general query

[smeeagain]

Hi everyone - I suspect I am about to be diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. I went to the Dr just before xmas to investigate tiredness, breathlessness and occasional sort of fluttery irregular heartbeat (like when you have had a surprise) afull blood test and ECG was done - ecg was ok but Doc concerned that my glucose and cholesterol were high, so a fasting blood test was requested, this was done and when I phoned for results I was told I had to come back for a further test (no information) so this test was done, and as I hadn't been told otherwise I fasted again. However I was dismayed to be told, when I called for my results that a furhter test was required as my HBA1c test was looking a little high - so on Friday I had a 4th test done (not fasting this time as I asked whether I needed to or not)The results secretary could /would not discuss these results with me . I looked up what an hba1c test was for and then while I was getting the 4th bloods done I asked why I needed a 4th test and she said that my last result was 49 which was a little high. (I dont know what this is meant to indicate). As I work away from home during the week the next appointment I can get with a doctor to disucss this is 9th February.

I guess what I am looking for is if can anyone tell me why:

1. I need to have so many tests
2. what a hba1c test result of 49 means - (also as I had fasted prior to this test for more than 12 hours - would this have given a false result?)

I am overweight , despite following a low fat diet for several months - I actually put on weight :-( - but I don't particularly have problems with thirst or the need to go frequently but I do get very tired and my concentration has been dreadful lately.

Just feeling a bit anxious that I have had all these tests done and no-one seems to feel I need to know why or what the iplications of the results are - telling me that I need to see the Dr to discuss - but now 9th Feb seems a long way off to find out what is going on - not that it is going to change the outcome I guess .

Any advice very welcome

 

[initforlove]

after much research on the internet I am convinced that the low fat high carb diet advice is incorrect and I also found that there are some vested interests behind the recommendations

humans have only been eating grains for about 12000 years and before that for about 200000 we did not eat grains

I feel grains and legumes cause us the most problems.

Please experiment to see if high fat and low carb diet works for you as it has worked for many people here

limit it to the number of calories you should have each day and aim for more calories form fats than anything else but avoid trans fats. Good way to get more fats in the diet is to have some walnuts for example

my blood pressure used to be high and now it is low and my blood sugar was high and now it is low and the cholesterol is lower too but I am not concerned because the experts are still not sure what role cholesterol plays in the heart disease issue.

 

[AMBrennan]

humans have only been eating grains for about 12000 years and before that for about 200000 we did not eat grains

Oh dear, here we go again. Yes, so what? Evolution implies that proto-humans did better than the competition on that diet, and ended up displacing them; it does not logically follow that this diet is therefore ideal for is today.

Again, just because someone somewhere on the Internet says something doesn't mean it's correct.

Finally, please explain those "vested interests". What motive would the NHS have to conspire with the... The high carb food industry (?) to kill patients? Why would they pay for the extra medication and preventable amputations when changing dietary advice would cost then nothing?

On the other hand, proponents of low carb are usually the ones trying to sell their books and/ or range of low carb foods (e.g. Atkins) - they are in the business of "having a miracle cure"

1. I need to have so many tests

Because there are quite a few tests, and the tests are fairly good at diagnosing diabetes but not good at excluding it. If a random BG test is high (>11mmol/l), then it's diabetes; otherwise, you don't know.

An HbA1c of 49 (or 6.7%) is just over the threshold for diagnosing diabetes (>47 is diabetes, if it's. < 47 you don't know), so presumably that's why they wanted to be sure. Was the last test an OGTT (did they measure your BG after making you drink Lucozade?)?

As far as I am aware fasting should not affect HbA1c.

 

[smeeagain]

Thanks AMBrennan - no it wasn't a glucose tolerance - as far as I know first test was uncontrolled full bloods then 2nd was fasting then it seems the next and the last were hba1c tests.

Thanks for your information - so a count of 49 looks a bit sus then?? :thumbdown: