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

Minimum Blood Glucose Levels?

Grazer said:
The Christianssen study I and Phoenix referred to says 7.8 and not 8.5. He's not from USA. Don't think it's confusing - NICE use a figure which I and others think is too high, so we use a lower one. I'm sure others use ones even lower. I do and you Imply you do. NICE use below 7 HbA1C as a target and no-one believes that. You're rightly proud of uour 5.4? Not confusing. If people want to use 8.5 it's up to them - still not confusing. You said you'd be horrified if you got 8.5, so why tell others it's ok?
Click to expand...


Oh I give up, I dont tell others its OK, and I dont tell others that 7.8 is OK either, read my posts again if you think I do.

I quote the same figures that NICE do I quote the same figures that Daisy does in her welcome to new members who are confused and I add the same caveat that many will want better/lower numbers - But I use the same figures I dont try to confuse people by using a totally different set of numbers.

I am not arguing about who is right and what numbers are better I am arguing that you and a few others using different figures than the UK norm is confusing.

At the Diabetes UK event I attended the other week there was a gentleman who said that he found all the different recommended numbers that he found on the internet confusing, and I explained what I am trying to explain to you that we in the UK work with the NICE recommendations although many people aim lower.

The newly diagnosed diabetics that come here have enough to contend with and take in without reading conflicting information about what the recommended numbers are.
 
xyzzy said:
I think you'll find 8.5 is not originally a UK recommendation but what the UK adopted from the IDF (International Diabetes Federation) over 40 years ago. Even 40 years ago 8.5 was seen as on the "high" side of safe by many researchers at the time.

In 2007 the IDF updated their recommendation to 7.8 based on a range of new studies including the one Phoenix and Grazer mention as well as studies such as...
Click to expand...

Then tell the Admin on this forum and then when they change the information given to newly diagnosed diabetics I will follow suit .

I think you'll find I dont give a fig whos figures they were originally, I just use the same ones that are recommended by NICE and this forum here in the UK.
 
Sid Bonkers said:
I just use the same ones that are recommended by NICE and this forum here in the UK.
Click to expand...

Even though you say "I'd be horrified if I got those figures"? I'd rather give them figures that are better for their health rather than something for simplicity that "horrifies" me. And if YOU read MY posts to new members, you'll see I tell them:- “below, say, 7.8; because NICE guidelines are below 8.5 but most of us think that’s a little high. 7.8 is the max. Level at 2 hours after eating that a non-diabetic normally gets to so is perhaps a better target. Some then set progressively lower targets."
Not confusing I think.
 
I think you'll find you're the one posting the minority view, confusing and argumentative comments Sid.
 
xyzzy said:
I think you'll find you're the one posting the minority view, confusing and argumentative comments Sid.
Click to expand...

And I think you will find that I have had it with this forum now so I will just leave it to you and Grazer who are clearly experts on all things relating to diabetes..

One last muse though before I go how do you make the leap from non diabetics reaching over 7.8 to that level being safe for diabetics? I hadnt realised we we shared the same physiology :lol:
 
sweetLea said:
lucylocket61 said:
I am not sure I feel comfortable on this forum.

Every question or comment seems to lead to arguments :(
Click to expand...

Yes, this has stopped me posting often as well. Shame, I'd have liked to join in more.
Click to expand...
Ditto
 
I have pm'ed Daisy1 to see if there is a solution.

As a newbie I feel swamped by the disagreements and as if I have stumbled into a professors class, when I just what simple knowledge, even both sides of the argument, but simple and without the angst.
 
I don't want to get into he said this, he said that.
In this thread I think there's been some misinterpretation on both 'sides' and it's become akin to counting angels on a pinhead.
:***:

Sid: There aren't many people on here now that have had T2 diabetes for very long let alone many (any other regular poster?) who has been able to come off insulin and have very good control . Diabetes is,as the cliche says a marathon, changes that people make have to be sustainable over a long time time. You're an excellent example of this and it would be a great shame if the forum lost you.
 
You've both just joined, and reading back I see you've both received excellent advice from some of the posters on this thread, which you acknowledged. Perhaps a bit early to be complaining about those same long standing members (Sid included).
 
3 of us said the same thing. We are not complaning for the sake of it. We are being open about our feelings.

Since when has being new meant our feelings dont count?

all that is being suggested is that people take their arguments into another thread. perhaps by saying "lets continue this dicrussion in xyz thread" .

And your reply is precisely why I feel uncomfortable. Having to defend myslef and being accussed of something i didnt say.
 
lucylocket61 said:
And your reply is precisely why I feel uncomfortable. Having to defend myslef and being accussed of something i didnt say.
Click to expand...

