Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Reactive Hypoglycemia
Please can we have a forum section on reactive hypoglycaemia?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Brunneria" data-source="post: 648562" data-attributes="member: 41816"><p>Hi again [USER=46002]@Giverny[/USER] </p><p></p><p>You asked how widespread RH is.</p><p>So I just spent half an hour on google, and I am STUNNED by the result (even so quickly)</p><p></p><p>Short answer:<strong> <em>RH is astonishingly widespread.</em></strong></p><p></p><p>This study (from 2010)</p><p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20509823" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20509823</a></p><p>Took 362 people <em>'without a diagnosis of abnormal glucose metabolism through an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)'</em> and tested them. </p><p>12.4% had idiopathic reactive hypoglycaemia !!! </p><p>And curiously, that only 54% of them had a normal glucose tolerance (but that is a discussion for another thread)</p><p>The study then went on to see if switching to a high fibre diet helped.</p><p>It did.</p><p><strong>They concluded that:</strong><em> A reactive glucose pattern following intake of a high glycaemic load is relatively prevalent and this phenomenon could be modulated by dietary fibre supplementation.</em></p><p></p><p>This study (2005) </p><p>found that idiopathic RH is prevalent in 50% of lean young women with PCOS.</p><p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15808380" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15808380</a></p><p>That actually blows my mind.</p><p>50%!!!</p><p>And bearing in mind that PCOS tends to lead to weight gain, presumably over weight PCOSers have an even higher incidence of RH (that is just my speculation)</p><p>Plus the fact that women with PCOS are statistically much more likely to develop Type 2</p><p></p><p>This study (2008)</p><p><a href="http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00802971" target="_blank">http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00802971</a></p><p>Shows RH to be astonishingly widespread:</p><p><em>'The prevalence of IRH is not fully known. A British trial among 1136 random chosen women aged 17-50, reported that 37.9% experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia four times every month (mean value). However, not all reported symptoms attributed to a low blood glucose (BG) correlates with measured low levels of BG and a "true" hypoglycaemic episode, i.e., as defined by American Diabetes Association (ADA) when plasma BG value is < 3,9 mmol/l with or without accompanying symptoms. This was underscored in three studies from England, Canada and Denmark, in whom all reported hypoglycaemic symptoms, but in whom accompanying plasma glucose values < 3,3 mmol/l during hypoglycaemic symptoms only occurred in 23, 47 and 0% of the study subjects, respectively. The majority of those with symptoms related to IRH hence are having these symptoms without being classified as hypoglycemic according to conventional interpretations. However, a new (2005) ADA definition; relative hypoglycemia, also comprise these symptomatic cases of hypoglycemia following a plasma glucose > 3,9 mmol/l.'</em></p><p><em></em></p><p>So, my reading of these studies suggests that RH may affect</p><p>12.4% of the population</p><p>At least 50% of women with PCOS</p><p>And 37.9% of women of reproductive age may experience symptoms 4x a month</p><p></p><p>Now, obviously, not everyone gets it badly enough to turn up on this website with symptoms... But it still suggests that a fair few people would benefit from there being some easily accessed threads here on the subject. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brunneria, post: 648562, member: 41816"] Hi again [USER=46002]@Giverny[/USER] You asked how widespread RH is. So I just spent half an hour on google, and I am STUNNED by the result (even so quickly) Short answer:[B] [I]RH is astonishingly widespread.[/I][/B] This study (from 2010) [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20509823[/url] Took 362 people [I]'without a diagnosis of abnormal glucose metabolism through an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)'[/I] and tested them. 12.4% had idiopathic reactive hypoglycaemia !!! And curiously, that only 54% of them had a normal glucose tolerance (but that is a discussion for another thread) The study then went on to see if switching to a high fibre diet helped. It did. [B]They concluded that:[/B][I] A reactive glucose pattern following intake of a high glycaemic load is relatively prevalent and this phenomenon could be modulated by dietary fibre supplementation.[/I] This study (2005) found that idiopathic RH is prevalent in 50% of lean young women with PCOS. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15808380[/url] That actually blows my mind. 50%!!! And bearing in mind that PCOS tends to lead to weight gain, presumably over weight PCOSers have an even higher incidence of RH (that is just my speculation) Plus the fact that women with PCOS are statistically much more likely to develop Type 2 This study (2008) [url]http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00802971[/url] Shows RH to be astonishingly widespread: [I]'The prevalence of IRH is not fully known. A British trial among 1136 random chosen women aged 17-50, reported that 37.9% experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia four times every month (mean value). However, not all reported symptoms attributed to a low blood glucose (BG) correlates with measured low levels of BG and a "true" hypoglycaemic episode, i.e., as defined by American Diabetes Association (ADA) when plasma BG value is < 3,9 mmol/l with or without accompanying symptoms. This was underscored in three studies from England, Canada and Denmark, in whom all reported hypoglycaemic symptoms, but in whom accompanying plasma glucose values < 3,3 mmol/l during hypoglycaemic symptoms only occurred in 23, 47 and 0% of the study subjects, respectively. The majority of those with symptoms related to IRH hence are having these symptoms without being classified as hypoglycemic according to conventional interpretations. However, a new (2005) ADA definition; relative hypoglycemia, also comprise these symptomatic cases of hypoglycemia following a plasma glucose > 3,9 mmol/l.' [/I] So, my reading of these studies suggests that RH may affect 12.4% of the population At least 50% of women with PCOS And 37.9% of women of reproductive age may experience symptoms 4x a month Now, obviously, not everyone gets it badly enough to turn up on this website with symptoms... But it still suggests that a fair few people would benefit from there being some easily accessed threads here on the subject. :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Reactive Hypoglycemia
Please can we have a forum section on reactive hypoglycaemia?
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…