I believe that Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin is the weight in picograms of the hemoglobin in a red cell. Fortunately all my blood numbers are in range so I haven't investigated what they all mean, how they interact or what is important, you would need to consult your GP.
Thanks, I didn't understand the mechanics. But if there are fewer red blood cells, might that also mean that a bigger proportion would be glycated? Also, fewer red blood cells may be because they don't live very long or aren't being produced in sufficient quantities. I have been anaemic for over 60 years, so there is something fundamental at work.
It is all very difficult and I was just saying not to concentrate too much on the numbers. My fbg is pretty constant at 4.5 and my weight is on target which are my main priorities.
Yes, it certainly is very difficult. If I had a fasting bg like yours I'd be less inclined to worry too! But I go along with the view that the most important numbers are the ones around meals. Not that mine are perfect either, but I give them much more credence than A1c tests.It is all very difficult and I was just saying not to concentrate too much on the numbers. My fbg is pretty constant at 4.5 and my weight is on target which are my main priorities.
Sorry if you've already answered this, but do you get your results online? I do, and when I look at the detail I am offered a more general explanation on each type of test. But I totally agree with your policy of research.The report of “normal” is no longer sufficient for me. I want numbers and to understand what that actually means
39 is in non diabetic range, which I am. I'm wary about research, as long as the cvd markers are in range, like triglycerides, ast, alt are normal, that's the main thing. My were very high 5 years ago, absolutely fine now on low carbing. My trigs are only 0.88 now.It all depends what level you have come from and what target you have chosen. My worst A1c was 41. Even by cutting almost all carbs from my diet I can't get it any lower than 38. I would dearly like a "normal" A1c of 31, or failing that 34 max. According to research quoted by Jenny Ruhl, heart attack risk rises with the rise in A1c above 31, slowly at first, but then more steeply from 36 upwards. My family is prone to cardiac problems, so I am wary of that risk.
I do get them online now, since I learnt to be more distrustful. Though mine don’t give explanations i am happy to go do the research myself and ask questions if required.Sorry if you've already answered this, but do you get your results online? I do, and when I look at the detail I am offered a more general explanation on each type of test. But I totally agree with your policy of research.
With numbers like that I'd be super-content too!Personally, I have a scale of acceptability I work to for myself. I won't state what the range is, as it doesn't matter a jot to anyone, except me, but provided I remain within that max tolerance range, I'm content.
Sorry, I should have said, "Well done, amazing results!"Personally, I have a scale of acceptability I work to for myself. I won't state what the range is, as it doesn't matter a jot to anyone, except me, but provided I remain within that max tolerance range, I'm content.
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?