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

TESTING TESTING last week i tested out lowish carbs, this week higher

Jenny 105

Well-Known Member
Messages
47
Type of diabetes
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
2 issues
*what size of carbs I can tolerate . Last week I kept records on lowish carbs. This week Im moving to slightly higher . And will compare the results in a few days.

*I need or want to increase my weight from 47kg to 50kg at least and keep it there .
 
Thanks thats useful.
Part of the reason for adding in the carbs is to find how much can be tolerated using meds + 1 x insulin. My DN hasn't given me any advice '' Except eat normally'' - whatever that means to a diabetic, to someone underweight or even what it would mean to a non diabetic !!
 
The problem as a type 2 is that the more carbs we eat, the more insulin we need. Now for many type 2 that will be our own and we generally produce huge amounts but it is still not enough as it’s somewhat ineffective due to insulin resistance. Unfortunately the higher our insulin levels are (which causes its own problems in excess independently of blood glucose btw)the more insulin resistant we get and the problem spirals and that is why it’s known as progressive. Adding insulin via injection means there is finally enough to cope with managing blood glucose levels and it all looks hunky dory when only checking those levels. But in many cases it means the circulating insulin is higher than ever and the problem continues to grow. The metabolic problems associated with high insulin (high blood pressure, cvd, large waist measurements, high triglycerides and others) continue to grow despite more normal blood glucose. Albeit slower than being untreated at all.

I will add the caveat that there‘s a minority (mis)diagnosed as type 2 are really some other type like type 1, LADA or 3c who cannot produce any or enough insulin and thus injections are lifesaving. They are often written off as severe or difficult type 2 and never reclassified. It makes a difference even if the treatment (insulin injections) is the same in the nhs as type 1 get different support and different tech options. Other type2 may have spent so much time over producing insulin that their beta cells have “burned out” so to speak and again have little other choice but to take insulin exogenously.

The problem comes in that insulin production is rarely tested in a suspected type 2 so no one really knows why you are struggling. If and when diet and other medications fail to control blood glucose sufficiently it is assumed production is low and insulin added. It obviously isn’t enough to balance the carbs being eaten in the face of whatever degree of resistance that person has - but that’s not the same as actually being less than normal amounts. In fact it might be still extremely high. It’s like adding water to a leaky bucket rather than fixing the hole (insulin resistance and maybe too many carbs). The obvious answer is to test insulin (or c-peptide which is produce in tandem for those on insulin already) - but it just doesn’t happen.

Insulin is largely ignored in type 2 other than to increase it with medication. Surely knowing the starting point makes a difference? Doing so at diagnosis would help find more of those missed type 1’s etc and doing so again when all other approaches seem to be failing might identify why and if the only option is injections or maybe diet could be relooked at.

All of this long winded explanation is to say that adding more carbs than you personally really need or want is only going to add to the problem. Limiting them can only help. It’s all very well to say eat normally as a type 2 and we‘ll control BGL with ever increasing amounts of insulin but the goal should be reducing the core issue and hopefully the problems caused by high insulin as well as high blood glucose - ie fix the bucket. It also depends what “normally” actually means.
 
Thanks thats useful.
Part of the reason for adding in the carbs is to find how much can be tolerated using meds + 1 x insulin. My DN hasn't given me any advice '' Except eat normally'' - whatever that means to a diabetic, to someone underweight or even what it would mean to a non diabetic !!
Ah, the good ol' "eat normally" line. Love it. If it helps, my diabetes training letter also said I could try reducing the number of boiled sweets I have too. As I hadn't had a boiled sweet in probably 35 years, I decided to ignore that advice, however that combined with "normal eating" gives you the sum total of advice I received from the NHS on diet! :hilarious:

What does your diet currently look like in terms of meals each day? This might help people here to give some advice as to where they'd bolster the calorific content, if weight gain is your goal, without having to add carbs unnecessarily.
 
The problem as a type 2 is that the more carbs we eat, the more insulin we need. Now for many type 2 that will be our own and we generally produce huge amounts but it is still not enough as it’s somewhat ineffective due to insulin resistance. Unfortunately the higher our insulin levels are (which causes its own problems in excess independently of blood glucose btw)the more insulin resistant we get and the problem spirals and that is why it’s known as progressive. Adding insulin via injection means there is finally enough to cope with managing blood glucose levels and it all looks hunky dory when only checking those levels. But in many cases it means the circulating insulin is higher than ever and the problem continues to grow. The metabolic problems associated with high insulin (high blood pressure, cvd, large waist measurements, high triglycerides and others) continue to grow despite more normal blood glucose. Albeit slower than being untreated at all.

