lucylocket61
Expert
I don't bother. I found it of little use as different foods spike me at different times. I am on a low income and self funding, so I test when I need to.
I don't bother. I found it of little use as different foods spike me at different times. I am on a low income and self funding, so I test when I need to.Besides the undoubtedly good advice on testing before eating and two hours after, would the experts among you also advocate testing after one hour to try to measure a spike at its highest amplitude? I am asking only in the context of those of us relying on simple finger-prick glucometers.
I think I’m too much of a worrier.I don't bother. I found it of little use as different foods spike me at different times. I am on a low income and self funding, so I test when I need to.
I go with the flow, do my best, and get on with life. In my decade at this I have learnt that trying to regulate my blood glucose levels only works up to a point, and worry raises blood sugar levels. Our bodies are not machines. There are too many variables to cover all bases all of the time. For me, reducing my carbs to a level safe for me, as much as possible, is my main control. It works for me.I think I’m too much of a worrier.
Getting back to what the OP asked, I test before and after meals so three meals a day is six times a day.I was told this morning by GP that I shouldn’t be testing and recording my meals and I should just take it easy What do you think?
Talking re T2s only...Each to his own, due diligence is called for.
Reading back over this thread seems no one has actually said it depends if your bg is low and under control in which case testing not necessary only optional, but if you are still struggling with bg then testing food is probably still a good ideaI test my glucose levels twice a day, morning and evening, I will do another test if the reading is higher than I’d like. I was diagnosed June 21’ and it was a total shock, no symptoms, just went confused and got taken to A&E. I was told this morning by GP that I shouldn’t be testing and recording my meals and I should just take it easy What do you think?
I would still recommend testing for a few days a month, no matter how much control someone appears to have. It's wise, in my experience, to make sure nothing has changed, and keep on top of this condition.Reading back over this thread seems no one has actually said it depends if your bg is low and under control in which case testing not necessary only optional, but if you are still struggling with bg then testing food is probably still a good idea
on extremely low carbs my bs rises by about 5 or 6,,, 30 g carbs is my absolute maximum, lower if possible. Exercising hard...There is no point in random testing. Test before and two hours after a meal to check the rise is not more than 2 points, then you know if a meal is sufficiently low carb for you to eat safety.
I have ME. I do zero exercise. Carb counting and reduction plays the major role in treating and controlling my type 2 diabetes. Exercise, if you can do, helps overall health, but is not a major factor.In my view exercise plays a major role in the management
My one regret with testing, at least by glucometer and strips, is that it is so infernally inaccurate. Is it 5.2 as it says? Or actually 4.5? Or 5.9? I wish the technology could get down to accuracy of 5% not 15%. Of course if it says 5.2 then we can be pretty sure it’s not 8, so it gives us something. Well this is old hat, just my mini-grumble. Should be grateful we have this much, of course.I have ME. I do zero exercise. Carb counting and reduction plays the major role in treating and controlling my type 2 diabetes. Exercise, if you can do, helps overall health, but is not a major factor.
After more than a decade of type 2 diabetes I continue to maintain good control, with no medication, by tailoring my carb intake to my meter readings and results.
Why do you need such accuracy?My one regret with testing, at least by glucometer and strips, is that it is so infernally inaccurate. Is it 5.2 as it says? Or actually 4.5? Or 5.9? I wish the technology could get down to accuracy of 5% not 15%. Of course if it says 5.2 then we can be pretty sure it’s not 8, so it gives us something. Well this is old hat, just my mini-grumble. Should be grateful we have this much, of course.
The important thing is the difference before and after meals. It's not an exact science. Trends are important, exact figures to the tenth of a point are not.My one regret with testing, at least by glucometer and strips, is that it is so infernally inaccurate. Is it 5.2 as it says? Or actually 4.5? Or 5.9? I wish the technology could get down to accuracy of 5% not 15%. Of course if it says 5.2 then we can be pretty sure it’s not 8, so it gives us something. Well this is old hat, just my mini-grumble. Should be grateful we have this much, of course.
People often make the analogy of not wanting to drive without a speedometer but I doubt they’d settle for one with 15% accuracy! And I did say I’d settle for 5%, not exact …Why do you need such accuracy?
When there are so many things that can affect our blood sugars in addition to food, I am happy with 15% accuracy … and I use it to calculate my insulin dose which is a potentially lethal medication.
Seriously, what do you want? What reassurance is enough? Our blood sugar levels fluctuate constantly, we can help control some parts of this condition by what we eat and drink.People often make the analogy of not wanting to drive without a speedometer but I doubt they’d settle for one with 15% accuracy!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?