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

Questions about my BG results 1 and 2 hours after my meal

It was chicken in tomato and pepper saucfe with mashed potato. It was a diet meal from their range
 
Someone on here told me to try testing an hour and two hours after first bite as I might be missing my peak. I am a very slow eater I don't know if that makes a difference and also I never have dessert or coffee
 
Yes I wouldn't normally eat a ready meal anymore. I wanted to test it out
 
I am always a slow eater regardless. I'm always sitting there still with half a plate when others have finished. Takeaway or not.
 
I know exactly how long that ready meal took me to eat as I wrote it down. I ate fairly fast compared to how I would normally eat. It took 20 minutes to finish
 
sorry for the multple replies I was reading and replying as I went
 
So what are your feelings about your experiment and how your body dealt with it?
I don't know tbh if it's good or bad? I was shocked at the hour reading of 9, I don't really know about the others. I would think that meal isn't one to put on my list because it was 7.6 after two hours is that right?

I wrote down the 7.8 result after two hours for my book. Am I doing right testing after first bite?
 
My advice would be sit down, test your blood, start eating, test 2 hours later.
 
It's a homemade meal tonight. I made a batch of chilli and froze it in portions. Surprisingly for me it actually tasted pretty good lol. I'm starting to enjoy cooking now.
 
For a diabetic it wasn't drastic but not good either. I wouldn't put it on my list of foods to eat. far to many carbs, and starchy ones at that.

The NICE guidelines say under 8.5 at 2 hours so it was within that. However, 8.5 is a bit generous. Many on here aim for under 7.8, and many more aim for a lot lower. We all have our personal targets. Your nurse will say it is a good reading because she will be following the NICE guidelines for diabetics.

Yes, you are doing right to test 1 hour and 2 hours after your first bite.
 
Thank you Bluetite1802
 

For me to do all that testing and record keeping would make me really obsessive about it. I did get a bit like that when I was first testing..1 hour 2 hours 3 hours sometimes more after a meal if I did not get the results I thought I should...one reason some DN's and GP's don't like T2's testing.... so I stopped testing altogether for a while as it was taking over my life.
Now I have a very good idea of what I can eat so I don't test every day any more just sometimes to see how my levels are but I mostly do it if I have had something new to eat.
 
You are right of course, @AnnieC It is obsessive, and expensive, but right now it's the main thing helping me keep control of my weight and BS as I am learning so much from the meal testing in that I have learnt portion size. I am naughty in some people's eyes because I still eat bread and spuds. I now know how much bread and how many spuds I can have, plus what types of bread and spuds. My biggest lesson was one lunch time when I was eating in a café where I eat most weeks with friends. All I had was a tuna and mayo sandwich on 2 slices of thin granary bread. No tea or coffee, just water. 2 hours later I was 12.4. I now have the tuna mayo salad with no bread. Lesson learnt. I don't test every meal by any means now, but I do keep a daily eye on all my "befores" and bedtimes so I know what levels I am running at other than after meals. Eventually I'll stop this too, but not until my levels are where I want them.
 
It takes about an hour for any glucose entering the bloodstream to thoughly mix and even out. If you injected glucose directly into a vein, which could be fatal so don't do it, it's just an illustrative example, you would get different readings if you tested shortly after, depending on your sample points. It takes time to mix and get down to the capillaries.

The usually suggested targets are if 6 or below before the meal, then 7.8 2 hours after the meal.

As your meter is not that accurate anyway, all you want to see is a trend over time so, if you stick to a regime like before a meal and 2 hours after a meal every time, you will be comparing like with like and eventually see a trend. Also, early morning before you have breakfast is a nice little indicator on how you are doing.

