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

Interesting aspect ... Beta cells and postprandial levels

DiamondAsh

Well-Known Member
Messages
641
Location
Walsall
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Dislikes
Disregard for authority. Noise.
Beta Cells Die Off in People Whose Fasting Blood Sugar is Over 110 mg/dl (6.1 mmol/L)
An intriguing study shows the severe organ damage experienced by people whose blood sugar falls into a range most doctors consider to be near-normal. A team of researchers autopsied the pancreases of deceased patients who were known to have had fasting blood sugars that tested between 110 mg/dl and 125 mg/dl within two years of their deaths. The researchers found that these patients, whose blood sugar was not high enough for them to be diagnosed as diabetic, had already lost, on average, 40% of their insulin-producing beta cells.

Since the American Diabetes Association believes that a fasting blood sugar level of 100 mg/dl to 125 mg/dl corresponds to a 2-hour glucose tolerance levels of 140 mg/dl to 199 mg/dl, this suggests that patients whose post-meal blood sugars rise only to the non-diabetic "impaired" level may be well on the way to losing as much as 40% of their beta cell mass. It also suggests that people with abnormal glucose tolerance who wish to avoid further beta cell loss should try to keep their blood sugars under 140 mg/dl at all times.

However, it is important to understand that in any study that measures only fasting blood sugar and finds a correlation with complications, it isn't the fasting blood sugars that are doing the damage when they are under 140 mg/dl.

The reason slightly elevated fasting blood sugars correlate with beta cell destruction is that people with slightly elevated fasting blood sugars who eat high carbohydrate meals are experiencing high, and often long lasting, blood sugar spikes after each meal they eat. A 210 lb person whose fasting blood sugar is 110 needs to eat only 12 grams of carbohydrate to raise their blood sugar to 150, and most of them are likely to be eating 50 to 60 grams of carbohydrate per meal, ensuring that their blood sugars are well over 150 for several hours after each meal.

It is those high post meal readings that go along with elevated fasting levels that cause the glucose toxicity that damages organs and causes complications.

Beta-cell deficit and increased beta-cell apoptosis in humans with type 2 diabetes. Butler AE, Janson J, Bonner-Weir S, Ritzel R, Rizza RA, Butler PC.Diabetes. 2003;52:102-110.
 
Excellent post, D.A.;)
This is why I believe its always better to err on the side of caution when dealing with diabetes. Personally I think that my BG had been spiking with dramatic highs and lows for years before I was diagnosed. I even think that's what set me up for IBD. When insulin is dysfunctional every thing else is.
Today I had the lowest reading ever since I started monitoring my BG; A1c: 4.5%, one and a half hours postprandial. I've worked very hard to achieve this, but, hey, this disease is nothing to mess with.
 
It's very interesting, I must admit. It's those 1hr postprandial spikes that can really affect the HbA1c results...
your A1c result is very good. well done. I've just been uploading my BG results to my PC and my average (14 day) is 7.0 ~ I have no idea if that is too high or not (for a non-D) but it should come down in time.

I don't understand some of the terminologies yet...
:wacky:
 
Here is a good link for some info:
http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/16422495.php

Also, check the resources on this site, the one we are now on, as there is lots of info on here.

My overall understanding is that the most dangerous stage for glucose is when it spikes high above the "normal" fasting blood glucose base-line for the individual and stays there for a few or more hours. Like your resource article says, that is when beta-cell damage is done.
 
Here is a good link for some info:
http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/16422495.php

Also, check the resources on this site, the one we are now on, as there is lots of info on here.

My overall understanding is that the most dangerous stage for glucose is when it spikes high above the "normal" fasting blood glucose base-line for the individual and stays there for a few or more hours. Like your resource article says, that is when beta-cell damage is done.
Thanks. That's what worries me. I want to look after my beta cells .. lol
I've gotten myself a bit muddled up now. Trying to work figures out etc. I think my 14 day average is in Diabetic range ... *sigh*
I'm so intent on staving off a Diabetes diagnosis.
 
I could understand your concern esp. if you are comparing yourself to the standard model of what is "safe". What kind of tests have you gotten so far?
 
I've realised that the figures I'm looking at are misleading inasmuch as they are the highs and lows of my testings.. they are not the overall BG levels in my whole body! I was worrying unnecessarily.

The only tests I;ve had are the ones I'm taking with my home monitor, ever since the Nurse took my random BG level and said it was high.
 
:)Sounds right.
I'm relatively new to all of this, but, I think the idea is to find out first what your base-line reading is, that is, the number that is your fasting BG, and go from there, You are right about the highs/lows numbers not in themselves being the only indicators which determine if we are diabetic, or, in a diabetic range.

But, let's say we are using a baseline reading of A1c - 5.8%, if we are lucky enough to have such. 45 minutes after we eat, the numbers will have climbed, which is normal. If by say, in two hours, the numbers are going into a dangerous zone, and stay there for many hours, that's when beta-cell damage can occur.

