Oh wow, haven’t heard of this. Can imagine this/these conditions must present many challenges for you, and those with the above conditions. Thank you for explaining it. Take care.
How high can non-diabetic blood sugars rise after meals?
- Thread starter Popsickle12
- Start Date
Oh wow, haven’t heard of this. Can imagine this/these conditions must present many challenges for you, and those with the above conditions. Thank you for explaining it. Take care.
Lamont D
Oracle
- Messages
- 17,291
- Type of diabetes
- Reactive hypoglycemia
- Treatment type
- I do not have diabetes
Not many doctors havent either. In 2007 (ish) can't remember exactly, but my first endocrinologist, no tests, couldn't reason it through and diagnosed me as a fatty liver. Insisted I stop drinking alcohol.
Good advice you think, but stopped five years earlier, he didn't believe me.
I did get diagnosed with Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver, as I seen my second endo, some six years later.
I was fortunate, in that my GP didn't understand why I was going hypo in front of her. Not T1, no diabetic meds or reason to go hypo! Got a referral to the endo, that did save my life.
I had a hypo on my first and second appointment which gave him an idea as to what it could be.
by this time I was seriously overweight and my health was at an all time low.
Now a decade older living a controlled dietary hypo free life. (Hopefully!)
Best wishes.
Wonderful, thank you very much. I’ve been told by my GP that I have prediabetes. My eating habits have improved since, and I’ve lost weight. I’ve noticed that my blood sugar 2 hours after eating has remained between 5-7 mmol/l on all occasions except for one where it was 9.1 after eating a meal with pastry! So apart from this occasion I think I’m doing ok….fingers crossed.
Thank you for your reply.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 567
- Type of diabetes
- I reversed my Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
Hi @jamesbrook23 - just noticing that this looks like your first post, so saying welcome and feel free to ask any specific questions you may have.
In a sense, the way you phrase it gives an interesting perspective. There is kind of an assumption (actually I can only say that I had this assumption) that there is a binary normal-diabetic thing, and that "people without diabetes" can regulate sugar whereas people with diabetes cannot.
The reality (once you start digging because you have this diagnosis) is much more complicated, and that absent anything pathologically wrong with your pancreas, you can have a period of even as long as twenty years, with blood glucose "in a safe range" but needing more and more insulin in order to achieve that same regulation. This is the classic pathway to T2DM, where your Pancreas, being responsible for all that insulin; eventually pulls a Scotty - "she cannae take it captain"..
The medical system then kicks in when your average HbA1c reaches a threshold, but actually, the preceding 20 years of increased insulin is just as problematic, and we would all be much better off if we could keep our insulin levels lower (insulin does much more than regulate sugar and isn't supposed to be elevated so often).
It's difficult not to start seeing the whole thing the other way around, and question whether everyone is simply consuming more sugars and starches (which quickly turn into sugars) than we are supposed to cope with, day after day. If we keep doing that, some of us will develop diabetes, but the problem is that the elevated insulin levels lead to all sorts of other health issues.
The good news, of course, is that anything you do to better control your blood glucose, will also help with reducing insulin.
The problem, is that there isn't really anything that backs up what you are describing as "safe" - it's normal for sure, but the levels of sugar we are typically consuming are many times higher than what had been described as "safe" only 50 years ago, and rates of diabetes and pre-diabetes (which really means elevated insulin levels) are continuing to increase.
To be clear - I think that the way you express it is totally the way that most people think about this - it's definitely the way I did... so I'm only reacting to, if you like, the way my own understanding has changed.
In a sense, the way you phrase it gives an interesting perspective. There is kind of an assumption (actually I can only say that I had this assumption) that there is a binary normal-diabetic thing, and that "people without diabetes" can regulate sugar whereas people with diabetes cannot.
The reality (once you start digging because you have this diagnosis) is much more complicated, and that absent anything pathologically wrong with your pancreas, you can have a period of even as long as twenty years, with blood glucose "in a safe range" but needing more and more insulin in order to achieve that same regulation. This is the classic pathway to T2DM, where your Pancreas, being responsible for all that insulin; eventually pulls a Scotty - "she cannae take it captain"..
