Do I have prediabetes?
29 Jul 2021, 9:19 pm
Double Retired wrote:
QFT wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
What sort of health insurance do you have?
I have Blue Cross Blue Shield. But I have it through University of New Mexico since I am a Ph.D. student over there. But right now I am in California since the school is remote. So I am not sure whether that insurance would cover me in California.
Have you checked with the University to see what they recommend?
And perhaps check out whether there is a Quest Diagnostics location near you.
I took the tests, both at Quest Diagnostics and at LabCorp as well as at my university.
I didn't know I had those options the first few replies, but then after that I tested, and I mentioned it in my subsequent replies. If you read this thread till the end you will see it.
30 Jul 2021, 10:44 am
kraftiekortie wrote:
You have to have an a1c of at least 5.9 to be considered “pre-diabetic.”
What criteria are you looking at? The criteria I know requires a1c of 5.7 rather than 5.9.
In any case I am way below either threshold. But the question is: is my a1c reliable, given that I am Ashkinazi Jew and I read it can be unreliable on people with Mediterranean descent?
30 Jul 2021, 11:43 pm
QFT wrote:
When I take fasting glucose it is in the 90s more often than not. But sometimes it is in 100s, and a few times it was 114 and once even 134. Then other times it was in the 80s and occasionally in the 70s. I think my stress about it might drive it up while my limiting what I eat might drive it down, so I am not sure which to believe. The time when I consistently was getting over 100 was basically when I couldn’t sleep due to thinking about it, this was my obsession 24/7 and felt agitated, so maybe adrenaline produced sugar. But then again, I shouldn’t forget about the fact that I started limiting what I eat so maybe my normal results are only normal due to that?
I once simulated glucose tolerance test by drinking what I estimated to be 75 grams of sugar. After one hour it went as high as 175 but after 2 hours it was down to 132. So if I judge it based on “under 140 in 2 hours”, then I am fine, but if I judge it based on “under 120 in 2 hours” or “under 140 in 1 hour” then I am not fine. So I don’t know which criteria to use since I see different things on the internet depending on where I look.
At the same time, next day after I took that test I ate cottage cheese with jam and my blood sugar was 155 in 2 hours. I have no idea why one or two spoons of jam affected me more than 75 grams of sugar. Maybe my body was just destabilized due to sugar the previous day so the two things sort of combined? I should mention though that four hours after I had 75 grams of sugar I was down to 80. So that sugar didn’t stay in my system. But could it be that I was destabilized in a different way?
What I see more consistently is if I eat sweet crapes then my sugar can be 144 in an hour and in 130-s in 2 hours. So again it can be interpreted as either good or bad depending on what criteria I use. Should I say 144 is bad because it’s over 140, or should I just say 144 doesn’t matter since it’s just in an hour but rather it’s food I am in 130-s after 2 hours? Or should I say it’s still bad since I should be under 120 in 2 hours rather than under 140?
On the good side, however, if I eat something like meat or fish or vegitables then it is either under 120 or slightly above 120. Sometimes it can even be under 110 and occasionally in the 90s. But then again, does it really count since it’s not sweet?
So this leads to the question: does the blood sugar after meal refer to the average meal or really sweet meal? If it refers to average meal then I can just say I am doing good since meat and fish is a lot closer to average meal than the other stuff. But if it refers to really sweet The 75 grams of glucose in that test seem to suggest it’s really sweet meal then it’s a lot more iffy.
The fact that they have you drink glucose on glucose tolerance test seem to suggest it refers to sweet meal. But then again the fact that I reacted to a couple of spoons of jam more than to 75 grams of sugar seems to suggest that for some reason or other the person reacts to food more which would suggest that maybe it should be average meal.
