Yeah it sounds like your sleep schedule and the large meal before bed is a big factor. I’ve heard it said that not all eight hours of sleep are the same, that a 9 PM to 5 AM is far better for the body than a 2 AM to 10 AM.
Hang in there bro. I got my FBS reading of 107 not long ago and I am planning to get things checked out on this front next week or next-next week. In the meantime, I’m cutting out carbs and sugar…
Apparently, coffee does good for blood sugar as well.
Maybe this is a whoosh/lame/Poe’s Law but the context is clearly fasting blood sugar. Over 90 is cause for concern, over 120 and you’re diabetic.
This is incorrect.
Per the American Diabetes Association:
A fasting blood sugar at or over 126 is diagnostic of diabetes.
A fasting blood sugar under 100 is normal.
A fasting blood sugar between 100 and 125 indicates impaired glucose tolerance.
A HgbA1c at or over 6.5 is diagnostic of diabetes.
Persons with 5.7 to 6.4 HgbA1c levels are at definite increased risk for developing diabetes, and values in this range should not be solely used to rule diagnosis of diabetes either in or out.
The World Health Organization differs slightly from the ADA in that they feel the FBS must be at or over 110 before it indicates impaired glucose tolerance.
And yet again: Do NOT rely on home glucose monitor readings to make a diagnosis of diabetes when the readings are coming in under 120.
Meanwhile, the OP should chill. There’s no evidence of diabetes from the numbers he’s presented. And the evidence is pretty meager for making a case for glucose intolerance too.
Out of curiosity, how long can lifestyle changes and metformin hold off the complications of diabetes?
I was under the impression that oral meds and reasonable lifestyle changes can slow the progression of diabetes, but by how long? 20 years? 40 years?
The people I know were only able to use oral meds for about 20 years before they had to go on insulin (they were all diagnosed in their 40s and started oral meds, were on insulin by their 60s). But they had poor lifestyles.
Hm. I’ve never had an HgbA1c at or over 6.5, but I am diagnosed with diabetes.
Metformin alone can result in Type 2 diabetics have all-cause mortality rates lower than non-diabetic controls (matched for age, gender, smoking, etc.).
My personal WAG is that someone who is able to control their diabetes with diet and exercise alone would do even better. (Not sure though how many of those people exist.)
I can’t speak for the guideline makers but my impression has been that one intent of the lower threshold for “prediabetes” by the ADA criteria is to identify more people at a level where diet and exercise can be more effective at preventing or at least significantly delaying progression to actual disease. Per the CDC, something like one out of four American adults have prediabetes.
You don’t have to have an A1c over 6.5 to be diagnosed with DM. If your fasting serum glucose was over 125 that is sufficient.
Yeah but supposedly metformin has some anti-aging properties. So I’m not sure how many of the benefits are due to that vs its control of blood sugar.
I can’t find it right now, but I believe a study comparing metformin vs Sulfonylureas found that metformin had much better outcomes despite both having similar effects on blood sugars.
I have been on metformin for 13 years. My last A1c was something like 4.6% and the blood sugar was also low. Low enough that I might have wondered except I know that metformin cannot cause hypoglycemia.
There was an article in yesterday’s Science Times that suggested that metformin even helped prevent pancreatic cancer.
It wasn’t. More like 110. I did have moderate elevation on a glucose challenge at the time. I’ve still never had an A1c or FBS that high (except once during chemo when I was full of steroids), but I do take metformin and do diet/exercise interventions, so I don’t really know know I’d test without it at this point.
Well, it wasn’t too hard to find … it was the cite I provided!
Yes, the impact of metformin, and/or diet/exercise, appear to be by way of more than glucose control alone. They both seem to also impact various other diseases of aging.
They do not seem to be completely additive however and of the two exercise seems to have the bigger impact. Metformin might even blunt the full effect of exercise training on insulin sensitivity anyway, and “metformin may attenuate the effects of training on some CVD risk factors and metabolic syndrome severity in IGT [impaired glucose tolerant] adults”
So anomalous1, worst case is that you may, like roughly 25% of other American adults, be at some risk of developing diabetes in the future. Your best crack at preventing it is further improving your nutrition plan and your exercise program, which as an aside, also lowers your risks for many other diseases associated with aging, lowers your chances of being disabled fairly young and lowers your chances of premature death.
If diet and exercise somehow does not do it and you creep into diabetic range anyway then metformin is a back up plan and also delivers quite well.
There are also guidelines for how to diagnose diabetes based on glucose tolerance testing, so you may have hit the criteria for a DM dx based on those challenge test results.
What have your docs told you? Have you been given the diagnosis of DM? Or of glucose intolerance? There’s a growing body of evidence for the benefit of giving folks metformin just based on glucose intolerance.
I had the blood drawn a couple of years ago and was told I was prediabetic. Then about ten months ago I had the same test, only this time I was told to fast the night before, which I did, and my results came back as non-prediabetic.
I’m sixty, in decent shape, and wear a smaller waist size than I did in high school.
Well that is embarrassing. I was in a hurry when I replied to this thread.
I thought you said you watch what you eat! Are you eating a lot of grains and root veggies? You are just lazy about food, check out this guy’s recipes. He’s into yoga and iron man type athletic events. He has more than a hundred recipes, all grouped into categories, they’re awesome. Even seemingly junky type food can be healthy. It just takes different ingredients. Once you get used to it, you’ll love to make your own meals. And when you make desserts using healthy ingredients it makes a difference. Get rid of the standard american diet foods like cereal, there’s much tastier and healthier stuff available.
My two favorites right now are the almond crusted baked zucchini crisps and the chocolate caramel avocado brownies. Did you ever think chocolate brownies could be anything besides junky?
You just need to get some stuff you have probably never bought before, like almond flour. The zucchini crisps sound and look boring but they’re totally addicting. And after eating healthy food for a while, things like Lean Cuisine just don’t taste good anymore.
good luck
Sorry for the delay in reply. I didn’t mean to be rude I have just had too much going on lately to even check the board, let alone my email.
**
Thank you everyone** for the replies and advice. Just to be safe I have switched to low carb and low sugar+no added or refined. Eating about 60 grams of carbs spread throughout the day. Its not so hard when you get used to it. Eat smaller portions, slower and more often with low carbs and exercise every day. Pretty simple I suppose. Just been really depressed about it. Got a second opinion as well and that doctor showed me her own numbers and she said “i’ve been ‘prediabetic’ for ten years, it doesn’t mean you’re diabetic, it means without change you are at higher risk”.
Qadgop and DSeid Thank you for the advice, it really helps. I am still sticking to lower carb diets and lots of exercise for life now. Its really not so bad, I just really really really really don’t want to get diabetes.
Bumping based on arecent Science article (full thing behind paywall).
It is unclear how big the risk of progression from “prediabetes” to diabetes is and much is being spent with little evidence of its helping much.
I’m still of the mind that motivating improved nutrition and fitness is a good thing. And even if a few go on metformin, well that is a pretty cheap drug and often very well tolerated with possible other good outcomes that may be associated with it.
But still it is clear that the label has pathologized and medicalized many people who do not actually have any current problem, on the unproven assumption that they are at increased risk that can be successfully reduced. From the other side of the paywall -
anomalous1 - you sticking with your plan so far? It’s been nine months …
Bumping almost a year later for more data.
Aw geez. So those of us on Metformin are going to live longer but be more blobby and less fit? Yay.