|
[ References & Resources Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
I'm curious. I just had a glucose test and my blood sugar level is 100. I didn't eat for 10 - 12 hours prior to the test. My doctor is not concerned but from what I understand this is pre-diabetes. I am thirsty often too. Please help. I'm very nervous for it to progress to full blown diabetes.
I am not overweight at all and otherwise healthy. I don't drink or smoke either.
In Reply to: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 16:18:21:
Hi Angela,
If you'd like to make sure you can avoid or postpone diabetes until much much later in life, consider starting the 3LS Wellness Program and making it your lifestyle. It is great for boosting health and disease prevention, and works wonders for diabetics, too.
Best wishes,
Jan
In Reply to: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 16:18:21:
Hi Jan,
I've been on the PWFD since January sometimes I slightly slip up. How long does it normally take to see a glucose drop?
In Reply to: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 16:18:21:
Angela, I thought 90-110 was normal. Why do you believe that is high? What lab margins did they give you?
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 19:20:47:
nmi
In Reply to: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 16:18:21:
Angela,
From your description, this is a classical FBS (fasting blood sugar) blood test. If your doc did this as a screening test for diabetes, he could not have chosen a more worthless test since 95% of adult diabetics have a normal FBS. See the diabetes archives for the description of a properly performed screening test for diabetes.
Let us know what you learn.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Walt Stoll [93.1903] on March 15, 2008 at 07:41:18:
Thank you Walt for your reply. Do you think it's though that the inital glucose number would already be higher if I had diabetes? I thought 100 is just one point over what it considered normal. I understand it will rise when I drink the sugary drink but could it rise 100+ points? Oh I hope not!
In Reply to: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 14, 2008 at 16:18:21:
Angela,
You can get a home glucose meter for less than $20 on eBay and then test what your sugar levels are after you've eaten.
FWIW, I am in great shape (5 4" 110) work out five days a week, but ended up w/gestational diabetes while pregnant five years ago, and I finally (after all that time) tested my sugar levels 2 hours after eating and the level was high and my dr. said just test after fasting as that's the best indicator. The deal is, when I HAD gestational diabetes, my fasting was always normal, it was the hour or two after it was high, SO, as Walt mentioned, fasting levels do not paint the entire picture.
Test after eating high glycemic foods like corn or potatoes and you'll get a better idea of what is going on.
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Angela [9869.3349] on March 15, 2008 at 12:24:49:
Angela,
The test you had is UTERLY MEANINGLESS for a diabetic screening mechanism. If you are really interested in your diabetic suceptibility, get the test done right and let us know what you learn.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Elle [3124.2514] on March 15, 2008 at 22:57:55:
I agree fasting glucose doesn't paint the whole picture. But I would also question the wisdom of loading up a fasting person on glucose and then claiming there is significance to their blood sugar reaction. If for example someone is eating a diet low in sugar and then gorges on carbos for 3 days prior to then drinking a glucose concoction -- I would not be surprised if the test showed "abnormalities." Seems like that kind of test is destined to show abnormalities. That is why I agree with the poster who suggested simply buying a glucose meter and testing at home -- fasting, then 2 hours after a meal etc while following one's usual diet. FYI, hypothyroidism can cause elevated blood glucose due to delayed gastric emptying. The late, great Broda Barnes MD described an experiment done on Eskimos who as a group have very low incidence of diabetes when following their traditional diet. A high percentage showed impaired glucose tolerance when given given the oral glucose challenge test. However, the same individuals tested normal when the glucose was injected directly into their veins. Hence, Barnes surmises that perhaps the Eskimos had low thyroid function -- not surprising given the stress of their living conditions ie cold weather which places greater demand on thyroid and less sunlight etc. Just a thought. Sorry to write a novel here. I think that if you are concerned, your best bet is to simply get a glucose meter and that will serve the dual purpose of seeing how your body reacts to particular foods.
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? posted by Vera [15.3379] on March 19, 2008 at 16:03:18:
Thanks, Vera.
The 2 hour PP blood sugar (following the appropriate meal) is the second most effective way to screen for diabetes. The apppropriate meal is necessary so the results can be compared to a standard.
Your concept of not using the most accurate predictor (the properly prepared 5 hour GTT) is flawed. I suppose you think an exercise test for the heart is not valid BECAUSE it stresses the heart? The whole idea of the GTT test is to stress the system! A healthy system can easily handle the stress and the susceptible system shows it's cracks when the GTT is done.
Hope this helps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? Misaprehension. posted by Walt Stoll [93.1903] on March 20, 2008 at 08:53:48:
The appropriate meal used to create a standard makes sense if the person generally eats a mixed diet and has no food intolerances to the foodstuffs comprising the "appropriate meal." Food intolerances can cause an abnormal raise in blood glucose in a non-diabetic.I also said that if a person has been on a low sugar diet -- suddenly stuffing down lots of carbos for 3 days and then guzzling a cup of glucose could very well give odd and misleading results. I'm not saying that nobody should ever get the test you suggested (although I wouldn't), I am merely pointing out its drawbacks especially if she is and has been eating a low sugar diet for some time.
The person who originally posted has fasting glucose in the normal range -- higher than some practitioners would like -- but 100 is by no means diabetic or even pre-diabetic. Other factors such as large evening meals, unusual stress, and "dawn phenomenon" can all cause increases in morning glucose. But if the 100 is a true 100, then it is sure to increase after each meal and how much it increases depends upon the composition of the meal etc. If she is concerned about tending toward pre-diabetes, then I think an A1C test may be more useful. This would give her average bg over a period of weeks. It doesn't give spikes, but at least it gives average bg while she has eaten her usual fare. Thyroid should be checked as well and rarely is. 99% of modern endos are stuck in the mud...pity for them and tragic for patients.
Regarding the stress test comparison, my response would differ depending upon what the stress test was comprised of ie sprinting or simply brisk walking. My understanding is that the stress test is based upon normal activity ie brisk walking -- something everyone should be able to do. Sprinting on the other hand would not be something everyone is able to or should do. Giving a person who hasn't eaten gobs of refined sugar for years will not necessarily be able to handle the sudden onslaught. The test would be more valid for someone already eating the usual American crap diet. Therefore, you would be correct that in my view, sprinting for the unfit during a stress test is akin to the unusual "punishment" refined wheat carbo fest plus juice for 3 days chased down by a final cup of glucose. Both could yield odd results and the former could bring on a heart attack. If one is already following a healthy, low sugar diet and is bound and determined to get a gtt test, I would propose that this person gradually re-introduce more and more carbohydrates and sugars for a period longer than a mere 3 days prior to the test. Sorry to be so wordy.
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? Misaprehension. posted by Vera [15.3379] on March 20, 2008 at 16:04:54:
Thanks, Vera.
Of course the GTT is ONLY testing for GTT. It is tough enough to sort out one factor and only test for that.
These other factors can easily influence physiology and, would have to be tested separately.
Our current understanding of diabetic mechanisms is finally being upgraded but is still pretty primitive.
Hope this helps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? Misaprehension. posted by Walt Stoll [93.1903] on March 21, 2008 at 09:50:27:
All anybody needs to know about diabetes and pre-diabetes can be found in the books by Dr. Richard K. Bernstein.
In Reply to: Re: Blood Sugar 100 - Pre Diabetes? Misaprehension. posted by Vera [15.3379] on March 21, 2008 at 18:33:17:
Thanks, Vera.
Walt
|
[ References & Resources Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |