Blood sugar levels, what's normal.

[tim2000s]

I don't want to 'gamble' with complications so sticking to non-diabetic levels is my approach.

The key about T1 is that while you might reduce the risk of complications, below the 6.5% Hba1C level, this relative risk compared to non-D is roughly 1.

Or in other words, you are as likely to suffer something like neuropathy, retinopathy, kidney issues, etc, as a non-diabetic. It doesn't mean that they won't happen whether you run at slightly non-diabetic levels or very non-diabetic levels!

 

[azure]

I don't like the thought of it because I don't want to be restricted even more. I was told when I was diagnosed in 2001 that I do not have to have a specialist diet, in moderation I can eat what I want. As long as I do my insulin!
I'm **** at maths as well!

I just don't want my life to be consumed by numbers

Carb counting doesn't restrict you Obviously, I try to eat healthily most of the time ( for my general health not just for the diabetes), but I also eat things like chocolate cheesecake, pastries, a nice cappuccino and a piece of cake in a coffee shop with my friends, takeaways, etc, etc. The difference is that with carb counting I can keep my blood sugar in the correct range and my HbA1C as normal as I can

I don't have a specialist diet. I eat what I would eat if I wasn't diabetic

I think sometimes the phrase 'carb counting' sounds a bit like 'counting calories' so makes people think of depriving yourself of food, but a more accurate name for carb counting would be 'matching your insulin to your food in order to control your blood sugar as closely as possible to how your body did it before you got diabetes'. That's what it is. But 'carb counting' is a lot shorter

 

[Wurst]

The key about T1 is that while you might reduce the risk of complications, below the 6.5% Hba1C level, this relative risk compared to non-D is roughly 1.

Or in other words, you are as likely to suffer something like neuropathy, retinopathy, kidney issues, etc, as a non-diabetic. It doesn't mean that they won't happen whether you run at slightly non-diabetic levels or very non-diabetic levels!

That is clear , I could still get complications but careful control of blood glucose levels can significantly decrease the risk of developing complications. A 1% decrease in HbA1c can result in a risk reduction of-

• Retinopathy (eye damage) by ~38%
• Nephropathy (kidney damage) by ~28%
• Neuropathy (nerve damage) by ~28%
• Cardiovascular (heart attack or stroke) event by ~57%

Tight control gives me greater hope of avoiding complications. Running in the 8's mmol all the time I would be expecting complications at some point.

 

[tim2000s]

@Wurst it works according to this graph, based on the empirical data from the DCCT and EDIC studies.

A 1% reduction in Hba1C from 7% to 6% gives the benefits you've described. From 6% to 5% it isn't the case. Obviously, reducing from an Hba1C that is much higher than 7% to below 7% provides a much greater benefit.

 

[LucyM88]

I'm currently 8 on that scale....have been higher in the past.

 

[azure]

I'm currently 8 on that scale....have been higher in the past.

So you're heading in the right direction

It's not always easy to get your HbA1C down (1% sounds a deceptively tiny amount, doesn't it?) but if you have the right tools then you can do it

 

[Wurst]

@Wurst it works according to this graph, based on the empirical data from the DCCT and EDIC studies.
A 1% reduction in Hba1C from 7% to 6% gives the benefits you've described. From 6% to 5% it isn't the case. Obviously, reducing from an Hba1C that is much higher than 7% to below 7% provides a much greater benefit.

Very interesting, The graph X axis scale does not include any 5 % HBa1C results in the study ?

I've always been a follower of the Bernstein way who advocates low HBa1C's ~ 4.5 %.

 

[Oldvatr]

Very interesting, The graph X axis scale does not include any 5 % HBa1C results in the study ?

I've always been a follower of the Bernstein way who advocates low HBa1C's ~ 4.5 %.

Pedant. The graph does not show CVE's either.

 

[tim2000s]

Very interesting, The graph X axis scale does not include any 5 % HBa1C results in the study ?

No, because the incidence of complications in T1s with normal Hba1Cs (Which those below 6% are considered to be) is on a par with similar issues in normal people. When you get to that level of Hba1C, variability of glucose levels plays a much bigger part than actual Hba1C.