I don't think I am misleading anyone.
Just because a GP made some self made interpretation- that does not make her wrong . It probably means she looked at this statistic for her patient database and she saw a pattern which she thinks is worth pointing out.
If people do not want to look at it they don't need to - in my own case it resonates entirely with my own data.
In the end I already know i have diabetes, thus this is not a question about self diagnosis, simply looking at what things do I know about my own body and whether I can see if the things I am doing to it seem to be beneficial or not with the information I have.
I agree entirely that of course an OGTT and a Peptide -C test would have been helpful to diagnose me and of course they should be used. Had I known that one could do the simple maths I outlined here back in 2014 I would also have known to ask for those things.
I would also have spotted a worrying upwards trend dating right back to 2001- which would have showed how these figures changed when I put weight on and what happened when I lost it. It would have put some "concrete" info alongside the doctors fairly woolly statements about - "you will get diabetes if you don't lose weight"
In my own case no doctor ever thought to give me either of those tests and I never knew to ask. What I do have is my fasting glucose and my trigs - and this method seems to have some sensible correlation to those things. even if it simply alerts one to think about asking the question about diabetes if trigs go up .
Dr Unwin himself said in a recent lecture that he had never got any idea of what to tell his patients when their trigs went up and now through LCHF he does - i.e reduce carbs and your trigs will go down. reduce carbs and your hba1c will go down too. Ergo it appears entirely reasonable that there would be some connection between the two- that is precisely why I tried to see if anyone had done any work on it and came across this.
In my case it is quite clear my trig/ diet and diabetes are correlated - as such I choose to look at the data I do have ,
In the end we can all divide what ever numbers we have on our blood tests by any other numbers if we feel like it - none of that changes the basic need to get the proper tests done by the medical profession at the proper time by a fully engage health professional who looks very carefully at your blood results as presented to him as opposed to completing a box ticking exercise which sadly has been my own experience. .
.
Changes or influences on the Lipids, Triglycerides or Cholesterols
can have many different causes ! Just ask any Doc. or Prof.
I don’t like to disappoint you, to me is just objectivity important
and for that reason we need to be carefully how we apply any
Internet Search !
For example and just as a tip, I always put in the search NIH.Gov
With The Matter and if there is not anything coming out of the US
NIH as connected with the National Library of Medicine the biggest
in the world and where the NIH is internationally functioning by
all its cooperation’s, sponsoring, etc. with any reliable certified
Institutions or R&D Clinical Centers, then it means it could not
been of any value or reference to consider,
as simple as that.
.
.