HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Question for prediabetics controlled with diet

Support Forums
>
Diabetes
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 2/21/2010 1:12 PM (GMT 0)
Hi...for those with prediabetes controlled with diet, I have some questions as I go through this process of testing. If 150 is the point that damage to organs can occur.., at what number should I conclude that a particular food spikes my sugar too high. For example, if a 1 hour reading is 139, is that too high? I am willing to be strict with this diet to do what is best for my health. Just wondering what ballpark numbers the rest of you are using to determine what to eliminate and what is okay to keep eating.
On another note, I decided to try a few carbs last night...only about 3 grams, along with my evening snack of ham and cheese. I woke up this morning to 107. Yikes. I guess I cannot tolerate any carbs for evening snack. I think I have the dawn phenomenon but had the numbers down in the 80's and 90's with zero carbs at night.
Posted 2/21/2010 2:15 PM (GMT 0)
From what I've been told petunia, 1 hour after eating readings aren't accurate. At that point, your BG is still on the rise. Think: roller coaster. The car is still climbing the hill and won't reach the top until the 2 hour mark. If you are getting a 139 after 1 hour, I would say that whatever you just ate is probably a bad choice. Watch out for being too strict with yourself and over testing. From personal experience, I found that this can sometimes produce stress which can lead to higher than normal readings.

Ballpark thinking is a good idea. I don't think even the medical profession has an exact determination as to where real damage occurs. For example, I was worried once about some high blood pressure readings I was getting from the machine at our local pharmacy and told my doc about them. He explained that high blood pressure is a good thing occasionally -- when you're lifting a heavy object or when you're being chased by a tiger smilewinkgrin He went on to say that what's bad is constant high levels. I use this as my guideline regarding BG readings.

In my case, I started out with readings around 22.0 (400) after meals -- YIKES! Now, I tend to average out below 6.0 (90-110). If I stray over that once in a while, I try not to sweat it. I even treat myself and eat things I know are wrong on special occasions - like days with a Y in them wink

I think this is OK as long as I get back on the horse later on - know what I mean? tongue

If you're averaging 80-90 on your morning readings or even a 107, this sounds great to me. Have a look at this explanation of BG readings:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/diabetes/faq/part1/section-9.html

I experience Dawn Phenomenon too. For my late night snacks, I tend to err on the side of fatty foods (cold cuts, peanut butter, etc.). The fat slows down the absorbtion of carbs and takes longer to digest. As with all things, moderation and small portions are the keys. I now have to watch my salt intake so there's a new factor in the equation but c'est la vie.

Again in my case, snacking seems to be the key to overall good readings. I eat something (nuts, cheese, lots of water, salad ... OK, I lie about the salad ... I'm too lazy to make it ;) about every 2 to 3 hours. Small portions in the morning/noon areas and larger ones at night. The snacking keeps me from feeling hungry and overdoing it at regular meal times.

Hope this helps :-)

Posted 2/21/2010 3:49 PM (GMT 0)
As Chris says, even the medical profession doesn't have an exact figure where organ damage would occur in high blood sugar.  Not only do different sources that you might read tell you different numbers, but it may differ from person to person.  The length of time might also vary.  Nothing seems to be consistent.  Nothing is written in stone.  When I started testing my blood sugar myself about three years ago, I'd read that blood sugar over 140 for lengths of time could do organ damage.  But what does "lengths of time" mean?  Months?  Years?  Days?  I think the information is vague and different because it does vary with different people.  So, to me that means that I should try to keep my blood sugar as near normal (to what a non-diabetic's blood sugar would be) as possible.   I agree with Chris about the 139 after 1 hour.  That's too high.  You need to test at 2 hours and it would probably be much higher!   In order for me to keep lower blood sugar, I don't eat potatoes, rice, bread, anything made with flour or sugar.  When you think of the common food we eat every day, that eliminates a whole LOT!  I don't consider this a "strict" diet though.  I consider this my life's eating plan in order to avoid complications of diabetes.  This is what I eat:  all meats, chicken and fish, leafy greens (lettuce, spinach, cilantro), vegetables like bell peppers, zucchini, eggplant, broccoli, cauliflower, mushrooms, green beans, onions, radishes and celery, cheeses, nuts, some yogurt.  Please look through our past threads about diet and food and you'll have more ideas.  Check the Phase 1 of the South Beach Diet if you need menu ideas, too.  Keep testing.  The meter is your new best friend.

