'hypo'?

You mean that the orthodox medical should be changed to suit you?

How do they define hypercholesterolemia? With a threshold cholesterol criteria.
How do they define hypertension? With a blood pressure criteria.
How do they define hyperglycemia? With a blood glucose criteria.

It doesn't make much sense clinically do define serious problems entirely on symptoms (which vary from patient to patient) where there are diagnostic criteria available.

michaeldavid said:

I don't allow my blood sugar to 'sit in the 2s'.

Click to expand...

But then it's not uncommon for you to let it to 2mmol/l

michaeldavid said:

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

Click to expand...

It's your life. Throw it away if you want. Just make sure that you don't kill someone innocent in a car crash.

But this thread yet again feels like you advertising your methods.

These are wholly unsuitable for the general diabetic population, are based on no scientific evidence and you yourself have said several times you have no idea how or why it works.

Actually they aren't just unsuitable but potentially dangerous in my own opinion.

The definition of hypoglycemia cannot and should not be changed to suit an individual, as far as I'm aware there isn't ONE wholly accepted definition anyway, If you dont like the ones currently available define it yourself and stick to that.

Mine is blood sugars below 4m/mol. What is everyone elses'?

Engineer88 said:

Mine is blood sugars below 4m/mol. What is everyone elses'?

Click to expand...

Mine's 3.4 - although I will correct higher than that if I have a strong amount of insulin active or if I need to drive obviously.

Smidge

Would it save time if I just gave michaeldavid the answer he wants to read, for this and any other threads he starts?:

You are special. You are different. You are clever. The world is wrong and you are right. I believe everything you say about yourself, really. I swooned in awe when you mentioned Wittgenstein on your other thread. I’m sure you live a happy and fulfilled life, and don’t just try to pick arguments for the sake of it.

smidge said:

Mine's 3.4 - although I will correct higher than that if I have a strong amount of insulin active or if I need to drive obviously.

Smidge

Click to expand...

3.5 for me if I'm not driving.

If you didn't take insulin your body would have a whole lot of defences to stop your glucose levels from getting too low . Why do you think that is?


Your brain requires glucose
The first mechanism is to stop secreting insulin ; this happens in the low 4s and natural insulin 'switches' off quickly unlike injected insulin.
As the glucose falls glucagon is released, then other hormones that help raise blood glucose.
It's not until the next bit that the brain demands some glucose and a non insulin user starts shaking, sweating , becomes anxious and knows jolly well that they need to eat something.
With recurrent hypoglycaemia the threshold for these events becomes lower and in people who have used insulin for a long time (or had lots of hypos) many of them may be lost .Many of us no longer get strong 'autonomic' hypo signs.
As your glucose falls lower if you underwent testing you might find that you were less likely to be able to do certain cognitive tasks well , and your reaction times may decrease. The main reason for the driving regulations
There are some people whose brains seem to become habituated and adapt to lower levels but their brain still probably doesn't function as well in all tasks , especially those more complex tasks that demand more fuel like decision making.

Eventually the reduction of glucose to the brain means you become confused, may get blurred vision, become sleepy, irritable, aggressive etc .Because your brain is habituated to low glucose levels, this happens to you at a very low level it is a known thing, you aren't unique and it's one of the reasons most doctors are keen for people not to get into this territory because there isn't any safety net left.

I think that you are indeed continually close to the edge of that cliff .

I think that presentation from Phoenix is a good conclusion to this thread. Whether we agree on hypo being 4 or under or 3.5 or under is beside the point. Levels in the 2's are dangerous and should not be condoned. They need treating with rapid acting carbs. If MichaelDavid is happy with his levels, that's fine but please don't try to justify it on an open forum. Thanks