Cheri wrote:
>
> "Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
> b.com...
>> On 1/22/2014 7:14 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> It seems the below 7 is the acceptable highest number for blood sugar.
>>>> Does anyone know what the lowest acceptable number is?
>>>
>>> Depends on who you ask and why. I am supposed to keep my numbers
>>> between 90 and 130 at all times. In your terms that would be about 5 to
>>> 7.2.
>>
>> 7.2 is high. Most endocrinologists we know want their patients A1C below
>> 7.0 and are happiest when they show 6.5 or lower.
>
>
> Here, my doc put me on Lantus for a time because I was close to 7, so I
> think it really does vary by doctor.
>
> Cheri


yes it will vary quite a bit by doctor

there's an interesting book, "Overdiagnosed," that shows the harm in
aggressive treatment (all conditions, not just diabetes)

of course you don't really want to be underdiagnosed either ...

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...

> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing - you are fine, probably just
> need to lose a little weight, sub veggies for pepperoni on pizza and
> things
> like that, sit less often (even consider a standing desk), and go for a
> nice 30 minute walk on as many days of clement weather as possible
>

I don't make pizza any more, I haven't ever bought processed or prepared
food and have always cooked everything from scratch. Every day I cook veg
and protein in various ways. The only carbs we eat are some potato with our
meal and a slice of my homemade bread for breakfast as I outlined. I am
losing a little weight now so that is nice too I am keeping a table on
each meal and the numbers after 2 hours. Now we have the new numbers it is
much easier!

> and continue to monitor your glucose

I am doing that We haven't been walking much because we lost our
beloved dog last January. We are only just coming to terms with it and have
decided to look for another rescue dog, next month. We will get plenty of
exercise then again

Thank you so much for your support


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "tert in seattle" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing - you are fine, probably just
>> need to lose a little weight, sub veggies for pepperoni on pizza and
>> things
>> like that, sit less often (even consider a standing desk), and go for a
>> nice 30 minute walk on as many days of clement weather as possible
>>
>
> I don't make pizza any more, I haven't ever bought processed or prepared
> food and have always cooked everything from scratch. Every day I cook veg
> and protein in various ways. The only carbs we eat are some potato with our
> meal and a slice of my homemade bread for breakfast as I outlined. I am
> losing a little weight now so that is nice too I am keeping a table on
> each meal and the numbers after 2 hours. Now we have the new numbers it is
> much easier!
>
>> and continue to monitor your glucose
>
> I am doing that We haven't been walking much because we lost our
> beloved dog last January. We are only just coming to terms with it and have
> decided to look for another rescue dog, next month. We will get plenty of
> exercise then again
>
> Thank you so much for your support


I'm sorry to hear you lost your dog

the rescue can go both ways of course :-)

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "tert in seattle" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing - you are fine, probably just
>>> need to lose a little weight, sub veggies for pepperoni on pizza and
>>> things
>>> like that, sit less often (even consider a standing desk), and go for a
>>> nice 30 minute walk on as many days of clement weather as possible
>>>
>>
>> I don't make pizza any more, I haven't ever bought processed or prepared
>> food and have always cooked everything from scratch. Every day I cook
>> veg
>> and protein in various ways. The only carbs we eat are some potato with
>> our
>> meal and a slice of my homemade bread for breakfast as I outlined. I am
>> losing a little weight now so that is nice too I am keeping a table on
>> each meal and the numbers after 2 hours. Now we have the new numbers it
>> is
>> much easier!
>>
>>> and continue to monitor your glucose
>>
>> I am doing that We haven't been walking much because we lost our
>> beloved dog last January. We are only just coming to terms with it and
>> have
>> decided to look for another rescue dog, next month. We will get plenty
>> of
>> exercise then again
>>
>> Thank you so much for your support
>
>
> I'm sorry to hear you lost your dog

Thank you, we still miss her.

> the rescue can go both ways of course :-)

Indeed, as it was in the past )

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 1/23/2014 2:46 PM, tert in seattle wrote:

>
> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing -

I've known Susan for a while from the diabetes boards. She is a Type 2
who is close to a zero carber so she doesn't need to take meds. I
applaud her for that, but she too often assumes that everyone else is
just like her and they are not.


