P
pollensa
Guest
By trade I am an IT guy, and basically my disposition follows a technical path, like an engineer, so have been problem solving in my career for over 30 years - this explains why I am like a dog with a bone on this anomaly. My wife is a HCP so getting the A1CNow+ testing is easy for me, my numbers on the same 20 test kit are the same as my wife's (and lower than several others in my family and my wife's patients) indicating that the kit is accurate-ish), but I am interested to see what the lab says in comparison. I am not worried as my control is good, but this is an itch. I know there are some for whom an A1C is not as reliable due to the variables of the length of time the red cells which are glycated live.
Excellent information, as you was interested in comparisons, hence I did my own A1Cnow as previously informed which was fasting state 5%, the actual lab test was ABSOLUTELY the same 5%, and same day/afternoon, I did my own A1Cnow NON FASTING STATE, was 5.3%, two tests lab and A1CNow same, and non fasting 5.3% not much off the marker as you say the latter accurate/ish.
I agree also with your comments for some A1C is not reliable due to variables due to life span of red cells, I truly believe this is the case and find it an area of concern if I have to be honest, and I quote from reliable sources that support your comments and my own personal thinking on this,
1.
A1C not so black and white? although its viewed gold standard re majority of countries for testing, there is a valid quesitno mark, re wide variation how long red cells survive in "different" people. i.e. diabetics may turn over in few s 81 days,while non diabetics can live as long as 146 days, indicates assumption A1C testing format everyones red blood cells live three months may/may not be case? person with normal blood sugar hemoglobic candy around on the cells for the longer period, may accumulate more sugar. Result of this, may upt the A1C test, has to be takenon board may not mean the person has too much sugar in their blood, instead, means their candy lived longer and thus, accummulated more sugar. The result is that people with normal blood sugar may experience unexpectedly high A1C levels. Whether this is the case, I have asked my doctor outright, and although got a positive response, this cannot be denied in, part, followed by words, "just remember, A1C is ONLY indicator of average, my thoughts on this, if this is the case, why is it viewed, as the MAIN TEST to have, over and above any other?
2.
American diabetes Association care, guidelines, indicate A1C is to be used as diagnostic tool alternative, but NOT superior to blood glucose, as such allowing doctor health care to have decision which test to use, A1C or finger testing.
3.
Australia use as tool and NOT main form of diagnosing, it is finger testing along with A1C.
There are Pros and Cons as with many areas.
Again, not a doctor, information viewed, but my own personal opinion is to take approach, many factors can contribute to the results of A1C, any medications taken, or other, and of course, possible variations of life cell life, whatever the result I always ask the Doctor to give an indeth explanation generally covering all factors that finally give the final result.