I will add the caveat that there‘s a minority (mis)diagnosed as type 2 are really some other type like type 1, LADA or 3c who cannot produce any or enough insulin and thus injections are lifesaving. They are often written off as severe or difficult type 2 and never reclassified. It makes a difference even if the treatment (insulin injections) is the same in the nhs as type 1 get different support and different tech options. Other type2 may have spent so much time over producing insulin that their beta cells have “burned out” so to speak and again have little other choice but to take insulin exogenously.

The problem comes in that insulin production is rarely tested in a suspected type 2 so no one really knows why you are struggling. If and when diet and other medications fail to control blood glucose sufficiently it is assumed production is low and insulin added. It obviously isn’t enough to balance the carbs being eaten in the face of whatever degree of resistance that person has - but that’s not the same as actually being less than normal amounts. In fact it might be still extremely high. It’s like adding water to a leaky bucket rather than fixing the hole (insulin resistance and maybe too many carbs). The obvious answer is to test insulin (or c-peptide which is produce in tandem for those on insulin already) - but it just doesn’t happen.

Insulin is largely ignored in type 2 other than to increase it with medication. Surely knowing the starting point makes a difference? Doing so at diagnosis would help find more of those missed type 1’s etc and doing so again when all other approaches seem to be failing might identify why and if the only option is injections or maybe diet could be relooked at.

All of this long winded explanation is to say that adding more carbs than you personally really need or want is only going to add to the problem. Limiting them can only help. It’s all very well to say eat normally as a type 2 and we‘ll control BGL with ever increasing amounts of insulin but the goal should be reducing the core issue and hopefully the problems caused by high insulin as well as high blood glucose - ie fix the bucket. It also depends what “normally” actually means.
Hi thanks for this I'll read and re read it in order to get my head round it. I The links will be useful. Admittedly I do like to know the reason for actions, maybe thats a downfall . Lada was one possible diagnosis. in 21 Then Type 2, 22 then need insulin. 23 I'm probably going down the wrong road trying to test things. A different nurse is going to phone me next week . These items will provide a base for my questions and reason for things.
 
Hi thanks for this I'll read and re read it in order to get my head round it. I The links will be useful. Admittedly I do like to know the reason for actions, maybe thats a downfall . Lada was one possible diagnosis. in 21 Then Type 2, 22 then need insulin. 23 I'm probably going down the wrong road trying to test things. A different nurse is going to phone me next week . These items will provide a base for my questions and reason for things.
If you progressed to insulin within a couple of years of diagnosis I’d strongly push for explanations about what testing was done to determine type, the actual values obtained and on what basis the decision you are type 2 was made, and by whom. It should have included testing for antibodies (there are more than just GAD btw too) and an insulin or cpeptide test to establish just how much you are producing.

Being typed by age or weight is Mickey Mouse. Even large people can have autoimmune disease and not every type 1 loses lots of weight before diagnosis. A negative antibody test also is definitive. Not all type 1 do test positive. (A positive test is close to definitive though). There are more types than just 1 and 2 (LADA is a slow onset version of type 1). A strong family history might mean MODY or any damage to the pancreas might mean 3c for example.
 
Hi thanks for this I'll read and re read it in order to get my head round it. I The links will be useful. Admittedly I do like to know the reason for actions, maybe thats a downfall . Lada was one possible diagnosis. in 21 Then Type 2, 22 then need insulin. 23 I'm probably going down the wrong road trying to test things. A different nurse is going to phone me next week . These items will provide a base for my questions and reason for things.
 
If you progressed to insulin within a couple of years of diagnosis I’d strongly push for explanations about what testing was done to determine type, the actual values obtained and on what basis the decision you are type 2 was made, and by whom. It should have included testing for antibodies (there are more than just GAD btw too) and an insulin or cpeptide test to establish just how much you are producing.

Being typed by age or weight is Mickey Mouse. Even large people can have autoimmune disease and not every type 1 loses lots of weight before diagnosis. A negative antibody test also is definitive. Not all type 1 do test positive. (A positive test is close to definitive though). There are more types than just 1 and 2 (LADA is a slow onset version of type 1). A strong family history might mean MODY or any damage to the pancreas might mean 3c for example.
I'll go back through my test results online when able to and list the results for what .
 
Back
Top