On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 09:56:00 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 11/6/2018 7:55 PM, Boron Elgar wrote:

>>
>> No. That was not a conclusion of the study, but one of the many
>> organizational recommendations among those being evaluated.
>>
>
>This is what is stated on my test results page:
>
>For someone without known diabetes, a hemoglobin
>A1c value between 5.7% and 6.4% is consistent with
>prediabetes and should be confirmed with a
>follow-up test.
>For someone with known diabetes, a value <7%
>indicates that their diabetes is well controlled. A1c
>targets should be individualized based on duration of
>diabetes, age, comorbid conditions, and other
>considerations.

The purpose of the study was to determine veracity of just such
statements and interpretations - to prove or disprove what you see
above.

Keeping some people <7% can be very expensive and mean a lot of
medications are involved. Those medications can add their own side
effects and complications into the mix. That is not including the
practical and psychological effects of non-compliance and MD reactions
to that or to not achieving goals. There are many other aspects of it
all, too, of course.

These guidelines and recommendations change a lot, not just with
diabetes, but in many aspects of health. For a while, they thought
hormones were great for post-menopausal women, then oopsie, they found
out they could have fatal side effects. Ideal blood pressure levels
get tweaked. Vitamin E supplements went in and out of fashion. Right
now everyone is on the Vitamin D bandwagon.