Pre-meal and post meal targets

[JenniferW]

I'm relatively new to testing - and am doing this because Diabetes UK (here, and in my local group) recommends it, not because my GP's told me to. I'm not on any medication. Because it's not the GP who's told me to monitor, I'm not yet rushing back there to ask what's going on - but might do if I can't pick enough brains here.

Apart from occasionally, my post meal readings are below 8.5 and a fair number (not exactly scientific) are between 7.5 and 6. I understand this means that's all not too bad and even is often in the non-diabetic range.

My pre-meal readings are another matter. In general, the pre-breakfast readings are the highest, and I have the impression are often the highest of the day (highest has been 9). But pre-lunch readings can be above 7 as well.

I'm on a low carb diet, which was quite a big change for me, from a wholefood sort of diet with quite a lot of low GI carbs before. This suggests that's going OK, with not a lot of post-meal significant increases - in fact the post-meal readings are often lower.

So, where do I go from here - to lower the pre-meal levels?

 

[poohtiggy]

The recommended level for pre meal is 4.5 and under 8.5 post meal so it looks like your having the right meals to be in the 7's post meal. If you are quite above 4.5 pre meal you can easily get that down with a little excersise, I use the stairs and go up and down them four or five times brings my levels right down quickly or clean a window, might sound silly but it works.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

I aim to be under 7.8 at all times, as I would rather not risk it if a target maximum of 8.5 turns out to be incorrect for preventing complications.

IMO a few weeks of low carbing should be sufficient to bring your levels under 7.8. If it's not, you may want to see your doctor to discuss your options.

 

[poohtiggy]

I aim to be under 7.8 at all times, as I would rather not risk it if a target maximum of 8.5 turns out to be incorrect for preventing complications.

IMO a few weeks of low carbing should be sufficient to bring your levels under 7.8. If it's not, you may want to see your doctor to discuss your options.

8.5 is the figure recommended in Nice guidelines

 

[ButtterflyLady]

8.5 is the figure recommended in Nice guidelines

Yes, but other sources suggest 7.8 and I am just erring on the side of caution. Guidelines can be wrong. There is further info about this at Blood Sugar 101.

 

[JenniferW]

... a few weeks of low carbing should be sufficient to bring your levels under 7.8. If it's not, you may want to see your doctor to discuss your options.

I switched to a low carb diet in July, so it's been more than a few weeks on the new diet. At first I was counting carbs carefully and as I got the day's count down, stopped counting as my meals were set within a pretty careful plan. And there's been little significant change since I did the first daily series of tests at the beginning of August.

As for exercise, I've not been recording this beside all the test results, and was wondering whether do now do this systematically for maybe 2 weeks. My day's exercise does tend to come in one half of the day (and not always the same half). But from a rough cross-check with my diary, I'd say the periods of more walking aren't producing a systematic shifting down of the levels. My main exercise is walking and I use a fitness monitor. At present, I'm averaging around 10,000 steps a day but only got up to that this week (from a starting level 4 weeks ago of around 4,000 ).

So, from these comments, I think I have to do a period of even more careful logging of diet details plus exercise details alongside the readings.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

I switched to a low carb diet in July, so it's been more than a few weeks on the new diet. At first I was counting carbs carefully and as I got the day's count down, stopped counting as my meals were set within a pretty careful plan. And there's been little significant change since I did the first daily series of tests at the beginning of August.

As for exercise, I've not been recording this beside all the test results, and was wondering whether do now do this systematically for maybe 2 weeks. My day's exercise does tend to come in one half of the day (and not always the same half). But from a rough cross-check with my diary, I'd say the periods of more walking aren't producing a systematic shifting down of the levels. My main exercise is walking and I use a fitness monitor. At present, I'm averaging around 10,000 steps a day but only got up to that this week (from a starting level 4 weeks ago of around 4,000 ).

So, from these comments, I think I have to do a period of even more careful logging of diet details plus exercise details alongside the readings.

This article is about weight loss but the principles may also apply to BG lowering.
http://authoritynutrition.com/15-reasons-not-losing-weight-on-a-low-carb-diet/

 

[JenniferW]

This article is about weight loss but the principles may also apply to BG lowering.
http://authoritynutrition.com/15-reasons-not-losing-weight-on-a-low-carb-diet/

Thanks for that - an interesting article.

• I was already thinking I probably need to cut the level of carbs even lower. I thought around 50g would work - after being on a wholefood sort of diet for years that was relatively high in low GI carbs. It's helpful to have someone else confirm your suspicions.
• The comment about too much dairy protein was a new one for me - and so there's something else I can try and change. I've been a great yoghurt and cheese eater.
• The comments about stress are also relevant. I've been through a number of years with increasing levels of stress (family issues I couldn't walk away from), and although I'm lucky that the causes of the stress have changed and are continuing to change, I'm not out of the woods yet. Not sure there's much I can do about this one that I'm not already doing - but it's good to have it confirmed that it's relevant.
• And maybe I try and add weight-lifting into the exercise - something I'd also not seen as particularly relevant.