Paulinea said:Mike did his first post meal test reading 7.1mmol/1. then pre meal test 4.9mmol/1 is that a good or bad reading ?
anyone free to answer when they have time please.
Squire Fulwood said:Paulinea said:Mike did his first post meal test reading 7.1mmol/1. then pre meal test 4.9mmol/1 is that a good or bad reading ?
anyone free to answer when they have time please.
That's a good reading if it was taken two hours after eating when it should be less than 8.5. Some people like to keep below the 8.5 recommendation so that they have a safety margin. The pre meal reading was also good.
He got it right first time.
Thundercat said:
nomistheman said:They are both very good readings! :clap:Paulinea said:Mike did his first post meal test reading 7.1mmol/1. then pre meal test 4.9mmol/1 is that a good or bad reading ?
See here for how good!
You confused me by putting the post meal reading before the pre meal reading - it made me think that you are potentially comparing, say, the post breakfast reading with the pre lunch reading which is of less use than, say, the pre lunch reading compared with the post lunch reading. I may have just misinterpreted your post though. :wink:
As a guide test prior to eating (pre prandial), then test two hours after Mike has finished eating (post prandial). The post prandial reading should be no more than 2 mmol/l greater than the pre prandial reading. If it is, then consider adjusting the carbs in the meal - either get rid of them, substitute for lower GI carbs, or just have less of the carbs in that meal.
(edit)
You can also try combining the carbs in the meal with more fat - which, I find, slows the digestion of the carbs, e.g. Cheddar cheese on wholegrain toast gives me a longer and lower release of Glucose into the blood than just wholegrain toast. There's very minimal carbs in Cheddar cheese but, a lot of fat.
(/edit)
Sounds like both you and Mike are off to a great start - well done :thumbup: - keep going!
nomistheman said:Ah - I see. I was just confused - I didn't intend to give the impression you or Mike were doing anything wrong. Apologies if I did.Paulinea said:Hi nomistheman,the thing was is we where waiting for the meter to come, so we did our first test 2 hours after lunch with the reading of 7.1 mmol/l, then just pre his tea reading was 4.9mmol/1 then 2 hours later it was 6.6mmol/l.
Lunch was good - the post prandial reading being just 1.7 mmol/l more than the pre prandial reading. 8)
Ooh, I would be interested in the post prandial reading for the porridge as it spikes my levels by at least +4 mmol/l but, everyone is different.Paulinea said:SO this morning we wanted to see the effect of him having porridge with water and sweetener he left his reading for me before he had his porridge which was 5.8mmol/l so I am waiting to see what his reading is after having the porridge,sorry for the ramble but its all new to us thank's for your reply it helps.
Would just like to say that all Mike's readings so far have been within the non diabetic range :!:
blackcat79 said:Tho thats not great after porridge its not to bad. I have BS of 17 after mine but need something to keep me going due to work shifts.
Keep up the good work
Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
nomistheman said:Thanks for the update. :thumbup:
10.2 mmol/l from 5.8 mmol/l up 4.2 mmol/l - similar to how my body breaks down porridge carbs. :wink:
May be useful to weigh a full measure and calculate from the info on the packaging how many carbs were consumed?
Trying a half measure is definitely worth a go!
What type of porridge is it - does it have added sugar .. you know, the little convenient microwave pots? I was using Scotts Porridge oats - I read on these forums about using jumbo sized rolled oats as they're more slowly digested, i.e. lower Glycaemic Index.
I miss my porridge but, I enjoy my scrambled eggs! :thumbup:
I'm 'eating' my way through test strips too! :lol:
Keep going you're on the right road. 8)