• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2026 Survey »

Puzzled and can't figure it out

I opt for the moderate carbs scenario. Don't eat the biggies like rice, spuds etc but do have lots of vegetables and the odd serving of pulses. I find my BG levels and weight loss on this regime both good. I 'd like to get the fasting one lower but it seems the one most affected by things out of my control as I have said before. I hope losing more weight will help bring it down some more( it is lowering slowly) but I am not going to fret if it is higher than my other levels long term. At the end of the day, I have to accept that I am a diabetic and that not everything is going to fall into the non-diabetic ranges. I can help my pancreas out and preserve its remaining function by lowering weight and reducing insulin resistance with metformin, diet and exercise but I do wonder if my higher fasting levels are just a reflection of the pre-diagnosis loss of function, allegedly 50% according to the Desmond course.
 

What is that "50%" based upon?
 
AndBreathe said:
What is that "50%" based upon?
Click to expand...

They just said that by the time of diagnosis, the loss of pancreatic function is around 50%, and that it takes on average ten years to go from pre-diabetic levels to full blown diabetes.
 
cold ethyl said:
They just said that by the time of diagnosis, the loss of pancreatic function is around 50%, and that it takes on average ten years to go from pre-diabetic levels to full blown diabetes.
Click to expand...

That sounds like quite a generalisation.

Well, my 50% is doing OK at the moment.
 
cold ethyl said:
They just said that by the time of diagnosis, the loss of pancreatic function is around 50%, and that it takes on average ten years to go from pre-diabetic levels to full blown diabetes.
Click to expand...

Surely it has to depend on how long you were pre-diabetic before diagnosis? Another one size fits all, methinks.

As it happens, I wasn't prediabetic 12 months before I was diagnosed diabetic. I went from non-diabetic to diabetic in that year. According to my annual blood tests that is.
 
Yep, I'm kind of hoping it's never! I don't want to progress to full blown diabetes :'(

Of course, I know it's not the end of the world, but it feels like all of this effort is in vain if that's the case. I don't think it's inevitable though that you have to progress to diabetes is it? I'm hoping that once I achieve a healthier weight I should be much less likely to become diabetic in the future.

Oh Louise, quit worrying...sheesh that inner voice is working over-time this week

I suppose what I'm really trying to say is I do't want to turn into my mother!
 
I think I was prediabetic for around... um... 25+ years.

But that is based on symptoms, cos I was only tested for the last 10 years (that's 3 x in 10 years)

I had no idea it was supposed to be annual - they said they forgot to call me in.

And I have read (but no idea where!) that only 30% of Prediabetics become diabetics. Can anybody confirm or deny that?
 
I'm leaning more towards moderate-low carb as I've now figured out I can tolerate 1 slice of Burgen bread, 1 small wrap or 100g potatoes...not sure about pasta yet, but rice (even in small quantities) is a no-no.
 
Of course they are talking in averages and obviously illness and other things can switch you from non- diabetic to diabetic in a short space of time. I think they were just trying to show that loss of function can be a slow thing but that without screening everyone annually by the time you are symptomatic you have lost a great deal,of pancreatic function. They were quite scathing of the Newcastle protocol and its claim to reverse diabetes and used my results as an example of a controlled diabetic whilst reiterating that I would always be diabetic. I am ok with that - my goal is to get my levels down to non- diabetic ones but as I'm having to do this by not eating what the rest of the population does, I can't really claim to be a non- diabetic. I'd need to be eating three carb meals a day and still turning in the low levels for that to be true.
 
I dunno, but I'd be happy to be in that 70%
 
I am sure that many prediabetics don't go onto to develop full blown disease. I would say that losing weight and staying off the carbs will help defer it for as long as possible. I guess age at diagnosis will be factor as pancreatic function declines with age as it is. I can understand not wanting to become diabetic, but even if you do, your attempts won't be wasted as your general health will be improved by the weight loss and dietary changes.
 

That's one of @jack412 's stats, I think.
 
Loobles, regardless of bg control a high fat low carb diet is often the easiest way to go for weight loss AND you get bg control effortlessly. So is your aim to loose weight while keeping bg normal, high fat it is,
 
Totto said:
Loobles, regardless of bg control a high fat low carb diet is often the easiest way to go for weight loss AND you get bg control effortlessly. So is your aim to loose weight while keeping bg normal, high fat it is,
Click to expand...
That's what I've been doing @Totto but I noticed the lower carb I went, my BG started going higher and the weightloss slowed right down (though that could have just been TOTM), who know? Women's hormones are funny things LOL. I think 80g carbs a day is still classed as a low carb diet according to what I've been reading. I'll double check that but I believe the 60-80 I've had yesterday and today is still LCHF. I've had no problem managing the fat LOL.
 
Brunneria said:
It would be good to find the source.
Click to expand...
ask and ye shall receive
http://www.australiandiabetescouncil.com/diabetes-education/faq
Will everyone with pre-diabetes go on to develop Type 2 diabetes?
It’s estimated that more than 16% or about two million Australians have pre-diabetes and research shows that a third or more of people with the condition will go on to develop the disease. The rate of development of diabetes from prediabetes is about 5 to 10 % annually.

It appears there are a number of terms being used… Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT), Impaired Fasting Glucose, abnormal glucose metabolism, Syndrome X and metabolic syndrome. What is the difference between them and pre-diabetes?

IGT and IFG are definitions that relate to the type of diagnostic test being used but don’t clearly explain what it means to have higher than normal blood glucose levels. In easy to understand everyday terms, pre-diabetes is a condition that precedes diabetes, therefore a risk factor for both diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The term helps to sound the alarm and trigger people at risk to take action. The other terms, abnormal glucose metabolism, syndrome X and metabolic syndrome apply to the more complex, full range group of cardiovascular risk factors, which encompass increased girth, high blood pressure, raised levels of blood fats and obesity, of which all are associated with insulin resistance.

@AndBreathe thks for letting me know
my @ didn't go red, does it still work?
 
Hormones are frustrating too @Loobles I'm now having "spotting" brought about by PCOS. I'm tired of my insulin resistance. Please go away.
 
Thank you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…