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

Type2 confirmed yesterday

Had bloods taken last Friday. Results back on Monday but doctor not accessed them so told ring Wednesday. Same situation but told try Thursday.Rang today but told still not opened? I understand it's not normal times but was a little cheesed off. Just this minute received text saying make appointment with diabetic nurse asap?Thinking it's a positive the Doctor doesn't want to see me?

It is common practice for GP's to devolve Type 2 diabetes patients to a nurse. Personally I have never once seen a GP in relation to my diabetes. After the blood tests that revealed diabetes I received a letter from the surgery asking me to make a nurse appointment. The nurse gave me my diagnosis, discussed all the results, went through all the usual stuff about diet and lifestyle, and made me another blood test appointment 3 months hence. The only time I have seen a GP in relation to this was not to discuss diabetes but to discuss and push statins on me because "we give statins to all diabetics". That is all she was bothered about.
 
Hy guys. Rang in and the nurse rung back.
She was pretty up to speed and actually recommended this site before I mentioned it so much improved than some colleague.
I was however a bit disappointed in my 3 month reading of 75 from 121. I was hoping for fair bit lower tbh. Although I was stuck in the 9s for a good while and it's only recent I've been seeing 5s to 7s. She was very happy with my results. The only negative was my cholestorol was 5.4(Wasn't checked first test for some reason?) She said the levels where wrong way around and suggested statins. I refused and said I'd rather use diet and excersise which she said was my choice. Kidneys good and all other levels fine so really I should be happy but was not as hoped. She did say the next test in 12 weeks should be good though. What do you think please?
 
Hy guys. Rang in and the nurse rung back.
She was pretty up to speed and actually recommended this site before I mentioned it so much improved than some colleague.
I was however a bit disappointed in my 3 month reading of 75 from 121. I was hoping for fair bit lower tbh. Although I was stuck in the 9s for a good while and it's only recent I've been seeing 5s to 7s. She was very happy with my results. The only negative was my cholestorol was 5.4(Wasn't checked first test for some reason?) She said the levels where wrong way around and suggested statins. I refused and said I'd rather use diet and excersise which she said was my choice. Kidneys good and all other levels fine so really I should be happy but was not as hoped. She did say the next test in 12 weeks should be good though. What do you think please?

A drop from 121 to 75 is brilliant in only 3 months. No wonder the nurse was happy. Please don't be disappointed - it is an excellent drop. (and don't forget the HbA1c is a sort of average of the previous 2 to 3 months so will include the time you were stuck in the 9's.) Also well done to the nurse for saying statins versus diet and exercise are your choice.

As for your cholesterol of 5.4, this is your total cholesterol, and unless you know the breakdown this figure is fairly meaningless. You need to know the HDL, LDL and triglycerides which together make up the total. The HDL is the good cholesterol, the LDL is a bit of a mix, the triglycerides are the baddies. What you need is a print out of the blood results - not just for the HbA1c and cholesterol, but also the kidneys, liver and anything else they tested. A good tip is to never, ever, accept the words "fine" "good" "OK". The nurse and GPs ideas of what are fine may not be yours. You need the actual levels, particularly so you have something to compare when you have your next lot of tests in order to keep an eye on any future trends.

If you are in England your surgery should put blood test results on line. You do have to register for this through the surgery and complete a form. It saves all the hassle of waiting for results - they just appear on line. Mine are often there within 24 hours. In the meantime, print outs are available when you ask. The receptionist usually does this.
 
Hy guys. Rang in and the nurse rung back.
She was pretty up to speed and actually recommended this site before I mentioned it so much improved than some colleague.
I was however a bit disappointed in my 3 month reading of 75 from 121. I was hoping for fair bit lower tbh. Although I was stuck in the 9s for a good while and it's only recent I've been seeing 5s to 7s. She was very happy with my results. The only negative was my cholestorol was 5.4(Wasn't checked first test for some reason?) She said the levels where wrong way around and suggested statins. I refused and said I'd rather use diet and excersise which she said was my choice. Kidneys good and all other levels fine so really I should be happy but was not as hoped. She did say the next test in 12 weeks should be good though. What do you think please?
Sounds all good to me. You're well on your way!
 
I think our bodies like to stay where they are - so your liver was probably desperately trying to keep your sugar levels at the same levels you were at for ages before. Once you beat it into submission, and the numbers dropped - things get a lot easier. It happens sometimes with weight too - we stall for ages. That is a massive massive improvement in only a little bit of time. And now you have motivation to keep up the excellent work and try and get the numbers you want and deserve!
 
Thanks. I have the nhs app which doesn't give test results but will look into the surgery own site. As for the cholestorol she said it was too much bad cholestorol but not the amounts. Was hoping for low 50s if not high 40s so 75 was a reality check.
 
Thanks. I have the nhs app which doesn't give test results but will look into the surgery own site. As for the cholestorol she said it was too much bad cholestorol but not the amounts. Was hoping for low 50s if not high 40s so 75 was a reality check.

