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

Do I test if I am 'post diabetic'?

This is what doctors currently consider normal BGs for a non-diabetic (source http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/14045524.php )

Fasting blood sugar under 5.5 mmol/L
One hour after meals under 7.8 mmol/L
Two hours after meals under 6.6 mmol/L

As a diabetic, I try to keep under 7 at all times, including 1 hour after eating, which is my personal peak (and that of most others too) but occasionally it goes over this and that's life. As long as it doesn't happen very often, it's ok, but I am never 6.8 or higher two hours after meals, no matter what I have eaten and would be very unhappy if I was. If I were to eat a packet of custard creams then I am sure at two hours, I'd be back under 6.8 however the figure at one hour would be in the teens or beyond because I have diabetes. It's this peak number you need to be looking out for.

6.8 at two hours is into the diabetic range, I'm afraid. It also strongly suggests that you're actually straying much higher at 1 hr. Have a read of this http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/16422495.php and a good look round the whole site. I think it's really important to be fully aware of all this before declaring your diabetes gone.
 
Pipp said:
Haven't tried white bread yet, but whole packet of custard creams and three daim bars didn't cause spike.
Click to expand...
Sooooo jealous! I love Daim bars. Could you have a chip butty for me and remind me what one tastes like?
 
Please please please this is just wrong......... You are interpreting the mean of a normal distribution as the definitive. This is just statistically wrong. If you look at the 95th percentile on those graphs they are much higher. Add to this that this is for one particular meal for a sample size of 20 people and you are stretching any credibility. I agree it is a good thing to aim for but does not mean those numbers are the numbers for normal otherwise 50% of the normal people in that test where diabetic. Remember all those people where normal and 2 of them where outside those graphs!
 
Yes, Andrew this was my feeling when I read this thread too. I didn't know how to express my thoughts so I didn't post, but you have explained what I was thinking perfectly. Thank you!

OK what I am going to say next will be a bit controversial, and most won't agree with me, it's just my opinion.

Pipp, I know the 'cured' label is a difficult one, as the ND is so new, but having read all of this thread my feeling is that you are no longer diabetic. To me if you can have so many carbs and only get spikes that some non-diabetics would get then surely that's a cure and you are no longer carb intolerant. Now obviously I see the need to be sensible and not push at the limits too much, because some of the factors that caused you to become diabetic in the first place may still be lurking, but if it looks like a cure and acts like a cure........

So yes I'm with Brunneria, I like the label pre-diabetic for you. Even though it makes no sense, it makes most sense because it is back one step from being diabetic - back one step from where you were with diabetes. Testing to make sure you stay pre-diabetic has to be sensible, but when you have lost all the weight you want to lose, I don't see there is any reason why you wouldn't be able to eat whatever you want to eat in moderation - but I would still advise testing occasionally then too.
 
There are two ways of looking at it (well, actually 2000, but I am picking 2).

Someone who had flu, gets over it, and it is over - for ever. Cured. Recovered. End of.

Someone who loses weight, is no longer obese - but they will always have an increased chance of regaining that weight.
Someone who had cancer, is 'in remission' but needs checking for its return.

I definitely don't continue to call a slim person obese, and an ex-cancerite is in remission until they get the all clear, at which point we call them 'a survivor'.

And I certainly don't like calling someone a ' diabetes survivor'. Awful idea.

So we need a new word!
 
Recovered diabetic!

Undiabetic

Carb tolerant.

Glycemic free

Type nil diabetic
 
I wasn't saying those non-diabetic numbers were something for those with diabetes to aim for in any way. I was saying that this is what doctors consider normal, non-diabetic blood glucose numbers. And that if someone is going to declare themselves "cured" or "post diabetic", these are the numbers they would need to do that. They're as arbitrary as figures you will find anywhere on this site or elsewhere and are just a guide. If someone is going to use the figures on this site to claim a cure without knowing anything about the provenance of such figures, then those figures I provided can also be useful.

To say that you were 6.8 two hours after eating a packet of custard creams without any information on what you were after an hour and using this as evidence which points to you being "cured" is odd. That's what I was trying to point out. If someone wants to say they're past diabetes, or cured, then that's up to them. I was merely pointing out that the numbers the OP has given us don't amount to a cure at all and are missing one piece of vital information anyway- one-hour testing.

As I say, it's up to the OP whether they call themselves 'cured' or not but they were here to canvas opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Type 0 is

Perfect

Right. I have decided!
All we have to do is inform the rest of the world of my decision.
Send out the Heralds!

@Pipp , I hearby dub you the first, the premier, (so far the only)
Type Zero Diabetic!!!

And @zand we don't have to phaff about asking her if she likes it - no one asked me if I wanted to be called a type 2. We just stamp her on the forehead with a big rubber stamp - no matter how hard she wriggles.
 
Love it!
 
No-one asked me to be,what I can't spell or say!!
 
Bluetit1802 said:
What about @Andrew Colvin He appears to be Type Zero too!
Click to expand...
After 3 years I will hopefully accept that (like @Pipp ). That is the point that my GP surgery (nearly typed sugary) stop monitoring type 2 post bariatric patients and declare their diabetes as gone. Just don't know .... may be I am not T2, may be I just cant stop eating 1lb bags of peanuts in a single session and put it all back on (btw doing that sends my levels to 6.2 peak at 3 hours - takes about an hour to eat them though and then it is down to processing the protein for many hours).

At the moment I just declare myself as a lucky boy.
 
Yes, Andrew gets a lapel badge too.

And they need a secret handshake. Only they'll have to decide that themselves. Or it wouldn't be secret.

I understand about the peanuts. Cashews with black pepper are my thing.
 
sarah said:
6.8 two hours after eating isn't non-diabetic numbers at all. It is likely to be far higher than that after one hour as well.
Click to expand...

I have been higher and I am non-diabetic. I find all of this so confusing.
 
@Andrew Colvin regularly tests his non-diabetic wife at the same times he tests himself. She is sometimes over the 7.8 peak that on average, an average non-diabetic is expected to peak at. If I've got that wrong, because its from memory, Andrew will put me right.
 
Hi everyone,

I am even more confused, my Hba1c has been in the non-diabetic range for the last year, my doctor
has told me that I am fine now but, to keep up my diabetic tests to make sure I stay that way, I still
class myself as a type 2 diabetic as I am diet only now, I have come off of all my medication
Ramipril for high blood pressure, Trajenta Linagliptin because I could not have Metformin because
of other problems and statins for cholesterol the only medication I am taking now is Levothyroxine
for my (underactive thyriod) I have not tested my own readings I was not told about testing myself I
was not given a meter or test strips.
Sandy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…