Blood sugar, I can’t tell you, but my A1C was tested at 6.4 in November after years in the low 6s, so I started an Atkins-style low-carb diet (and I started a thread here somewhere about the constipation that it triggered) just before Thanksgiving. I haven’t had a follow-up test yet (I asked for one on 2/1, but my doctor specified the test had to be at least three months after I started taking Metformin), but I have managed to drop around 30 pounds. Amazing what doing without pasta, potatoes, tomato sauce, corn, and flour can do.
In about 2000, I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic. My glucose was about 6 x 18 = 108 (you have to multiply by 18 to convert the Canadian measure–mmole/liter–to US–mg/centiliter). I lost 30 lb, then gained back around 10 and finally in 2005, the glucose hit 8 x 18 =144. I didn’t know about A1C in those days, so I don’t know the numbers. In 2005, I started metformin. Without further dieting, I lost 20 lb in the ensuing year. That weight loss is a known side-effect of metformin; my doctor says the mechanism is not known. I then stabilized at that weight and the glucose stabilized around 108 and the A1C around 6%. Around 2011, I decided that while you can’t go off eating cold turkey, you can go off noshing between meals. I did and gradually lost another 40 lb. Which I have mostly kept off, although I am currently 5 lb above my minimum–too much holiday and vacation (3 weeks in Barbados) eating. Currently my A1C is around 5.5% and my doctor is quite pleased. He has stopped doing glucose tests, feeling that A1C is more important. It is a measure of what percentage of hemoglobin is bound in a complex with glucose and measures long term glucose concentration.
What I have is not pancreatic disease; just metabolic disease which means my body does not react properly to insulin. But I still produce plenty of insulin. Oh, and I have never gone through the pin prick and paper tape business since that is really necessary only when you are taking insulin.
The fasting blood glucose of 100-125 is considered pre-diabetes. I’m at 106 for fasting blood glucose, in the low end of pre-diabetes.
This is really good information. I was “pre=diabetic” a few years ago. While I managed to knock my blood-sugar levels back down, I was never terribly worried because I was under the mistaken impression that diabetes was defined simply by a blood-sugar measurement. That is, I thought that if I became “diabetic,” I could just get the numbers back down and become “not diabetic any more.”
Of course, it doesn’t work like that. Once you’ve lost the ability to produce insulin you may not gain it back. I was unaware of this fact and I’m sure many others are as well. If this were common knowledge, I think people would be much less cavalier about it.
Thanks
I was being treated for high cholesterol when the latest levels were published (in the early 00s as I remember) and tipped over from “at-risk” to “early diabetes”. My sugars were running around 100 at the time, but one visit I was at-risk and the next no longer. Clearly my understanding was that pre-diabetes = early diabetes. When that happened my insurance started covering my visits and testing under a diagnosis of diabetes. Fortunately, I have never hit 125 fasting. But the numbers are clearly trending upward so some day…
I haven’t researched the subject, but the channels we watch seem to have an inordinate number of commercials for diabetes medicines. So I’m curious:
If we know that diabetes is caused by damage to the pancreas, why can’t new, healthy, reproducing pancreas cells be grown from stem cells? (Or perhaps any remaining healthy cells in the pancreas?) If the damaged cells are not producing enough insulin, why can’t new, healthy, reproducing pancreas cells be created through genetic modifications?
My wife hit over 125, and then started eating brown rice instead of white rice. That, and generally avoiding sweets (only a bite or two of a shared dessert) was all it took to get back towards the 100 range.
I don’t know about genetic modifications, but research into using stem cells currently looks promising. The last I heard though, they were trying to determine if they could come up with something that would be safe enough to try a few human trials with. As far as I am aware, nothing has completed any of the first stage human trials at this point, so there’s still a long way to go before this could potentially become a cure.
So, I had another blood lab last week, and now my blood glucose is 99. For the first time ever, I got an A1C, and it was 5.4, which is normal and not pre-diabetes.
I’m definitely in the high end of normal, but maybe it’s not as bad as I was led to believe in January, when I had the 106 and didn’t get an A1C.