This is only my personal understanding and I am not an expert.:D

I still test throughout the day even though my GP told me to only test 2X a day, at bedtime and upon arising, that is, after having had slept and "fasted" for about 7 hours. Like you, I am curious about my BG spikes and how high the BG rises/falls after meals and exercise (exercise can also cause spikes in some people).

Also, the 7-day average is a cumulative average of all the readings, throughout the week.
If we have dramatic highs and lows throughout the day, we get a noticeably different 7-Day average if we take our readings only 2X a day, versus 6X a day.

I also understand that the distance, up or down, that the BG travels is an indicator of "stable" blood-sugar, that is, the tighter the gap between numbers the better.
But that is for someone who has actually been deemed "Diabetic". I couldn't say what parts of this, if any, would hold true for you, who are in a "Prediabetic" stage. What is "normal" for you, in base-line or BG activity, may not be "normal" for me, because the bottom-line is different.;)
 
Thanks a lot FatGenes , I would love to know what my HbA1c is, but of course there's no chance I'd be allowed that test as I;m not in the Diabetci range yet. Today, my BGs haven't exceeded 7.8 so that's better. But I have been too tired to eat tongiht... I need sleep :)
 
Thanks a lot FatGenes , I would love to know what my HbA1c is, but of course there's no chance I'd be allowed that test as I;m not in the Diabetci range yet. Today, my BGs haven't exceeded 7.8 so that's better. But I have been too tired to eat tongiht... I need sleep :)

:joyful:You're welcome, D.A., and like I said, I'm certainly not an expert. I also think it is very important to be aware of how/when the beta-cell damage can occur, so your input has been helpful

If you are really worried about your BG levels maybe you could strongly express this to your GP.

In fact, I just happened to run across some medical-lab blood-panel results from 2011, and I noticed that my BG was definitely high back then. I even found a letter from my GP warning me about this. I ignored it at the time because I was dealing with another, very serious medical issue which demanded my full and immediate attention.

Since then, I had been warned one other time, of a "prediabetic" stage, until this past January, when I requested another blood panel screen, the results of which deemed me diabetic. So that is effectively three years that I'm aware of, during which the diabetes had time to strengthen and take hold.

So, please stay on top of this if you have any reason for concern;)
 
:joyful:You're welcome, D.A., and like I said, I'm certainly not an expert. I also think it is very important to be aware of how/when the beta-cell damage can occur, so your input has been helpful

If you are really worried about your BG levels maybe you could strongly express this to your GP.

In fact, I just happened to run across some medical-lab blood-panel results from 2011, and I noticed that my BG was definitely high back then. I even found a letter from my GP warning me about this. I ignored it at the time because I was dealing with another, very serious medical issue which demanded my full and immediate attention.

Since then, I had been warned one other time, of a "prediabetic" stage, until this past January, when I requested another blood panel screen, the results of which deemed me diabetic. So that is effectively three years that I'm aware of, during which the diabetes had time to strengthen and take hold.

So, please stay on top of this if you have any reason for concern;)
I don't really want to alert my GP at this stage in case I get roped in to some advise/treatments/medications that I don't want. They seem to have a one size fits all approach to sugar levels. But I do think itj's a good idea to control levels if they are a edging towards the high side. I've seen some noticable benefits already.

But if my doc offered me a A1c I would have that but I don't thing he would at this juncture.

I fell straight to sleep at about 7pm last night and slept straight through til 4am.... I was well pleased... I love to wake just before the dawn!
 
It is those high post meal readings that go along with elevated fasting levels that cause the glucose toxicity that damages organs and causes complications.

That shows the importance of the HBA1c test which is often higher than finger prick tests would suggest. Many people are surprised by their hba1c results. They think that they 'have been good' but are disappointed by their result. This example of continuous glucose monitoring shows why:

uk140509ipro_cgmsvsfingerstick.png
 
That shows the importance of the HBA1c test which is often higher than finger prick tests would suggest. Many people are surprised by their hba1c results. They think that they 'have been good' but are disappointed by their result. This example of continuous glucose monitoring shows why:
I must admit I tend to test 8-12 times a day
 
I must admit I tend to test 8-12 times a day

Ouch :-)

I used to but when things settle down, readings start to get predictable. Frequent testing is, in my opinion, necessary at the beginning to find out what is going on and what effects foods have on you but, those poor poor fingertips.
 
Ouch :)

I used to but when things settle down, readings start to get predictable. Frequent testing is, in my opinion, necessary at the beginning to find out what is going on and what effects foods have on you but, those poor poor fingertips.
lol @ ouch ... I must be a glutton for punishment. Actually I have noticed I'm testing less because I am getting a better idea of what foods I can eat.
 
Back
Top