And now you see exactly how arguments start.......you've potentially just started another! That's what tends to happen sometimes on e-discussions when people disagree. I could now say "what were you accused of that you didn't say" and so it would go on. It's unfortunate, but it happens. People try to be sensitive often with "I understand but..." and "I don't totally disagree however...", but it doesn't always work! Life and forums are like diabetes - they ain't fair and they don't always run smoothly.
 
phoenix said:
I don't want to get into he said this, he said that.
In this thread I think there's been some misinterpretation on both 'sides' and it's become akin to counting angels on a pinhead.
:***:

Couldn't agree more Phoenix. The pity of it is that everyone concerned means well. Personally , I don't get upset by disagreements but occasionally I feel that it is more about personaliies than facts and that should not be.

I understand the need for the newly diagnosed to have some simple , straighforward guidance and everyone concerned in the disagreements does an excellent job in that respect as do some others.

I don't think the forum should be constrained by the fear of confusing "newbies". There is easily accessible information here for them and specific areas where they can go.

The fact is, that there must be progress. Things are not set in stone - well some things are but maybe shouldn' be.
The science is evolving all the time and i am very grateful to those who bring it to my attetion.
Anone who wants certainties has been chosen by the wrong disease.
I relly don't think anyone should get upse at parameters and edefinitions changing. This wil happen all the time.
It is very understandable hat those who had a good initial experience upon diagnosis . like sid , for example . and many others will have more faith in the system than hose of us who have had to muddle our own way through.
Sid has not become complacent and and still keeps strictly ot the regime which works for him and may well work for many others.

Perhaps a little more mutual respect genlemen? I would hate to lose any of you. I would hate to seee this forum stultified and diminished.
I think we have an excellent mix of old and new and if sometimes these clash - we are all adults and can choose what yo take from the discussions.

Thank you all , [and phoenix] for your input.
Click to expand...
 
Diabetes is an emotive subject... after all we all have it and like it or not it play's a big part in our lives.

The message on the newly diagnosed sub-forum is clear.. and that message is the one that is recommended by NICE. However... the point of a forum is discussion and shared experience... and in other sub-forums is see no reason why discussion on the 'recommended' level shouldn't take place.. After all an awful lot of us who have been diagnosed for sometime would have palpitations if our readings ran at levels as recommended by NICE..

Will different messages be confusing.. yes probably is that a problem... I don't think so.. We are no better than the NHS if we don't share our knowledge and experiences.. if we just say these are the 'rules' live with them... people offer opinions.. a lot of the time they also provide links to lots of interesting studies and other information sources.. we are all adults and should all be able to go and read and make our OWN INFORMED DECISION...

At the end of the day what levels you run at and how you achieve those levels is your own business... but I would like to think that atleast when people make that choice they have as much information as possible...

Reference the 'arguments' / 'discussions' yes sometimes perhaps they do split over.. but also a lot of topics and threads on this forum are full of helpful information.. and a lot of this comes from these discussions... we don't agree with everyone else in real life.. I don't see why we should all agree here.. as long as people aren't rude or abusive or blatantly trolling I don't see the problem.

Take what people post with a pinch of salt! it's often easy to read meaning into a post where none was intended as we don;t have all the normal que's we rely on in real life such as body language to figure our the posters actual intent.
 
Grazer said:
You've both just joined, and reading back I see you've both received excellent advice from some of the posters on this thread, which you acknowledged. Perhaps a bit early to be complaining about those same long standing members (Sid included).
Click to expand...

Terrified to post anything now, but I'll just say this.

Lucy I am genuinely shocked that you have attacked and apparently reported to a moderator the one guy on this forum who goes out of his way to do the "first contact" thing with new members. I'd go re-read the first ever post you made and see who it was that took the time to write you half a page back telling you in such a neutral way what to do. I do the "first contact" thing too and it's not easy. Likewise you as well bigfatpaulie why not revisit your first posts and see who took the time to help you.

Before this turns into a Grazer love fest I DO have differing opinions to Grazer on low carbing, what are acceptable levels and I've even been known to have a small pop at him in the recent past but in the context of "first contact" we both put those differences aside. In many of my "first contact" posts I even push Sid's portion control as an effective method people should try and point out that diet is just one way of controlling diabetes.

In this actual thread I made 3 posts. The first was a purely informational post about your 5.5 question which has been worrying a lot of the new people in recent days, the second was purely informational as to where 7.8 came from and yes the third was a response to Sid and yes I was irritated by him just as apparently I'd irritated him - that's life.

I realise my opinions are strong and sometimes my replies are terse but as unbeliever has just posted without people who try and make progress and are willing to stand up with what they believe a lot of the new forum members like yourself wouldn't be getting the generally good information they do.

Sorry if that upsets you Lucy but it 's the way I feel.
 
Back
Top