HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Decided to Get a meter-have some questions

Support Forums
>
Diabetes
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 2/1/2008 1:38 AM (GMT 0)
I've had a couple of high normal Fasting tests 102 (March 2006)and 103 (Sep 2007)as well as the Glucose tests which were 118 and 113 at 2 hours. In Canada the fasting test is considered normal under 110. My doctor assures me I'm "normal", but I know the fasting numbers are a bit high.

I decided to get myself a meter and just started using it yesterday. Do most meters tend to run higher or lower than lab tests? I got the "Freestyle" mini, which I had read was quite accurate.

I've been tracking my numbers and here's what I have so far (numbers in brackets are US equivilent):

5.6mmol/L (101), 3h after Lunch, 17:15 Jan 31, 2008
5.6 mmol/L (101), 2h after Lunch, 16:15 Jan 31, 2008, spaghetti, broccoli
6.4 mmol/L (115), 1h after Lunch, 15:15 Jan 31, 2008, Spaghetti + broccoli
4.9 mmol/L (88), Before Lunch, 14:03 Jan 31, 2008
5.9 mmol/L (106), 3h after Breakfast, 13:00 Jan 31, 2008
5.7 mmol/L (103), 2h after Breakfast, 12:00 Jan 31, 2008
5.2 mmol/L (94), Fasting, 8:00 Jan 31, 2008

6.5 mmol/L (117), 2h after Dinner, 20:30 Jan 30, 2008
4.8 mmol/L (86), 1h after Dinner, 19:30 Jan 30, 2008, spaghetti broccoli
4.4 mmol/L (79), 3h after Lunch, 17:15 Jan 30, 2008

What can I assess from these numbers? I guess if the meter is running high, that's great, but if it's running low, not so good? I guess this is why my Dr. doesn't like people that haven't been diagnosed with diabetes to use a meter. Really what do the numbers mean if they're wrong.
Posted 2/1/2008 3:05 AM (GMT 0)
Hi frombc, these readings are not alarming  in the least.  True, some of them look like they're edging up there but if you can keep them from going higher even after eating spaghetti, that's wonderful.  The fact that you're aware of your blood sugar is good.  And as you know from reading here on the Forum so many doctors have different ranges of what they want to see in their patients.   Even so, I believe the "cut off points" for what is diagnosed as diabetes today is now lower than it was years ago here in the States.  I don't think you need to do much more than monitor your blood sugar occasionally and not go overboard on carbohydrates.  In general, for anyone who's diabetic or "pre-diabetic", getting regular exercise and losing weight (if you need to) is also really helpful.  A person who is "normal" and metabolizing carbohydrates normally would not have blood sugar readings in the 100's according to what I've read but in your case you seem to have normal ones and some elevated ones, so this is not bad news actually.  And you're right about "What if?"  If the meter is not completely accurate?  Well, I guess it just gives you a ballpark figure.  The next time you go in for a blood test, take it with you and test yourself right after they do the blood test.  Then, compare their result with your meter's.  Don't stress over this, ok?   Let's see what others say.   


Posted 2/1/2008 3:50 PM (GMT 0)
Your sugars appear to be completely normal.
Posted 2/1/2008 5:18 PM (GMT 0)
Thank you Lanie and Jeannie,

I took my reading this morning and it was 73 fasting. I didn't quite believe it, so I tried again and the next reading was 79. Are the meters really that fickle? I'm extremely happy though at the results I've been getting.

I've read about "white coat" hyperglycemia and am beginning to wonder if that's what happens when I go to the lab to get my tests done. Stress increases your BG levels.

The reason I got the monitor, is because of all the websites out there that say that what your Dr. tells you is normal isn't really normal. That the standards should be much lower than they are now. How many more people would this involve if they did that, I wonder. There's website called "what they don't tell you about diabetes", that makes it all sound quite scary.

I'm glad I didn't listen to my Dr. and got the meter anyway. It's given me a clearer picture of how my body works with carbohydrates.
Posted 2/2/2008 6:21 PM (GMT 0)

I wouldn't be concerned.  I think your blood sugars are great...especially with eating spaghetti!

Sherrine

Posted 2/3/2008 1:00 AM (GMT 0)
Thank you Sherrine, Lanie said she thought that "normal" people don't ever go in the 100's. I'm not positvie, but I'm sure I've read that even normal people can go into the mid 100's, but they come back down again quite quickly.