--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Ophelia,

Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably the
best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to count
carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are not.

It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

x-no-archive; yes

On 1/23/2014 7:12 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
> Ophelia,
>
> Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably
> the best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to
> count carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are
> not.
>
> It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.
>

Right, I mean, it's not as if their guidelines have been influenced by
all the soft drink, candy, cereal and drug money funding them.

That's how you get diabetes "education" that tells you to eat sugar with
diabetes because they found out it's no worse for you than grains.
Seriously.

<*rolls eyes*>

Susan

On 1/23/2014 6:29 PM, Susan wrote:
> x-no-archive; yes
>
> On 1/23/2014 7:12 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
>> Ophelia,
>>
>> Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably
>> the best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to
>> count carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are
>> not.
>>
>> It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.
>>
>
> Right, I mean, it's not as if their guidelines have been influenced by
> all the soft drink, candy, cereal and drug money funding them.
>
> That's how you get diabetes "education" that tells you to eat sugar with
> diabetes because they found out it's no worse for you than grains.
> Seriously.
>
> <*rolls eyes*>
>
> Susan

"Seriously", if you had a bad experience with an educator, it's not nice
to pass it along as gospel.

We've been to diabetes education where we've learned carb counting and
it has made a tremendous difference in my DH's (he's the diabetic)
control and my ability to cook the proper foods for him.



--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 18:16:23 +0000 (UTC), lid (Drew
Lawson) wrote:

>In article >
> "Ophelia" > writes:
>>
>>
>>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
>>news
>>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:03:44 -0000, "Ophelia"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
m...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsle...-should-you-go
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for posting that, Boron.
>>>
>>> You are quite welcome. As a diabetic myself, I am more than casually
>>> interested in the topic, obviously.
>>>
>>> These latest studies are, in some ways, confounding, but there is no
>>> questioning their consistency and large study numbers.
>>
>>I haven't had a chance to take it all in yet, but it is saved for later when
>>I can give it proper attention.
>
>Not sure which you have saved, but I would recommend following the
>URL given (just finished reading that). There is a lot more there
>than the quoted text, and it helps put that text in context.
>
>Unfortunatey that page is 3 years old, but it is a start.

The research has certainly stood up since then and I have not seen it
contradicted.

The one thing that is sure about a T2 is that the disorder varies in
intensity and affects that are not always correlated/directly
cause-related to treatments and behaviors.

TWIAVBP and YMMV come into play quite a bit with it all.

Boron

Cheri wrote:

> This is why I hate these discussions on a food group instead of a diabetes
> newsgroup! No good ever comes out of them, and they usually end this way.
> How about some religion, or politics? That always works well too.
>
> Cheri

how about political science?

When Chris Christie implodes, he will become a:

A. white dwarf
B. neutron star
C. black hole

On 1/22/2014 11:59 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

> That's never been an option for me either. My previous ones were all
> blue and I hate the color blue. Current one is black and although I do
> like black, I hate black for my meter because it blends in with
> everything, especially the interior of the case that I keep it in. Wish
> I could get a bright color like red, but no dice.

My ReliOn is red.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 1/22/2014 2:35 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> I didn't know you were in Europe. As others have said we use a different
> scale here in the US. Basically anything under 126 4 hours after eating is
> a good target.

I don't know if this is unusual or not, but my fasting sugar is
typically higher than an hour or two after eating. That's what concerns
my doctor, just the fasting number. I can have a fasting number of like
119 and an hour or two after eating normally, the number can be around 102.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> Cheri wrote:
>
>> This is why I hate these discussions on a food group instead of a
>> diabetes
>> newsgroup! No good ever comes out of them, and they usually end this way.
>> How about some religion, or politics? That always works well too.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> how about political science?
>
> When Chris Christie implodes, he will become a:
>
> A. white dwarf
> B. neutron star
> C. black hole

LOL, not going there. :-)

Cheri

On 1/22/2014 7:54 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> Excellent! As I said... Lentils were horrible for. I do like them but
> they are not something I really miss. Once in a while I will add just a
> few to a soup. And for some things, this is where a salad bar or buffet
> can come in handy. I know you don't eat at such places but... They
> allow you to have just a bite of things that would otherwise not work
> for you.

I'm not diabetic, at least not diagnosed even though I check my sugar
now. The hardest for me is giving up wheat. I gave it up for different
reasons, and it has already had an incredible positive impact on me, and
I expect it will impact my blood sugar readings, too. Wheat starches
were my weakness; cooking for one sometimes meant some type of pasta for
dinner because it was quick, or even something quicker and less
nutritious like cheese and crackers. I'm forced now to actually cook
something even when I don't feel like it.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 1/22/2014 10:25 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> I got this from Amazon. Lemme look.
>
> This is the stuff:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
>
>
>
> Hmmm... Looks like it isn't white after all! Just tiny and no
> hulls.

Good grief that's expensive. It must be a rare treat!

--
CAPSLOCK€“Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 1/22/2014 10:52 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

>> If you are on insulin, as are more and more T2s these days, you need
>> to be concerned and aware of the possibility of a low. I've been told
>> by my diabetes doctor AND kidney doctor that lows are more dangerous
>> than a high and should be avoided at all costs.
>
> They can be. Especially if you are driving or going down stairs or
> anything like that.

No, I meant in the course of your long term health. Lows can be very
damaging to your overall health. Of course driving while having a hypo
can be as dangerous as driving drunk. As for stairs, well... a low could
be very dangerous there, but only to yourself, unlike driving with a
hypo. (-:

--
DreadfulBitch

I intend to live forever....so far, so good.
......Steven Wright

On 1/23/2014 5:41 AM, Ophelia wrote:

> Thank you. I wouldn't know what a 'low' felt like. As I said
> elsewhere, there never
> have been any symptoms, it was just picked up on a yearly health check.
> All the checks have come back good ie eyes, feet etc.
>
About the only symptoms I get when my sugar is high is that I get
extremely cranky. (Yes, I know... who can tell??)

OTOH, a low is very obvious and I think those symptoms are pretty common
among most diabetics. YMMV. I get sweaty and shaky. My thinking gets
screwed up and I feel weak. As I mentioned in another thread I've found
that those little juice boxes (do you have them? Perfect to be packed
in a child's school lunch) are perfect to bring up my sugar without
being too much. As my sugar comes up all I want to do is sleep.

I've found that most of my hypos (not that I have many) occur overnight
and I'm usually awakened because I'm so sweaty.

You'll learn to cope with your diabetes over time and hypos are just one
aspect you *may* have to deal with. Here's hoping you don't have to
deal with them.

--
DreadfulBitch

I intend to live forever....so far, so good.
......Steven Wright

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...

> Your personal disorders are legion.
> Your family members all seem to be a mess too.
> You are constantly mentioning people you know who are also defective
> in numerous ways.
>
> You would be a good candidate for Jerry Springer, except you're not
> interesting enough.

So, you're calling Christine Dabney stupid now? Let's just see what she
says about that. I would be fearful to do your chart. I think it would
scare me! And no, I would not be a good candidate for Springer. I don't
live in a trailer. I don't hit people with shoes. I'm not having an
affair. Whatever...

On 1/23/2014 10:53 PM, DreadfulBitch wrote:

> I've found that most of my hypos (not that I have many) occur overnight
> and I'm usually awakened because I'm so sweaty.

Can you please expand on this? I get horrible night sweats but I
thought it was hormones due to age. I mean it could still be, because I
have no reason to think I have hypos but I'm curious about this.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >, says...
>
>> I'm not sure how they would know this as most normies would have no
>> reason
>> to test. My former Endo. said that normies are almost always around 80.
>> Exceptions being if they are on certain meds like steroids or perhaps
>> ill.
>> Not sure how he would know this either.
>
> So much for your claim to be "expert in science"

I never claimed to be an expert in science. I said that I got A+s in
biology. Diabetes is a very complicated thing. I did say that I have that
Joslin book on it. There are over 300 variances of it. And there is much
we still don't undersand.
>
> Normal people in good health with reliable health services, still get
> thorough health checkups and screening. Many illnesses are more
> prevalent in certain age groups so a good medical service, will perform
> age-related health screenings to pick up early diagnostics.
> The "normal" results from screening well people are collated because
> they are vital to medical research.

Of course! But how are they tested for diabetes? I was given a random
finger stick once. Dr. told me that I had diabetes then backtracked and
said that he never said that. Then incorrect testing (fasting finger stick
and 24 hour urine collection) confirmed what he said, one month later. But
I did in fact have diabetes. I was just unwittingly controlling it with my
diet. And was also on a thyroid med that I needed not to be on. Thyroid
problems can cause elevated or low BG if left untreated or not treated
properly.

How many normies are going to go to the Dr. and get a random finger stick at
2 hours after eating? I'm sure it could happen. But at least in this
country the normal test for diabetes is the OGTT. Unless perhaps a random
finger stick is above 180 or 10 in your terms.

I'm sure that Drs. and scientists have had to use normies as their control
group when doing various things. So they would know what normie numbers
are. Was that Dr. that I mentioned a person who knows what he is talking
about? Dunno. He was wrong on other counts.

"Cherry" > wrote in message
...
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:29:03 AM UTC, Ophelia wrote:
> "Cherry" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Amazon is so far the cheapest place, even with p+p they're still only
> > £20
>
> > for 50 test strips for the Contour Next USB machine. I can plug that
>
> > meter into my laptop to charge it and download the test results into an
>
> > online diary. I periodically send the diary to the diabetic nurse at my
>
> > local surgery (saves making an appointment and if I'm not there she
> > can't
>
> > tell me off!) she emails me any recommendations etc.
> >
> > http://www.bayerdiabetes.co.uk/
>
> Thank you for all that information too)) I am very grateful
>
> I take it you are in UK too?
> --
>
> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

Yes I am, Cricklade, Wiltshire. I come from a family of diabetics, Type 1
and Type 2s. My elder brother has reversed his Type 2 with a good balanced
diet, I'm still working on mine.

Doctors here still very much believe in the 'balanced diet' approach. This
means you can still eat bread, pasta, potatoes and rice, but in smaller
portions than you are probably used to. Rice is very high starch and can
give a nasty spike in your blood glucose levels. Root vegetables tend to
have a higher sugar content like parsnips, beetroot, carrots and swede so
eat smaller portions and not too often.

If you want to eat some chocolate or ice cream work it into our diet and cut
back on something else in your meal. If you want toast and jam for
breakfast fine, just use butter and jam sparingly. Denying yourself of
stuff completely is unnecessary and is going to make you feel bloody
miserable.

Cherry

---

I simply don't believe that one can reverse diabetes. Control it? Yes.
Reverse it? No. And there is nothing wrong with butter. No need to eat it
sparingly.

I wish it were true that we could work anything that we want into our diets.
I can't. And I use insulin! Those folks who makes the claim that they can
shoot whatever amount to cover their carbs are perhaps lucky. I can not do
that. Simply does not work.

If you want to eat chocolate, go for 70% or higher. The bitter kind. I
even eat nibs. Unsweetened.

But it's not the sugar content of the food we must watch. It's the overall
carbs. The only reason that ice cream might be better for BG than bread is
the fat content of it. Fat delays the absorption of carbs. Which is why if
you're gonna eat toast, you'd be wise to eat it with butter or cheese or nut
butter. Just not Nutella.

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>I am learning much from the sites posted and as I was very concerned about
> the numbers particularly, this bit:
>
> "Patients who can achieve near-normal blood sugar levels with lifestyle
> therapy and simple drug programs should do so. Current ADA guidelines call
> for achieving HbA1C levels of less than 7.0%; this corresponds to an
> average
> blood sugar level below 154 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). The ADA also
> recommends striving for fasting blood sugar levels below 131 mg/dL and
> peak
> post-meal levels below 180 mg/dL."
>
> So using the ‘divide by 18 rule that is:
>
> FASTING level should be below 131/18 = 7.27
>
> Average below 154/18 = 8.5
>
> Peak after meals below 180/18 = 10
>
> Wow! That makes it all much easier to manage) I was panicking at
> everything over 7 after meals))

Hmmm.... That may be an old link. Those numbers seem pretty high! Higher
than what my goal numbers are. This is something you really should ask your
Dr. or nurse.

Sometimes when we are first diagnosed, we are given higher goal numbers to
shoot for. Reason being that bringing BG down too suddenly can cause
damage. I believe this is rare but there was a diabetic who posted this to
alt.support.diabetes. He had retinopathy and was told that the reason was
that his BG was brought down too rapidly. His BG was quite high upon
diagnosis though.

