is that the only "available glucose" is what is circulating in the bloodstream. For most people with normal blood sugar, this is about 80 grams of glucose, which amounts to 240 calories. Glycogen is only used during anaerobic exercise and does not get used before fat during cardio exercise. This is why the body switches into fat burning mode after 15-20 minutes of exercise. After this point 70+% of calories come from fat. As a T1, I am very aware of this process. During aerobic exercise, my blood sugar drops quickly during the first half hours and then stabilises.

There is very little capacity for blood to carry excess glucose from carbo in meals. "Normal" people have mechanisms that keep blood glucose in a normal range, and any excess glucose is quickly stored as fat. Glucose that can't enter the cells directly because it isn't needed is soon converted to triglycerides by the liver and stored away as fat anyway. After you have been exercising for 20 minutes, these reserves are drawn on.

Having said that, exercise can be a good way to counteract a post-meal spike. And the more carby the meal was, the sooner after eating that exercise needs to be. There is no advantage in delaying the exercise, except in that it may be more comfortable. ...

[Mack Khelly]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate all the responses. I got two more questons, if yo'll don't mind responding to.1) Which would be more beneficial, running hard on the treadmill with highest incline for 35 minutes, or walking average speed for 60 minutes. 2) I'm type 2, and my AIC is 5.9 with no medication. how much would that convert into my average daily blood sugar reading over 3 months period? anyone knows of a convertor I can use? Thanks to all. Mack

[xMenace]

There's a converter in the panel on the right.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by Mack Khelly

.... 1) Which would be more beneficial, running hard on the treadmill with highest incline for 35 minutes, or walking average speed for 60 minutes. 2) I'm type 2, and my AIC is 5.9 with no medication. how much would that convert into my average daily blood sugar reading over 3 months period? ....

There is no way of converting exercise into an HBA1c improvement. But it definitely helps. The difference between the two exercise options you mention is in the source of the calories burned. Less intense exercise (the walking) will be fuelled mainly by calories from stored fat, while running will be fuelled by glycogen. To replenish the glycogen, you will have to eat carbs, which will adversely affect your BG control. From this perspective, the less intense exercise is probably more appropriate. But you should combine with it muscle building anaerobic exercise (weights). Increasing lean muscle mass benefits blood glucose control enormously as muscle is more insulin sensitive than fat and uses more calories at rest.

[Emm]

I find the best help is exercising BEFORE eating. Because it means I start off lower, and my body is happier and healthier and seems to use glucose better.

I actually prefer to avoid the high carb meals.... most of the time. When I want takeaways or something it's still doable - remembering that I'm a type 1 and can play with insulin - but it's a tricky thing and often not worth it.

[tanyatype1]

Walking/running on your treadmill set to the highest incline will burn the most calories. You'll also increase muscle mass in your legs and butt! Go for it! (I LOVE my treadmill!)

[princesslinda]

If I know i'm going to have a higher carb lunch, I will exercise that morning, have a VERY low-carb b/fast, eat the higher carb lunch, get some exercise afterwards, even if its just a walk, then have a low carb dinnner.

According to the conversion chart I use, 5.9 A1C correlates to an avg blood sugar of 133.

[Wolf]

Originally Posted by princesslinda

If I know i'm going to have a higher carb lunch, I will exercise that morning, have a VERY low-carb b/fast, eat the higher carb lunch, get some exercise afterwards, even if its just a walk, then have a low carb dinnner.

According to the conversion chart I use, 5.9 A1C correlates to an avg blood sugar of 133.

I don't quite understand the conversion chart, regarding "avg. blood sugar". Since blood sugar levels fluctuate so much because of meals, how would somebody know what the average level is? For example, most of the time I measure my levels, it's after meals rather than fasting or at other times. Periodically, I'll measure fasting, but my main focus is seeing what happens after eating. (I'm type 2)

[princesslinda]

Originally Posted by Wolf

I don't quite understand the conversion chart, regarding "avg. blood sugar". Since blood sugar levels fluctuate so much because of meals, how would somebody know what the average level is? For example, most of the time I measure my levels, it's after meals rather than fasting or at other times. Periodically, I'll measure fasting, but my main focus is seeing what happens after eating. (I'm type 2)

Like you, I too am most concerned with my after meal readings. The conversion chart i'm referring to is only in regard to A1C testing, I don't average on a daily or monthly basis. However, I was curious as to how to convert A1C to blood sugar, so I use the chart and my monitor to determine just how accurate my A1C is, as that result is what my doctor bases my treatment on.

[Wolf]

Originally Posted by princesslinda

Like you, I too am most concerned with my after meal readings. The conversion chart i'm referring to is only in regard to A1C testing, I don't average on a daily or monthly basis. However, I was curious as to how to convert A1C to blood sugar, so I use the chart and my monitor to determine just how accurate my A1C is, as that result is what my doctor bases my treatment on.

I guess what I'm driving at, is that I'm trying to improve my latest 6.5 a1c. For my next testing, I'd be happy to get it to 5.9. According to one conversion chart I looked at, 5.9 equals an average glucose level of 117.(another chart says "133"). My question is, is 117 an average of fasting or is it after meals average? Or is it an average of both fasting and after meals taken together?

[princesslinda]

From my understanding its a 90 day average. Red blood cells apparently only live an average of 90 days, and blood sugar sticks to red cells; therefore A1C measures the % of the "sugarized" red blood cells in your blood stream), for this reason i'm assuming it would include fasting, post-prandial and random tests.