  yeah

Posted 2/22/2010 8:10 PM (GMT 0)
HI Chris and Lanie,

I have been eating the same foods in Lanie's list ( except hardly any onions for me)..with no grains, legumes, pasta, potatoes, etc. However, I was trying to test other things that don't have TOO many carbs in them. For example, I ate 1/2 cup of diced cantalope ( only 6 or 7 carbs) the other day with my otherwise low carb lunch. After 1 hour, I got a 144... Then after 2 hours it was back down to 99. So I have crossed cantalope off my list. This morning I woke up to 119 fasting number. Just when you think you are making progress there's a whammy !! The only odd thing I ate last night was 1 TB of ground sesame seeds along with my snack. I guess no more sesame seeds. No dark chocoalte recently. I"'ve had high readings after nuts,too! Plain ones I roasted myself: almonds and hazel nuts which are supposed to be low carb. It's surely hard to figure things out, but I will plod along. Thank you for the guidance and support..
Posted 2/22/2010 8:26 PM (GMT 0)
Ugh, Petunia.  Finding what you can eat that doesn't cause high blood sugar is trial and error.  For example, I can't eat melon, but I've ok with some berries.  Of course, I can only eat a small amount at a time but they're not off my food list at least.  You might even do well with just a smaller serving of cantalope after a meal.  Sometimes just cutting back on the portion is ok.  I cannot eat an entire container of artificially sweetened yogurt.  Even though it has no sugar, I still spike, so I'll eat just a couple of spoons after dinner and keep the container for a few days in the refrigerator to eat like that.  When you're controlling your blood sugar without meds, it's tricky to find your own balance but you'll do it!  Honest.

  yeah

Posted 2/26/2010 1:00 PM (GMT 0)
It's a learning experience (still) for all of us petunia. Just when I thought I had everything figured out, some new medical stresses have been added to my plate. I was feeling a bit low low so my wife suggested we take in a local winter carnival last weekend. It was fun and the hot dogs and homemade fries sure smelled good. I caved and ate a whole plate 'o fries shocked

"OK, I'm going to pay for this", I thought. When I got home and tested (expecting a grossly high number), the result was a 4.7 (85) smilewinkgrin

There is no good explanation for this other than my drenching the fries in vinegar but even so, some things on some days defy the rules.
Posted 2/26/2010 5:51 PM (GMT 0)
Chris! Congrats on the low reading from the fries! Gotta remember your body was generating heat to keep you warm, you were walking, there was lots of fat in the fries to slow the entry of the starches into your system... Lots going on here. But all the scientific mumbo jumbo aside, you treated yourself and had a good time!

Sometimes this disease gets to be more than we want to deal with and we just cave on a certain food. I don't see this as a bad thing if it only happens occasionally. Food and eating with family is such a social thing, the sharing of flavors, the sharing of portions, it's difficult to always be 'odd man out'. Those fries probably did you more good than harm. (Jeannie offers Chris absolution with a wave of her Genie powers!)
Posted 2/26/2010 6:36 PM (GMT 0)
Christ that must have been a WONDERFUL experience, to have the fries ( oh, so manY!) followed by a good number. Who would have guessed. It makes me think I ought to fill up a plate with many, many squares of dark chocolate, dip them in vinegar and give that a try!!
Posted 2/26/2010 10:37 PM (GMT 0)
Thanks for the absolution Jeannie turn

petunia: I think that the key to health is a good part mental as well as physical. A 'treat' now & then shouldn't cause too much trouble, as long as we don't go overboard.

I think 'chocolate & vinegar' is overboard wink
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply