FoodBanter.com - View Single Post

tert in seattle

writes:
>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.

yes medicine has come a long way since evidence-based practice caught on

the summary is here - there are four guidance statements

<http://annals.org/data/Journals/AIM/936928/M170939ff1_Figure_Summary_of_the_American_College_ of_Physicians_guidance_statement_on_HbA_1c_tar.jpe g>