• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Confirmation - 2nd HbA1c test results in.....

K

kazd63

Well-Known Member
Messages
61
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
So I had my blood tested a couple of weeks ago and the result was 54, I have been following a low carb (ish) diet since the 30th April so a week or so before the blood test (taken around the 8th/9th May I believe). DN requested that I repeat the test within two weeks for a confirmation. The test was taken on Thursday and the result is 47.

What is the likelihood that I am not diabetic but pre-diabetic. I do wonder how they can diagnose diabetes based on an average rather than how your body reacts say in a glucose test.
 
As your first test was definitely diabetic, that is what you are.
My Hba1c is in the normal range - judging from the 41 I got a year ago and my BG levels since then - but that is simply controlled diabetes.
Low carb is a very effective means of lowering BG levels in type twos, and that appears to be what you have done - keep on and you could see even lower results as long as your HCPs don't get all huffy and abandon the idea of testing you (as they seem to have done with me) I don't mind being a medical phenomenon and frightening the doctors.
 
HbA1c is an average over the lifetime of your red blood cells - apprx 3 months - skewed to represent the most recent month.

I would look at Pre-diabetic - as something you "will not receive any treatment" for.
 
I think they will say that the 1st test was a fluke and class me as pre-diabetic because the DN wanted the second test to confirm the first but obviously it doesn't.
 
kazd63 said:
I think they will say that the 1st test was a fluke and class me as pre-diabetic because the DN wanted the second test to confirm the first but obviously it doesn't.
Click to expand...

I doubt it to be honest. It could equally be the second one that was a fluke. :) Also, the 47 is right at the top of pre-diabetic. To be very honest, in my opinion you would be better being diagnosed T2 than pre-diabetic because you will be put on the register and hopefully the correct care pathway (more regular review blood tests, foot checks, retinal screening etc.) At the end of the day, it is only a label. The dietary requirements are the same.
 
I read a medical report somewhere saying that the the term “pre-diabetic” is only a label.

Once you hit the HBA1c 40-48 range, you are I’m afraid, considered a “diabetic”.
 
NewTD2 said:
I read a medical report somewhere saying that the the term “pre-diabetic” is only a label.

Once you hit the HBA1c 40-48 range, you are I’m afraid, considered a “diabetic”.
Click to expand...
The 48mmol level does seem to have a strange hold over HCPs - as though at 48 it's serious, but 47 is perfectly fine. This is complete nonsense as CVD can occur at lower levels. Treatment does NOT to do everything possible to help patients achieve non-diabetic BG levels. It seems to me that this is a fairly arbitrary figure arrived at to prevent patients on glucose lowering medications from having too many hypos.
 
bulkbiker said:
Did you tell them about your low carbing in the intervening period?
Click to expand...

When I mentioned it on the phone she said I needed carbs and eating fat was no good because fat turns to sugar in the body, hence I don't have high hopes of getting on with the DN!
 
What I don't understand is how they can diagnose you on an average taken over three months, I fully confess to being seriously out of control with the sweet stuff in the run up to my getting my monitor. However, surely the sure fire test is a glucose test which measures how you body reacts to the sugary/carbs etc
 
kazd63 said:
When I mentioned it on the phone she said I needed carbs and eating fat was no good because fat turns to sugar in the body, hence I don't have high hopes of getting on with the DN!
Click to expand...
Ah yes sorry forgot that was you.. sometimes we just have to smile politely, think very rude thoughts and leave..
 
The labels only matter in terms of treatment and screening options, whether you want a label of Pre Diabetes rather than Type 2 Diabetes is unimportant, imo. The crux of the problem is the Insulin resistance and how you deal with it.
You have already started to address this by adjusting your diet and quickly seen a change so keep it up and you could see (fingers crossed) non Diabetic numbers. But you will still have Type 2 Diabetes.

I understand that diagnosis can be hard to accept, I myself am only one year from diagnosis and clearly remember thinking 'someone has dropped the ball, this couldn't possibly happen to me'. A year on and I can say with hand on heart that I am no longer fearful of the label, in fact, Diabetes has given me the opportunity to improve my overall health and changed my attitude toward one of empowerment. I own this condition.
 
Guzzler said:
The labels only matter in terms of treatment and screening options, whether you want a label of Pre Diabetes rather than Type 2 Diabetes is unimportant, imo. The crux of the problem is the Insulin resistance and how you deal with it.
You have already started to address this by adjusting your diet and quickly seen a change so keep it up and you could see (fingers crossed) non Diabetic numbers. But you will still have Type 2 Diabetes.

I understand that diagnosis can be hard to accept, I myself am only one year from diagnosis and clearly remember thinking 'someone has dropped the ball, this couldn't possibly happen to me'. A year on and I can say with hand on heart that I am no longer fearful of the label, in fact, Diabetes has given me the opportunity to improve my overall health and changed my attitude toward one of empowerment. I own this condition.
Click to expand...
I would wholeheartedly agree Guzzler with regards to the treatment but it does make a difference when you apply for travel insurance/life insurance and that sort of thing. I am assuming that if you have pre diabetes you do not have to declare it (though I could be wrong). Obviously health comes first though and getting access to extra treatment ie, foot checks is the priority.
 
KK123 said:
I would wholeheartedly agree Guzzler with regards to the treatment but it does make a difference when you apply for travel insurance/life insurance and that sort of thing. I am assuming that if you have pre diabetes you do not have to declare it (though I could be wrong). Obviously health comes first though and getting access to extra treatment ie, foot checks is the priority.
Click to expand...

I have heard this argument about insurance before. As I understand it, if you are not on insulin or bg lowering drugs then the question is moot.

I would much rather pay the extra money for insurance, what you lose in monetary terms with that you gain in access to NHS services which probably costs a helluva lot more. Anyhoo, the diagnosis has been made, you cannot unmake it.
 
To be honest as much as I would rather not be diabetic, it has given me a kick up the backside and I am going to get rid of the weight which has caused the problem in the first place. I just want to get back my BG levels back to non diabetic range so that on occasion (special) if I want a slice of cake or maybe some rice with a takeaway then I can. As long as it does not become one long sugar fest which is what I was on in the run up to my first test. I realise that once I lose the weight (not if but when) I will be eating this way for life, am not thinking that when I lose the weight I can go back to my old way of eating. But maybe I may be able to introduce a little more carbs in like a jacket potato or a wholemeal roll without having a massive affect on my numbers or weight.
 
Bluetit1802 said:
Which of course may be down to variation - roller coaster swings up and down are known to cause problems but can still give an HbA1c of 38. Maybe a flattish line 38 would be different.
Click to expand...
True, but they haven't really answered the problem of the variables making up a 'solid' hba1c! Blue tit I take you point, it's valid, but hba1c is a figure in approximately the right parish, however if they pretend they can diagnose and compare between individuals, they are joking. Hba1c would require, in maths parlance, normalising for different cell turn over for one thing. And as you say time spent above a datum and its amplitude in BG terms varies the impact with the same hba1c.
Let's face it, it's a joke telling someone they are diabetic at 48 and not at 47.

The 38 idea of starting the damage is just a graphical average.

Sad thing is if we hypo like those of us with RH it can cause dementia.

regards
Derek
 
KK123 said:
I would wholeheartedly agree Guzzler with regards to the treatment but it does make a difference when you apply for travel insurance/life insurance and that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

There is another side to this. When you get older and want to take out any annuities from pensions etc. you get a much better deal than non-diabetics because they don't expect you to live a normal life span. :)
 
Back
Top