The medical system then kicks in when your average HbA1c reaches a threshold, but actually, the preceding 20 years of increased insulin is just as problematic, and we would all be much better off if we could keep our insulin levels lower (insulin does much more than regulate sugar and isn't supposed to be elevated so often).
It's difficult not to start seeing the whole thing the other way around, and question whether everyone is simply consuming more sugars and starches (which quickly turn into sugars) than we are supposed to cope with, day after day. If we keep doing that, some of us will develop diabetes, but the problem is that the elevated insulin levels lead to all sorts of other health issues.
The good news, of course, is that anything you do to better control your blood glucose, will also help with reducing insulin.
The problem, is that there isn't really anything that backs up what you are describing as "safe" - it's normal for sure, but the levels of sugar we are typically consuming are many times higher than what had been described as "safe" only 50 years ago, and rates of diabetes and pre-diabetes (which really means elevated insulin levels) are continuing to increase.
To be clear - I think that the way you express it is totally the way that most people think about this - it's definitely the way I did... so I'm only reacting to, if you like, the way my own understanding has changed.
Incredible amount of interesting and helpful information thanks guys. It’s a lot to take in for a new-be
May I ask another question please?
I understand the reason for pre and post meal blood glucose testing.
If, for example, my blood glucose is 4.5mmol/l pre meal, should I be trying to get my BG back down to 4.5 2 hours after, OR anywhere below 7 mmol/l?
I have been testing my BG pre and post meals on a regular basis over the last few weeks. My BG pre meal is often between 4 and 5 mmol/l, and on a few occasions less than 4, particularly first thing in the morning.
My BG 2 hours after meals has generally been below 6-7 mmol/l, occasionally in the ‘5 -6 region’ but does not always return back down to the level it was pre meal. Is that ok?
In someone who has a healthy response to glucose, would they find their BG returning to where it started, or just somewhere below 7.8 mmol/l?
- Messages
- 3,465
- Type of diabetes
- Treatment type
- Diet only
What you're looking for is information on how well your system deals with the additional glucose produced by the digestion of carbohydrate. So the idea is that your system should be getting you back to close to where you started - within 2mmol/l of the "before food" figure. It will either handle the glucose and you'll be back roughly where you started, or it won't, and that tells you that there were probably too many carbs in what you ate. So if I started at say 4.5 and had a reading at +2 hrs of 7.5, that's too many carbs for me.Incredible amount of interesting and helpful information thanks guys. It’s a lot to take in for a new-be
May I ask another question please?
I understand the reason for pre and post meal blood glucose testing.
If, for example, my blood glucose is 4.5mmol/l pre meal, should I be trying to get my BG back down to 4.5 2 hours after, OR anywhere below 7 mmol/l?
I have been testing my BG pre and post meals on a regular basis over the last few weeks. My BG pre meal is often between 4 and 5 mmol/l, and on a few occasions less than 4, particularly first thing in the morning.
My BG 2 hours after meals has generally been below 6-7 mmol/l, occasionally in the ‘5 -6 region’ but does not always return back down to the level it was pre meal. Is that ok?
In someone who has a healthy response to glucose, would they find their BG returning to where it started, or just somewhere below 7.8 mmol/l?
In addition the second reading should be lower than 7.8 - 8 is close enough for all practical purposes given inaccuracy in the meter - it's not either/or.
As said above, you are not looking for the highest point, which will probably occur around 45 minutes after eating.
Great, thank you @KennyA. Luckily most, if not all of my BG tests are within 2mmol post meal since being on this pathway on looking after myself. On one occasion it was below the ‘pre‘ meal which was bizarre!
Lamont D
Oracle
- Messages
- 17,291
- Type of diabetes
- Reactive hypoglycemia
- Treatment type
- I do not have diabetes
It's not, if you don't rise too much.
For instance, you have a zero (ish) carb amount in your meal and an amount of good protein and fats.
Your pre meal is 4.5, and because you have background insulin, and the first phase insulin response, because it is a natural response. So it would likely but not always, come down a tad.
But as always, it is on the individual.
Best wishes.
For instance, you have a zero (ish) carb amount in your meal and an amount of good protein and fats.
Your pre meal is 4.5, and because you have background insulin, and the first phase insulin response, because it is a natural response. So it would likely but not always, come down a tad.
But as always, it is on the individual.
Best wishes.