Doing a one hour test will give you some sort of indication of how that particular food effects you, so it should, over time, help you to learn what to eat and what to avoid. The two hour test shows you how your body is coping with that food. A one hour test is mostly higher that the two hour test but how high depends on what you ate. Different foods have different glycaemic response curves:


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's my figures this far today. Fasting at 6.30am 5.5, ate breakfast at 9am of 2 poached eggs, 3 rashers and a sausage lashed with brown sauce. 10am 6.2. 11am 5.7 13.30 5.2 post exercise of a 2 mile run. Probably skip dinner as playing football at 8pm


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 

People often act with the best intentions - and unfortunate results.

I am quite convinced that most health care professionals act in ways that they think are in their patients' best interests.

Have you read the threads on here about statins? Numerous people have posted who have painful and debilitating side effects from a medication that new studies are showing has little or no benefit for many of them.

Statins certainly lower serum cholesterol.
What is now in doubt is whether lowered cholesterol is of benefit to the average person - especially to older women.

I won't talk about diet (that gets discussed enough around here!) but as an example:
A friend of my parents, 75+ yrs old, was on about 6 different prescription drugs - heart problems, water retention, dry skin and rashes, constipation... Those were only the ones I heard about. He felt dreadful. Couldn't walk far. Always breathless, tired and uncomfortable.

His old doctor retired, and the new one took one look, ripped up the prescription and reduced his heart tablets.

Instant transformation. He could go for walks, climb stairs, stay awake all day, go to the toilet with ease. 90% of his symptoms had been side effects of all that medication. Which took more medication to control.

Did his old doctor intend to harm him? Of course not. I'm sure he thought he was helping.
But the effect verged on ignorant malpractice.
 
On that note, I was prescribed Atenolol ' a beta blocker , for anxiety. It gave me terrible vivid dreams and really bad indigestion that kept me awake for hours. The duty GP prescribed another drug to counteract this which made me have other side effects. I stopped both and felt heaps better- even the anxiety improved as I wasn't half dead with sleep deprivation and worry about feeling so ill.
I think has become worse as NICE hand out all these recommendations and GPs are encouraged to prescribe preventative drugs. On paper such things sound great but once inside the body there can be unintended consequences. A friend was a senior pharmacist at Boots and often did the med reviews for patients on lots of drugs and she was horrified at some of the combinations being prescribed.
I trust my GP to offer help and advice and appreciate that they must feel the need to be seen to be helping but sometimes they get it wrong.
 
Your nurse will say it is a good reading because she will be following the NICE guidelines for diabetics.

Yes, you are doing right to test 1 hour and 2 hours after your first bite.

And the nurse would be right it is a good reading for somebody starting out as Marieukxx is. As Marieukxx becomes ever better-informed as to what foods and activities affect her blood sugar levels they'll hopefully get better and better. But for somebody diagnosed just last week I'd say they were very encouraging results. I think we all need to bear in that the NICE guidelines and their equivalents throughout the world are just that guidelines and that because they represent the establishment consensus by definition they'll always be a bit out date or even very out date. For obvious reasons they also have a certain amount of margin of error built in. I take them as a handy reference point but no more than that. My goals for example are to consistently hit these levels:

  • Pre prandial 4.0 to 5.9 mmol/L
  • 2 hours post prandial ≤ 7.8 mmol/L
My goals used to be these:
  • pre prandial 4 to 7 mmol/L
  • 2 hours post prandial ≤ 8.5 mmol
I got more ambitious as my situation and my situational awareness improved so that the goals I have now are reasonable goals (according to the specialist at the Diabetes clinic)-for me as I am now. They're reasonable for me as I am now and I mostly hit those targets too but I have to work at it and I had to work very hard indeed at it to get there. There was a time when even my original goals were utterly unrealistic to give you some idea - at one point I was injecting a daily total of 44 units of insulin and still not hitting anything even close to ≤ 8.5 mmol post-prandial.

I haven't used insulin for months and on those occasions when I don't hit my 'new' targets I generally am well aware of what it was I did to cause the higher levels. I don't know Marieukxx's circumstances but it seems to me that those are really rather good figures for somebody diagnosed only a week ago. I'd be quite optimistic if I were her as she's starting from a pretty good point.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…