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Susan" > wrote in message
> ...
>> x-no-arhive: yes
>>
>> On 1/23/2014 9:17 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>> So using the ‘divide by 18 rule that is:
>>>
>>> FASTING level should be below 131/18 = 7.27
>>>
>>> Average below 154/18 = 8.5
>>>
>>> Peak after meals below 180/18 = 10
>>>
>>> Wow! That makes it all much easier to manage) I was panicking at
>>> everything over 7 after meals))
>>>
>>
>> Those numbers are way too high and represent severe risks of diabetic
>> damage and earlier mortality.
>
> I'll take them along to the practice nurse in March and see what she
> thinks.
> She said at the last check the last numbers were below the diabetic range!
> I asked if that meant there was no diabetes and therefore no need to be
> under her care, she said once you are diagnosed, you will always be
> checked so I am still checking my numbers each day!

Just curious. What test did they do to diagnose you?

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Susan" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> x-no-arhive: yes
>>>
>>> On 1/23/2014 9:17 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>> So using the ?divide by 18 rule that is:
>>>>
>>>> FASTING level should be below 131/18 = 7.27
>>>>
>>>> Average below 154/18 = 8.5
>>>>
>>>> Peak after meals below 180/18 = 10
>>>>
>>>> Wow! That makes it all much easier to manage) I was panicking at
>>>> everything over 7 after meals))
>>>>
>>>
>>> Those numbers are way too high and represent severe risks of diabetic
>>> damage and earlier mortality.
>>
>> I'll take them along to the practice nurse in March and see what she
>> thinks.
>> She said at the last check the last numbers were below the diabetic
>> range!
>> I asked if that meant there was no diabetes and therefore no need to be
>> under her care, she said once you are diagnosed, you will always be
>> checked
>> so I am still checking my numbers each day!
>
> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing - you are fine, probably just
> need to lose a little weight, sub veggies for pepperoni on pizza and
> things
> like that, sit less often (even consider a standing desk), and go for a
> nice 30 minute walk on as many days of clement weather as possible
>
> and continue to monitor your glucose

I don't usually agree with Susan on anything but I will agree with her on
this one. Those numbers are oo high! For most people, 140 is the highest
they would *ever* want to be. Some might want to use 160. But 131 fasting?
Eek! No, no. Not that I'm claiming my numbers to always be in range. For
sure they are not. I also have neuropathy (nerve damage) to my feet and
legs, gastroparesis (nerve damage to the stomach), tooth and gum damage and
now bleeding in my eyes. All from high BG. Not that I'm not trying to
lower it. I am. It's just that nothing seems to be working for me very
well. Am for sure doing better than I was. But control could be a lot
better.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
eb.com...
> Ophelia,
>
> Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably the
> best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to count
> carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are not.
>
> It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.
>

Or not. Mine certainly hasn't been very helpful in terms of food. But then
I have met with many dieticians prior and I do know how to portion control,
carb count, etc. So perhaps she figured there wasn't much she could do
there. She did make some suggestions to Angela though on food choices.

I would however suggest some sort of book or online source for carb counts.
When I was first diagnosed, I got Corinne Netzer's book. Not sure if there
is a version for other countries. But... Much of it didn't apply to me
since it does focus on restaurant meals and prepared foods. And that's the
thing with prepared foods. At least they are required to give you the carb
counts. When you cook from scratch, you don't have that handy.

Does someone know of an online source for this. I know they exist. It's
just that by now, I pretty much have it all memorized so I don't look much
up. If I do need to know of something, I just look up that individual item.

One food that did surprise me was parsnips. I assumed since they look like
a carrot, the carb count would be similar. Nope. They're more like a
potato. Fortunately, I didn't care for them at all. I think they used more
often in the UK than they are here. I hadn't eaten one at all until a few
years ago.

Oh and... Another useful bit of information that you probably already know
but might not be thinking of. A portion size of a raw food would be more
than for cooked. Reason being that the food cooks down to a smaller and
therefore more concentrated state. So... One cup of raw carrots has about
the same carb count as 1/2 cup of cooked. Cup being 8 fl. oz. Sorry, I
speak American when it comes to cooking. And... If you eat too many
vegetables, even low carb ones, those carbs can really add up.

