• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2026 Survey »

Positive results finally

B

blackboxes

Member
Messages
8
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Other
Fasting has brought my A1C from 8.5 to 7.3 in 1 year.
No meds did this for me.
So after nearly 12 years since diagnosis I finally found something that worked.
Minimum 16 hours to 24 hours fasting daily.
Thanks for reading
 
Mark Rawlinson said:
How are your results being measured ?
finger prick, CGM or lab test ??
Click to expand...
Well it's confusing to me. Because the A1C came down but the everyday numbers didn't. So I don't really understand that. Because it's said that the A1C is the average of 3 months so I must be somehow missing seeing the better numbers that brought the A1C down. The lab results show my improved A1C.
I do the finger pricks method at home.
 
blackboxes said:
Well it's confusing to me. Because the A1C came down but the everyday numbers didn't. So I don't really understand that. Because it's said that the A1C is the average of 3 months so I must be somehow missing seeing the better numbers that brought the A1C down. The lab results show my improved A1C.
I do the finger pricks method at home.
Click to expand...
That's because HbA1c isn't an average. The test counts the number at the point of testing of red blood cells of a particular type that have had a glucose molecule attached. Because red blood cells usually live around three months, the result is mainly (~60%) affected by the most recent month, then 2 months ago, and about 10% is due to three month old rbcs. For most people the test does give a useful overall picture of BG over recent weeks, but it's not an average.

Fingerprick tests are snapshots of the moment and measure current blood glucose directly, so they are not measuring the same thing as the HbA1c. They are generally unreliable indicators of the overall picture. I don't bother fingerprick testing anything other than before and after food, for this reason. You might get a clearer picture from a CGM, which is their big strength. Without CGM info, you would have no idea what's going on with your BG when you're not able to test - when you're asleep, or driving, or whatever.
 
Personally I find the home tests( finger or otherwise) annoying because I can never make the numbers better. And the drs ask for them then ignore them just wanting and using the A1C.
So why do they want the home tests. Just to ignore anyway.
I just know that the A1C went down but I finally just got a dr who doesn't care about the A1C. So different ppl want different things. Leaving me too confused.
And the education centre nurse and dieticians and cdes don't agree in the same education centres.
So honestly about 2 years ago I decided I don't believe most of anything taught about diabetes.
I just do my best.
 
Last edited:
blackboxes said:
Personally I find the home tests( finger or otherwise) annoying because I can never make the numbers better. And the drs ask for them then ignore them just wanting and using the A1C.
So why do they want the home tests. Just to ignore anyway.
I just know that the A1C went down but I finally just got a dr who doesn't care about the A1C. So different ppl want different things. Leaving me too confused.
And the education centre nurse and dieticians and cdes don't agree in the same education centres.
So honestly about 2 years ago I decided I don't believe most of anything taught about diabetes.
I just do my best.
Click to expand...
There's not a lot you can do with a particular fingerprick result other than understanding why it is what it is. The biggest single influence on your current BG is your food, and in particular the carbohydrate in your food.

For me, the point of constructive FP testing is to assess how well your insulin system deals with the carb load in a particular meal. Take a baseline reading, eat the meal, and test again at the two hour point - by when your insulin system should have brought your BG back to around the baseline. If it is more than 2 mmol/l above the baseline, your system couldn't cope with the carb/glucose in the meal. You can't get that sort of food response information with an HbA1c. And you can't get a long-term indication from a fingerprick test. They're different tests for different purposes.

In my experience the only test that UK GPs are interested in is the HbA1c. That is at least partly because all the NICE targets and "best practice" guidelines for T2 are written with HbA1cs as the required measurement. In my view setting "ideal" BG levels that are definitely at abnormal levels, as these do, is not helpful. But the problem with deciding that you "don't believe most of anything taught about diabetes" is that you run the risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. What is it exactly that you don't believe?
 
KennyA said:
There's not a lot you can do with a particular fingerprick result other than understanding why it is what it is. The biggest single influence on your current BG is your food, and in particular the carbohydrate in your food.

For me, the point of constructive FP testing is to assess how well your insulin system deals with the carb load in a particular meal. Take a baseline reading, eat the meal, and test again at the two hour point - by when your insulin system should have brought your BG back to around the baseline. If it is more than 2 mmol/l above the baseline, your system couldn't cope with the carb/glucose in the meal. You can't get that sort of food response information with an HbA1c. And you can't get a long-term indication from a fingerprick test. They're different tests for different purposes.

In my experience the only test that UK GPs are interested in is the HbA1c. That is at least partly because all the NICE targets and "best practice" guidelines for T2 are written with HbA1cs as the required measurement. In my view setting "ideal" BG levels that are definitely at abnormal levels, as these do, is not helpful. But the problem with deciding that you "don't believe most of anything taught about diabetes" is that you run the risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. What is it exactly that you don't believe?
Click to expand...
Not very much because when the dietician in the same clinic says to eat sugar flavored instant oatmeal with 19 grams of added sugar in each tiny pk then one of the nurses in the same clinic says not to consume added sugar? Well then I wonder what do they know? Who knows what? And they still preach the 50-60% carb diet and the plate and tell me 17(306) is ok???
It's just hard to believe the other things when those are so wrong.
 
KennyA said:
There's not a lot you can do with a particular fingerprick result other than understanding why it is what it is. The biggest single influence on your current BG is your food, and in particular the carbohydrate in your food.

For me, the point of constructive FP testing is to assess how well your insulin system deals with the carb load in a particular meal. Take a baseline reading, eat the meal, and test again at the two hour point - by when your insulin system should have brought your BG back to around the baseline. If it is more than 2 mmol/l above the baseline, your system couldn't cope with the carb/glucose in the meal. You can't get that sort of food response information with an HbA1c. And you can't get a long-term indication from a fingerprick test. They're different tests for different purposes.

In my experience the only test that UK GPs are interested in is the HbA1c. That is at least partly because all the NICE targets and "best practice" guidelines for T2 are written with HbA1cs as the required measurement. In my view setting "ideal" BG levels that are definitely at abnormal levels, as these do, is not helpful. But the problem with deciding that you "don't believe most of anything taught about diabetes" is that you run the risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. What is it exactly that you don't believe?
Click to expand...
But I like your info. on the 2mmol/l . That will help me as I didn't know that.
 
blackboxes said:
Not very much because when the dietician in the same clinic says to eat sugar flavored instant oatmeal with 19 grams of added sugar in each tiny pk then one of the nurses in the same clinic says not to consume added sugar? Well then I wonder what do they know? Who knows what? And they still preach the 50-60% carb diet and the plate and tell me 17(306) is ok???
It's just hard to believe the other things when those are so wrong.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree for a moment that those sort of carb and sugar recommendations are no good for anyone with T2. The problem is that the official NHS "healthy eating" advice is still to base all meals around carbohydrates and to avoid fat. Changing that would be an admission that the advice we've been told to follow since the 1980s is/was wrong. The advice from the American College of Cardiology has been changed as long as six years ago - see this link:


But it's because of the poor advice still being given that pro-low carb forums like this exist. You could also look up people like Dr David Cavan, Dr David Unwin, Dr Jason Fung, Dr Michael Eades - as well as many other non-medics.

There's absolutely nothing new about low carb/keto as a way of tackling diabetes - it saved my great-grandmother's life a hundred years ago when she was diagnosed as T1 before porcine insulin was available, and it wasn't even new then.
 
My sister, who doesn't have diabetes as far as I know, does the 16:8 fasting method, which works well for her. I can't really do more than 14:10, as my blood sugar goes too low for comfort if I do. I do try to do it a bit, but it doesn't always come off!
 
Back
Top