Post GD: Blood sugar readings - please please help

AndBreathe said:

My understanding (as it applied to little old me, at diagnosis) is that a single random reading of anything over 11.1 can be used to diagnose diabetes (I was, and "they" did), although current "Gold Standard" for T2 is an HbA1c of 48 or greater.

In the end, I had the random 11.1+ (declared T2 at that point), then a few days later, a "qualifying" HbA1c test.

The rest is history.

Click to expand...

catapillar said:

Thank you! Obviously my view on what is or isn't usual or otherwise for a type 2 diagnosis isn't worth a lot!

I guess I thought it was becoming more unusual for random blood sugar tests alone to be used to diagnose type 2 - like you mention the "gold standard" and a supplementary hba1c? But totally could be wrong on that too.

Doesn't undermine the point to @Chasida that the absence of a random blood sugar >11 doesn't necessarily suggest she was misdiagnosed as she could have been diagnosed based upon hba1c and/or fasting blood sugar readings.

Click to expand...

AndBreathe said:

In my view, the absence of a 11.1+ is a total red herring. These days, diagnosis is almost always by HbA1c, it just so happens I had a full panel done, with a fasting level on it, hence the "single random reading" being used.

Had it not been my personal experience, I would have never been so sure. I read that criteria a few times at diagnosis, such was my disbelief. I wasn't trying to point score with you catapillar, because the detailed understanding I have of T1 could be written on a business card, and that's me giving myself more credit than due, I think.

Click to expand...

catapillar said:

It didn't cross my mind you were trying to score points! It was a genuine thank you

Click to expand...