It said 5%. Whether that means 5% exactly or something between 5.0 and 5.9, I don’t know.
5 is certainly a good a1c.
And 6’3" is pretty tall.
I’d still like to see the actual report.
Is a 5.0% A1c consistent with a fasting blood glucose of 99?
I’m obviously not a doctor, but using an online calculator a 5.0% A1c translated into an estimated average glucose of 97. As far as I know, that means Trump’s average glucose is 97.
If Trump’s fasting glucose is 99, then his eAG should be higher than 99 at minimum because he has all the spikes from eating. How can your eAG be lower than your fasting glucose?
I know for some people, A1c isn’t accurate because their red blood cells either are very short lived or long lived. And things like hypoglycemia can give low readings too.
Any medical people have opinions? Am I just misreading his medical info? I’m confused.
Type II diabetic here. An a1c of 5-ish is consistent with a fasting blood sugar of 97 or 99, which are so close to each other as to be virtually the same. Blood glucose measurements are not excruciatingly precise. If thump were a long way from being prediabetic, his fasting blood sugar would be 70-ish to 80-ish and his a1c would be less than 5, but 5 is okay.
Last time I had my a1c checked it was 7-ish and my fasting blood sugar is usually in the neighborhood of 140-150. My doc would like to see my a1c down to 6-ish. Does that give you an idea of the ranges?
You are trying to compare apples and oranges. A one-time fasting glucose level tells you absolutely nothing about the A1c because they measure completely different things. The FBG is a one-point measurement - a snapshot of what the glucose level was right that particular moment. The A1c is a number that reflects the average blood glucose over the entire previous three months. It is a ‘big picture’ measurement. A person could have a great FBG and still have an awful A1c. The two different tests are numbers that are useful for different reasons. They do not line up with each other.
What would line up and give a rough idea of the A1c would be if someone was checking their blood glucose multiple times daily, either with a finger stick or by wearing a continuous glucose monitor. Then you might be able to use that data to guesstimate an A1c. But an FBG by itself tells you exactly nothing about the person’s A1c level.
True, a person can have a FBG (fasting blood glucose) of 99 and be over 200 at other times of the day for long periods. The a1c would reflect that, probably being higher than 5, as it is an average of blood glucose over a 3-month period.
However, thump’s FBG of 99 and his a1c of 5 are not inconsistent with each other. In itself, that is a true statement, even though one cannot extrapolate a whole lot beyond it. OTOH, for example, a FBG of 80 and an a1c of 9, in a non-insulin dependent person, would be quite inconsistent with each other.
We aren’t guesstimating thump’s a1c-- at least I didn’t think we were. Someone upthread said it was 5 (maybe I’m wrong). And coupled with a one-time FBG of 99-- as I said, those are not inconsistent with each other.
And it’s not comparing apples and oranges. More like comparing key limes with regular limes.
From what I can tell, Trump’s average blood glucose readings are below his fasting blood glucose readings. That doesn’t make sense to me.
Assume Trump’s fasting blood sugar is 99, he eats a large meal and his blood sugar spikes to 180 and then drops down to 99 again over 3 hours.
Trump’s blood sugar normally hovers in the 99-180 range in that scenario. His fasting is 99, when he eats it may spike to 180, then go down to fasting levels again.
But Trump’s A1C implies his average blood glucose is 97 (you can convert A1C numbers into eAG numbers to determine average glucose readings from A1C), which is lower than his fasting. That doesn’t add up, shouldn’t your A1C be higher than your fasting because you also have the postprandial curves?
Trump’s blood sugar probably varies from 99-180 (as a guess, assuming 99 is his fasting), so how is it an average blood glucose 97? There are ways it is possible. he could have hypoglycemia, his red blood cells may have a shorter life span, etc.
To me an average blood glucose of 97 (A1C of 5.0%) would imply a fasting glucose of around 80 and a postprandial spike of maybe 130 or so.
The numbers are not inconsistent. Maybe he had three scoops of ice cream the night before the test (could explain the sudden increase in his cholesterol). Maybe this is the highest fasting sugar he has had all year and the others have all been in the 70s. Maybe he forgot to fast and ate some candy on the way to the test. That is why we do both tests. I just had a patient (not diabetic) with a screening fasting sugar in the 200’s and a normal HBA1C. Repeat fasting sugar was 106. Every other test was only slightly high. Humans are screwy like that.
Trump’s fasting blood sugar was 89, though, not 99.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/16/donald-trump-physical-results-2018-343092
Just to be a little picayune.
This is very informative. Thanks.
Your mind, make it up please.
EITHER crap on him for being on the golf course every time there is a national crisis OR crap on him for not getting exercise.
You cannot do both.
There’s a workout room in the White House. He can walk the White House grounds. Ford put in a pool and Clinton had a running track built. I don’t know if those still exist) He doesn’t need a 3 million dollar trip every weekend to get exercise.
And he doesn’t get exercise on the golf course, either. He rides a cart.
But does he obey the 90 degree rule?
Yes, they can, and are going to.
Regards,
Shodan
And that’s because he doesn’t need to be on a golf course to get exercise. .Especially a three million dollar trip each time.
There are several championship courses on Andrews Base he could use so he doesn’t need to go to his properties.
He has a number of options without leaving DC.
Sure you can.
Since the height and weight are pretty obviously fake, I can’t see how anyone can take any comfort from anything in that report.
I dunno, my mom lost a few inches due to a spinal fracture, but she’s lost a lot more pounds than inches, and I think the spinal fracture was largely due to the weight loss – neither her bones nor her muscles where what they should have been – thus, her spine was at risk.
Maybe that’s now how it always works. But I don’t think it’s normal to just lose height. And I don’t think that’s the story with trump, anyway.
Probably because he has some age-related dementia, unfortunately.
Yeah, they always look at my weight, height, BP, and temp. Even if I’m there because I have an infection on my finger. How much extra does the measuring stick cost, anyway?
exactly