Oh by the way I also took a1c based on the thing I bought in the store and it is 4.8 So that looks good, but I am not sure whether I can trust it because, unlike the fasting glucose thing, I only had two a1c things in the entire package. The first one I did with the help of the pharmacist since it is too difficult to figure it out and the second one I tried to do at home but I screwed it up so it just gave error message. The 4.8 that I got, I did with the pharmacist. Now I know that a1c is the average over 3 months so there is no point in doing it over and over. But the question is: am I sure the number that it gave me is correct? For example, I was disinfecting my finger over and over instead of doing it just once, so maybe the alcohol diluted the blood sugar. I read the rubbing alcohol can put the fasting result lower than it should be. But can it affect a1c in that way too?
The other thing I am concerned about is that, even if my a1c is, in fact, 4.8, is it truly because I don’t have diabetes or is it because my good diet hides it? I am living with my mom now that school became remote due to pandemic, and my mom always gives me really healthy food. So could it be that I became prediabetic back when I was living away from my mom, and then when I moved to my moms place her diet lowered my a1c while I am still prediabetic all the same? What do you think?
Speaking of diet, few days before I got fasting results in 100-s, I are the whole package of pita with a whole package of butter in two days. But I did those tests a week later so I don’t know if they were able to stay in my system for that long. Also I should mention that I starting limiting what I eat once I saw the results I didn’t like. So should I really feel good about my normal fasting scores or should I say they are just due to my eating less? And by the same token should I feel bad about my high fasting scores or should I just say they were due to my eating all that pita a week earlier and/or due to extreme stress about the topic?
As far as my actual symptoms, occasionally I get cracked heels, and that’s what drew my attention to this on the first place. Also, during the first couple of weeks after I started taking my blood I was extremely thirsty and going to the bathroom a lot. But both of these things went away, so I am not sure if it was just a placebo thing due to my stress about the topic (like I said I couldn’t sleep at night). One thing I do notice right now is that my fingers are cold which I read is one of the symptoms. But then again “sometimes” I am exposed to semi-cold temperature (I like to study in back yard where it can get somewhat chilly but not much). However my fingers remain cold even when I am warm. So can I really say my fingers are cold today because I was cold yesterday or does it require some other explanation besides that.
I once simulated glucose tolerance test by drinking what I estimated to be 75 grams of sugar. After one hour it went as high as 175 but after 2 hours it was down to 132. So if I judge it based on “under 140 in 2 hours”, then I am fine, but if I judge it based on “under 120 in 2 hours” or “under 140 in 1 hour” then I am not fine. So I don’t know which criteria to use since I see different things on the internet depending on where I look.
At the same time, next day after I took that test I ate cottage cheese with jam and my blood sugar was 155 in 2 hours. I have no idea why one or two spoons of jam affected me more than 75 grams of sugar. Maybe my body was just destabilized due to sugar the previous day so the two things sort of combined? I should mention though that four hours after I had 75 grams of sugar I was down to 80. So that sugar didn’t stay in my system. But could it be that I was destabilized in a different way?
What I see more consistently is if I eat sweet crapes then my sugar can be 144 in an hour and in 130-s in 2 hours. So again it can be interpreted as either good or bad depending on what criteria I use. Should I say 144 is bad because it’s over 140, or should I just say 144 doesn’t matter since it’s just in an hour but rather it’s food I am in 130-s after 2 hours? Or should I say it’s still bad since I should be under 120 in 2 hours rather than under 140?
On the good side, however, if I eat something like meat or fish or vegitables then it is either under 120 or slightly above 120. Sometimes it can even be under 110 and occasionally in the 90s. But then again, does it really count since it’s not sweet?
So this leads to the question: does the blood sugar after meal refer to the average meal or really sweet meal? If it refers to average meal then I can just say I am doing good since meat and fish is a lot closer to average meal than the other stuff. But if it refers to really sweet The 75 grams of glucose in that test seem to suggest it’s really sweet meal then it’s a lot more iffy.
