'hypo'?

Here's a line from the official, supposedly informative thread from the beginning of the 'Type 1 Diabetes' section of this forum:

"Hypoglycemia is the term for when we have low levels of glucose in our blood. A blood glucose level of under 4 mmol/l is considered to be hypoglycaemia (a hypo)."

Each and every day, I quite commonly have blood-glucose readings below 4mmol/l. Not at all uncommonly, I get readings around 2mmol/l.

By and large, however (touch wood), I do not have hypos at all.

It's on account of what I eat, and the way that I eat, that I'm able to tolerate blood-glucose readings that in the past would have brought me to the floor before I might take appropriate action. (I've read that others manage to achieve the same result by a dietary means different to my own: @diamondnostril is one that I know of.)

But how could my control of my condition possibly appear reasonable when, according to the definition of 'hypoglycaemia' endorsed by this Forum, I am in a semi-constant state of hypoglycaemia?

Hypoglycaemia necessarily involves behaviour: my inability to respond appropriately to a hypo do to a lack of insight - which response, or lack of response, would be something behavioural - is itself a highly characteristic symptom of severe hypoglycaemia.

So, here's what looks like a veridical definition of 'hypoglycaemia': "(Symptoms resulting from) low blood glucose."

I found the above definition somewhere on the internet. Here's something else I found, after a brief search:

According to Medilexicon's medical dictionary, hypoglycemia is "Symptoms resulting from low blood glucose (normal glucose range 60-100 mg/dL [3.3-5.6 mmol/L]), which are either autonomic or neuroglycopenic."

The present Forum's official definition of 'hypoglycaemia' is at best an unhelpful convention. (It's a very widespread quasi-convention, I know.) But it's also just plain wrong.

Once more, here's my question:

How could my control of my condition appear reasonable when, according to the definition of 'hypoglycaemia' endorsed by this Forum, I am semi-constantly going hypo?

Is that 'Healthcare Practitioner'?

Do you mean, ask if I'm having a hypo?!

Well, I've just checked. And according to the orthodoxy, I am indeed having a hypo at this very moment.

But I won't dwell on that too much.

My past few HbA1c readings have been 27mmol/mol.

So the meter's fine.

But I mostly use visually read strips, anyway.

I certainly manifest symptoms with a 2mmol/l reading, but normally nothing severe.

The severity depends on things like when I injected, and - above all - what I've been eating.

I'm a carer for my 93-year-old mother. She'd notice symptoms if I showed them

The point is that this is a correct definition of 'hypoglycaemia': "(Symptoms resulting from) low blood glucose."

Low blood glucose itself (however measured) is nothing other than low blood glucose.

Hypoglycaemia involves behaviour.

But the behaviour resulting from low blood glucose can be very, very different - depending on factors such as what you have been eating. The official, orthodox definition of 'hypoglycaemia' takes no account of this.

I alway eat around 220g of rye bread, every day. (I don't eat it after 4.00pm, or my blood sugar would rise later in the evening and overnight.)

But I eat other stuff too.

I do not understand why the rye bread moderates my blood sugar and enables me to tolerate blood sugar levels which previously - before I started eating the stuff STEADILY throughout the day, as I do now - would have brought me to the floor.

Of course, 2mmol/l is very close to the edge.

But the point I'm making is that I just walk relaxedly to the fridge for some fruit juice, and I eat something and I carry on.

That's pretty well throughout the day my blood sugar is wavering near the edge.

But it doesn't aggressively yo-yo like it used to do.