It all depends on the ratios and triglycerides. Was it as fasted test? Mine is higher and my doc is fine about it as my triglycerides are low and ratios are good. I did have to point that out though.
 
A drop from 121 to 75 is brilliant in only 3 months. No wonder the nurse was happy. Please don't be disappointed - it is an excellent drop. (and don't forget the HbA1c is a sort of average of the previous 2 to 3 months so will include the time you were stuck in the 9's.) Also well done to the nurse for saying statins versus diet and exercise are your choice.

As for your cholesterol of 5.4, this is your total cholesterol, and unless you know the breakdown this figure is fairly meaningless. You need to know the HDL, LDL and triglycerides which together make up the total. The HDL is the good cholesterol, the LDL is a bit of a mix, the triglycerides are the baddies. What you need is a print out of the blood results - not just for the HbA1c and cholesterol, but also the kidneys, liver and anything else they tested. A good tip is to never, ever, accept the words "fine" "good" "OK". The nurse and GPs ideas of what are fine may not be yours. You need the actual levels, particularly so you have something to compare when you have your next lot of tests in order to keep an eye on any future trends.

If you are in England your surgery should put blood test results on line. You do have to register for this through the surgery and complete a form. It saves all the hassle of waiting for results - they just appear on line. Mine are often there within 24 hours. In the meantime, print outs are available when you ask. The receptionist usually does this.

I have just received copy of test results.
5.4 overall
HDL 0.9
LDL 3.4
Chl/HDL ratio 6.0
Triglyceride 2.0.
So I do need to lower the bad cholestorol but suspect this has been the case as it was not recorded on first set of tests and reckon next times should show this?
 
It all depends on the ratios and triglycerides. Was it as fasted test? Mine is higher and my doc is fine about it as my triglycerides are low and ratios are good. I did have to point that out though.

It wasn't a fasted test. I'm not that worried from what I've read but saying that I'd like to lower them all
 
It wasn't a fasted test. I'm not that worried from what I've read but saying that I'd like to lower them all
Sticking to low carb probably will improve them.

If it wasn’t fasted whatever you ate will have quite possibly raised trigs. This is why I fast. Level playing field to compare results.

Lower carb might not lower ldl it it typically changes ldl from small dense potentially harmful particles to large buoyant potentially protective particles and unless they test which (they typically don’t) then even that is quite likely not a problem either. Higher hdl is good. Lower trigs are good. Totals are pointless.
 
Sticking to low carb probably will improve them.

If it wasn’t fasted whatever you ate will have quite possibly raised trigs. This is why I fast. Level playing field to compare results.

Lower carb might not lower ldl it it typically changes ldl from small dense potentially harmful particles to large buoyant potentially protective particles and unless they test which (they typically don’t) then even that is quite likely not a problem either. Higher hdl is good. Lower trigs are good. Totals are pointless.

So are my stats overly bad? I know they suggest 4.0 for diabetics but is that practical?
 
Just noticed one I missed
4.5 non high density lipoprotein chol level
 
Your drop of 121 to 75 beats my 91 to 47 by two - so I'd say that you are probably going to hit normality before too long, and that there is no need to be at all disappointed.
As people are beginning to point out that all the 'fat is bad' info was based on some very bad manipulation of figures and that the results have been pretty dismal all round, I suspect that there will have to be a re evaluation before long. When studies show that those who live longest tend to have higher LDL, why expend so much effort and energy to reduce it?
 
So are my stats overly bad? I know they suggest 4.0 for diabetics but is that practical?

I would say it's as practical as saying we should all weigh exactly the same, whether male, female, child, tall, short, etc. Why oh why do they think there is a magical number that EVERY single person should be at regardless of how individual bodies work and exact amounts of any one thing they may require? That is why with all other blood tests there is a 'between range' which can be quite wide. x
 
Your drop of 121 to 75 beats my 91 to 47 by two - so I'd say that you are probably going to hit normality before too long, and that there is no need to be at all disappointed.
As people are beginning to point out that all the 'fat is bad' info was based on some very bad manipulation of figures and that the results have been pretty dismal all round, I suspect that there will have to be a re evaluation before long. When studies show that those who live longest tend to have higher LDL, why expend so much effort and energy to reduce it?

Thanks. My meter shows 7 day average 6.5 14 day 7 up to 8.7 90 day.The fact I started over 18 has hit my average but hoped the decent last month would reflect more
 
I'd put money on you being in the normal range by Christmas, and I don't bet.

Cheers. It's a fair target imo . Next test due 2nd week Semptember so knuckle down and up the excersise as weight loss has slowed.
I was disappointed but probably down to setting such lofty goal in such timescale.Now had time to digest it i can take a longer term view
 
Cheers. It's a fair target imo . Next test due 2nd week Semptember so knuckle down and up the excersise as weight loss has slowed.
I was disappointed but probably down to setting such lofty goal in such timescale.Now had time to digest it i can take a longer term view
Craigmartin

You are an inspiration to me mate, keep up the great work
 
Back
Top