I just did a reading after having some cherry struedel (something I normally don't eat) and after about 30 minutes it was up to 149. I'm going to do another reading shortly and see what it's at. Is this normal?

ETA: approx 2 hours after the streudel it was 115. After not eating much sugar at all for the last 2 years, I really don't enjoy it much.
Posted 2/3/2008 2:32 PM (GMT 0)
In a book that was given to me by my doctor when I was diagnosed with diabetes, it gives this information.  The level for people without diabetes is sugar before meals = less than 115 mg/dl...blood sugar at bedtime = less than 120 mg/dl.  Hope this helps you.  Whenever you eat something that's sweet and loaded with carbs  your blood sugar will go up.  Talk to your doctor if you are this nervous about it but it doesn't sound like you have diabetes to me.  That's just my opinion. 

 

Sherrine

Posted 2/5/2008 2:31 AM (GMT 0)

Parameters for what's considered acceptable for diabetics' blood sugar have not only changed in past years but varies depending on the source.  Even doctors will tell their patients something different compared to what they may read from the ADA here in the States or in Canada or elsewhere.  Everything I've read online gives different parameters, much higher, for diabetics than for normals.  I don't know why.  We should be aiming for better than that.  To me it would be like taking meds for high blood pressure (which I do) but not to get the pressure down to normal but to be satisfied with continued elevated high pressure.  That's ridiculous.  Living with continued high blood pressure is also damaging to the same organs as high blood sugar is.  The source where I've read that a normal's blood sugar would not be in the 100's under usual conditions is from Dr. Richard Bernstein's books that we've referred to here sometimes.  Please read Sandy's response under another thread today ("I have struck a goldmine of information") for a better explanation as to why it's important to aim for more "normal" blood sugar readings.  Personally, I feel it's in my best interest to keep my blood sugar as close to normal as I can.  In Frombc's first post, her numbers were really good but a more recent post saying 149 after strudel means she cannot metabolize carbohydrates in more simple sugars.  This means she should not endulge in these kinds of desserts - which she says she normally doesn't eat anyway.  If she didn't test her blood sugar, she wouldn't have known her blood sugar went so high.  The only reason I'm following a very low carbohydrate diet is to keep my blood sugar as near normal as I can but I don't take any meds.  It might be that I will in the future though if I can't continue controlling it my way.  Sorry for the long response, but the more I've learned about diabetes, the more I am striving to keep my numbers nearer to normal.  


Posted 2/6/2008 2:08 AM (GMT 0)
frombc,
When I took my first class the instructor said that 110 two hours after a meal was pretty much normal. That's kind of what I strive for. I've had to adjust the foods I eat to reach that goal because all I was doing before was adding more and more meds. It's much easier (not to mention less expensive!) to just change the foods I consume.
Posted 2/20/2008 10:05 PM (GMT 0)
The single best source of info for what is and isn't normal is

www.bloodsugar101.com.

In my opinion it can be a goodinvestment to test foods to see where to cut back on the carbs. For example, my father found that mushrooms raise his levels. He was eating 2/3c servings!? And mushrooms are not considered to be a high carb food on any list that I have ever seen. Now he avoids them and his weight loss is going a lot better. He is officially Pre-D.

I have another friend who is not officially pre-D, who's #'s are not alarmingly out of line similar to yours, except when she eats a few foods. With her meter, she found out what those foods were (like brown rice, another healthy food!) and now she has an easier time maintaining her weight. It cost her some money in test strips, but she feels it was worth it.

Best wishes

Post Edited (Roll_with_the_Changes) : 2/20/2008 3:08:32 PM (GMT-7)

Posted 2/21/2008 2:29 PM (GMT 0)
That's an interesting website.  Thanks!  I'm sorry your father gave up mushrooms.  I believe the problem was that he ate too much for his metabolism to handle at one time.  We all have different rates that our bodies will respond to food, even low-carb food.   Blood sugar may rise even if you eat a large salad with just lettuce in one sitting.  I don't think there's one hard and fast rule as to how much a food will cause the rise in each person, so testing after you eat will tell you how a particular food affects you.  What works for me is smaller portions of the foods I can eat.  If I eat a too much of any "good" food, it will cause a blood sugar rise.  Brown rice has a lot of carbs.  A food might have nice nutrition on its list of nutrients but its carbs will cause a blood sugar rise regardless.    

✚ New Topic ✚ Reply