I'm just waiting for results of my latest blood test last time I was 48 but I suspect I am over that figure now. I have nodded off with a phone in my hand a couple of times around 11 a.m. only to be woken up when my phone drops to the floor. I've also had what I thought were hot flushes returning so I feel like I've had the same sort of symptoms as you.I found out I had pre-diabetes in August, at the time I'd have said I didn't have any symptoms. Since then have tried to make adjustments in diet, a bit more exercise (am fairly active though) and switching screens off in evening in hope of better sleep.
Last week we were away, I eat really well at times but lapsed in terms of trying a local cake and dish and had a glass of wine every night. Been feeling tired all week, but have tried two different exercise classes. Went out last night, eat half a pizza and a glass of wine, found myself feeling quite sweaty in the night. So just wondering if the tiredness and being hot last night are symptoms of not eating so well.
There are diabetic symptoms - ie symptoms of metabolic disorder, and symptoms/damage caused by high blood glucose, which is itself a symptom of metabolic disorder. And not everything you experience is caused by diabetes.Thanks for your replies. I felt a bit better yesterday, so I guess time will tell whether I'm just generally have a couple of off weeks or so, or whether it's symptoms.
The graph you posted is absolutely horrific, the mean a1c is literally almost prediabetic range. IMHO there is NO difference between prediabetes and T2, same exact disease just how severe it is. So to this this many people have diabetes worldwide is really HORRIFIC. There is really no other way to describe it, the graph you posted is hard to look at even cuz it’s just so awful.Hi and welcome.
I don't actually accept there's such a thing as "pre-diabetes". The whole "diagnosis at 48" thing was set up around 2008 to provide a fallback - it was accepted internationally that what ever else happened (ie earlier diagnosis wasn't ruled out), T2 would be diagnosed by everyone if BG rose past 48. The problem with that is that in the UK at least, it's become a fact that T2 will only be diagnosed with a BG of 48 and above.
Pre-diabetes had to be invented as a concept to cover the gap left when people's BG left normal levels (above 42ish, see graph) but before it rose to 48.
This matters because it's known medically (see Bilous and Donnelly, Handbook of Diabetes) that diabetic symptoms occur at lower BG levels. One of the reasons that 48 was selected as the fall back point was that serious retinopathy was relatively rare at BG levels below that. In other words, it is known that people did get retinopathy caused by elevated blood glucose levels, at levels under 48, but it was usually milder.
In my case, I had a pretty full range of diabetes symptoms starting about as soon as my BG left normal levels, which I think happened around 2010. I can't be sure because my medical records don't mention any BG levels from then. I started with oedema and weight gain, moved through kidney problems, bullae, "burning feet" neuropathy (I know my BG was 44 when that started in 2013/4), night sweats, blistering, cuts not healing, tissue paper skin, and more.
I did go to the doctor, but was firmly told I didn't have diabetes as my blood glucose wasn't high enough. I was on a range of medication to make my kidneys work, to stop the pain, that sort of thing. In those days I knew next to nothing about diabetes and assumed that I was getting good advice.
Roll forward to December 2019, and they tell me that actually I am now diabetic after all, because my BG had reached 50. By April 2020 I had reduced that to 36 and almost all the symptoms had gone immediately (although I still have some greatly reduced things that are probably permanent damage).
So the short answer is yes. The formal diagnosis level doesn't mean much in terms of symptoms. People have diabetic symptoms, ie diabetes, at lower levels and can have no symptoms with much higher BGs.
[edited to attach graph]
I am not sure what you're seeing here. The graph clearly shows that normal - ie non-diabetic - people have Hba1cs clustered around a mean of 38. They are not ill - at least, they don't have diabetes. And this graph is fairly typical of populations, it just happens to be mainly Dutch people.The graph you posted is absolutely horrific, the mean a1c is literally almost prediabetic range. IMHO there is NO difference between prediabetes and T2, same exact disease just how severe it is. So to this this many people have diabetes worldwide is really HORRIFIC. There is really no other way to describe it, the graph you posted is hard to look at even cuz it’s just so awful.
@Ali Akin ... what is it exactly that you are reacting to? The graph is just statistical data of real people... I don't mean to sound antagonistic, just curious. There is definitely (at least in my opinion) a worrying conclusion that far more people are living with insulin resistance than is realised outside of the diabetic community, but what is it that think is horriffic?The graph you posted is absolutely horrific, the mean a1c is literally almost prediabetic range. IMHO there is NO difference between prediabetes and T2, same exact disease just how severe it is. So to this this many people have diabetes worldwide is really HORRIFIC. There is really no other way to describe it, the graph you posted is hard to look at even cuz it’s just so awful.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?