The fact that they have you drink glucose on glucose tolerance test seem to suggest it refers to sweet meal. But then again the fact that I reacted to a couple of spoons of jam more than to 75 grams of sugar seems to suggest that for some reason or other the person reacts to food more which would suggest that maybe it should be average meal.
Oh by the way I also took a1c based on the thing I bought in the store and it is 4.8 So that looks good, but I am not sure whether I can trust it because, unlike the fasting glucose thing, I only had two a1c things in the entire package. The first one I did with the help of the pharmacist since it is too difficult to figure it out and the second one I tried to do at home but I screwed it up so it just gave error message. The 4.8 that I got, I did with the pharmacist. Now I know that a1c is the average over 3 months so there is no point in doing it over and over. But the question is: am I sure the number that it gave me is correct? For example, I was disinfecting my finger over and over instead of doing it just once, so maybe the alcohol diluted the blood sugar. I read the rubbing alcohol can put the fasting result lower than it should be. But can it affect a1c in that way too?
The other thing I am concerned about is that, even if my a1c is, in fact, 4.8, is it truly because I don’t have diabetes or is it because my good diet hides it? I am living with my mom now that school became remote due to pandemic, and my mom always gives me really healthy food. So could it be that I became prediabetic back when I was living away from my mom, and then when I moved to my moms place her diet lowered my a1c while I am still prediabetic all the same? What do you think?
Speaking of diet, few days before I got fasting results in 100-s, I are the whole package of pita with a whole package of butter in two days. But I did those tests a week later so I don’t know if they were able to stay in my system for that long. Also I should mention that I starting limiting what I eat once I saw the results I didn’t like. So should I really feel good about my normal fasting scores or should I say they are just due to my eating less? And by the same token should I feel bad about my high fasting scores or should I just say they were due to my eating all that pita a week earlier and/or due to extreme stress about the topic?
As far as my actual symptoms, occasionally I get cracked heels, and that’s what drew my attention to this on the first place. Also, during the first couple of weeks after I started taking my blood I was extremely thirsty and going to the bathroom a lot. But both of these things went away, so I am not sure if it was just a placebo thing due to my stress about the topic (like I said I couldn’t sleep at night). One thing I do notice right now is that my fingers are cold which I read is one of the symptoms. But then again “sometimes” I am exposed to semi-cold temperature (I like to study in back yard where it can get somewhat chilly but not much). However my fingers remain cold even when I am warm. So can I really say my fingers are cold today because I was cold yesterday or does it require some other explanation besides that.
I had that when I started taking an SSRI - sugar was 170. All my life it was ALWAYS in the 90s. I think what is happening is that you are aging, and you sugar is becoming slightly wacky. I would call it pre-hypoglycemia plus pre-pre-diabetes. Exercise more and it will become more normal.
31 Jul 2021, 1:46 am
idntonkw wrote:
I had that when I started taking an SSRI - sugar was 170.
I don't take any meds. Never did.
idntonkw wrote:
I think what is happening is that you are aging, and you sugar is becoming slightly wacky.
Do you think its due to aging or do you think its due to binging? I used to binge a lot. Here are some of the things I did in the past that concern me:
a) Whenever I was on campus I would buy Snickers bar or some sweet drink or similar every time I passed vending machine.
b) The caffeteria on campus was a buffet, and I liked to spend all day studying there, and as I was studying I would go and grab something literally every 5 or 10 minutes. And yes it was often something sweet or high carb. Then at a university I am at now, there was a buffet that was 24 hours so I would be there throughout the night and do the same. I guess eventually I would get full so instead of 5 to 10 minutes it would be half an hour. But I would still keep grabbing something.
c) I like to study at the restaurants off campus. But sometimes I get restless sitting at the same place for too long, so I would switch restaurant. And as I come to a different restaurant I would order another large meal, despite the fact that I just ate large meal like an hour ago.
And let me clarify one thing. I was going from school to school throughout my adult life. And yes I am still at school doing my second ph.d. So no, I am not saying that I damaged my glucose metabolism back when I was 20. That would be silly. I am saying that I was still doing all three of the above things well in my 30-s, all the way up till COVID started. That, plus also I didn't do yearly physicals or blood work (the only reason I suddenly started to think about it this year is because my skin at my uncles got split and I read on the internet it might be the sign of diabetes). Thats why I can't rule out the possibility that I developed pre-pre-diabetes any number of years before COVID started without ever knowing it, and only discovered it now that something got my attention to buy glucose meter.
Well, during COVID, I stopped those things since I came home to live with my mom. But before COVID it was going on for many years. So I am wondering if I damaged my glucose metabolism that way.
If I did damage it, is there a way to cure it, especially since it didn't reach diabetic proportions? When I google "reverse prediabetes" they say its possible, but they misuse the word "reverse". Because they say its possible to "reverse" it and then the next sentence they say one can slow down or stop the progression towards diabetes. But thats not what I mean by "reverse". By reverse I mean go in the opposite direction, as opposed to just going slower in that direction. Is it possible?
I konw some people get their glucose readings back to normal. But they do it by CONTINUING to adhere to lower carb diet. But is it possible to CURE myself so that I can eat high-carb again and have low numbers?
idntonkw wrote:
I would call it pre-hypoglycemia plus pre-pre-diabetes. Exercise more and it will become more normal.
I thought of that too. I run in the mornings but not very consistently. I decided to do it more consistently. But the qustion is, again: is it possible to actually get cured this way?
Because you see, the way I used to think of running is that I can actually improve my pace. So the idea that I can't "improve" carb-tolerance and am only slowing down its deterioration feels rather upsetting. I wish there was something I could do to actually "improve" it.
I actually read on the internet there was a study over a group of around 20-30 people with severe diabetes who were put on 600-calorie diet for 2 weeks and half of them were cured but the other half wasn't. Now, they were severe diabetic, while in my case its pre-pre-diabetes as you put it. So do you think if in their case they have 50 percent chance of getting cured in my case I can get cured with near certainty?
The other thing I am thiking of doing to improve my chances is to replace what they did with something stricter. For example, I might replace 600 calorie a day with outright fast. Or I can replace 2 weeks with a month. Or both.
The idea of prolonged fasts is not as dangerous as it might seem. There was a dietologist Paul Bragg who wrote a book "Miracle of fasting". He basically invented the specific ways of fasting that he tried on himself. My family actually uses his ideas to cure cold with fasts. But we only do short fasts that last 2 days or so. But he described long fasts too in his book, but our family never tried it. I am actually thinking of trying it this fall when I will move out of my mom's place back to school.
Some people warned me it might be dangerous. Do you have any ideas of what the dangers might be though? I want to weigh pros and cons. For example, if I get ulcer that way, this is worth it: I would rather have ulcer than pre-diabetes. But if I get permanent liver damage, then no its not worth it.
By the way, one thing that I DID get diagnosed with when I went to the doctor to test for diabetes is high cholesterol. My HDL and triglucerides are both normal, but my LDL was 157 in first and third test, and 135 on the second test. I am wondering whether I can lower my LDL through fasting too. One thing I am thinking of is fasting for whatever duration I want to fast, then BEFORE I stop the fast I would show up to my doctors office and ask for a blood test to measure cholesterol, the stop fasting, and then measure cholesterol a month later. This will answer my question whether simply removing LDL from my blood stream would solve this problem once and for all, or whether I have a metabolic issue that would cause the body to keep creating all this unwanted LDL over and over again.
Basically the idea is that I would rather fast for a prolonged time and then be able to eat everything I want, as opposed to having to limit my food throughout the rest of my life. I am hoping for a fasting to "reset" my body so that, once my fast is over, I can pretend none of my issues ever happened and eat everything I want. Thats the goal of it. But what is your opinion, do you think I can accomplish that goal?