When I was first diagnosed, a favorite meal was a huge salad. I used a
serving bowl. All kinds of greens, onion, tomato, carrots, celery, peppers,
cheese, olives and nuts and usually a serving of kidney or garbanzo beans.
Sounds low carb except for the beans. But... I was eating so much in terms
of vegetables that those carbs added up to be plenty enough for one meal.
No need to add a piece of bread or anything else.

"Susan" > wrote in message
...
> x-no-archive; yes
>
> On 1/23/2014 7:12 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
>> Ophelia,
>>
>> Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably the
>> best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to count
>> carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are not.
>>
>> It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.
>>
>
> Right, I mean, it's not as if their guidelines have been influenced by all
> the soft drink, candy, cereal and drug money funding them.
>
> That's how you get diabetes "education" that tells you to eat sugar with
> diabetes because they found out it's no worse for you than grains.
> Seriously.
>
> <*rolls eyes*>

I still don't believe that Susan but even if true... Soft drink makers make
diet soft drinks and there is sugarless candy. Not that I'm recommending it
because I'm not.

My only beef with a lot of diabetes education is that from what I have seen,
it is very general. I know countless people who took a class or classes
that spanned a weekend and were never told anything specific to them. And
IMO, general just doesn't work with diabetes. Many sources will tell you
that lentils are good for diabetics to eat. And yet? They spike the hell
out of *me*. So the best I can do is to put a very few in a big pot of
soup. Same for barely.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
eb.com...

> "Seriously", if you had a bad experience with an educator, it's not nice
> to pass it along as gospel.
>
> We've been to diabetes education where we've learned carb counting and it
> has made a tremendous difference in my DH's (he's the diabetic) control
> and my ability to cook the proper foods for him.

Carb counting is very important to know. I suspect that Ophelia is probably
smart enough to be able to figure this out on her own. But many people
can't. I have met quite a few who were totally clueless when it came to
carbs and what all foods they are in.

I have also been given very stupid advice by health care professionals.
Like the nurse who said that diabetics should eat lots of soup and fruit.
Say what? Yeah, broth based soups with meat and non-starchy veg are good.
Condensed soups from a can? Cream of whatever soup? Thickened soups?
Potato soup? Not necessarily so good. And the same could be said for fruit.
A big bowl of strawberries is probably going to be okay. But a big bowl of
slice bananas? Nope.

I am still learning about diabetes and I was first diagnosed when pregnant,
over 15 years ago. We can pick up useful bits of information from all sorts
of places. I think the key is never to think that something is set in stone
and never assume that the person who tells us this knows what they are
talking about.

My dietician when I was pregnant told me to consume raw dairy products
despite them saying on the news for pregnant women not to due to an outbreak
of listeria poisoning. She had never heard of listeria and couldn't look it
up on her computer as she didn't know how to use the computer!

So I have had my share of clueless health care people. I take them all with
a grain of salt. But I also never assume that they are all clueless.
Because they're not. I've also met some very *good* ones!

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
eb.com...
> On 1/23/2014 2:46 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>
>>
>> please disregard Susan's hyperventialing -
>
> I've known Susan for a while from the diabetes boards. She is a Type 2 who
> is close to a zero carber so she doesn't need to take meds. I applaud her
> for that, but she too often assumes that everyone else is just like her
> and they are not.

Yep but... I still agree with her that those numbers for goals are too
high.

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
> This is why I hate these discussions on a food group instead of a diabetes
> newsgroup! No good ever comes out of them, and they usually end this way.
> How about some religion, or politics? That always works well too.

Yeah. Stuff like this finally calmed down on ASD and we just have the socks
arguing with each other. Now it's happening all over again here!

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> Cheri wrote:
>
>> This is why I hate these discussions on a food group instead of a
>> diabetes
>> newsgroup! No good ever comes out of them, and they usually end this way.
>> How about some religion, or politics? That always works well too.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> how about political science?
>
> When Chris Christie implodes, he will become a:
>
> A. white dwarf
> B. neutron star
> C. black hole

The sad thing is, I liked him. But now I think he should just go off with
that other guy (is not interested enough in politics to remember his name)
and smoke crack together! How's that?

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> Here let me make it very simple:
>
> you claimed 140 = cell & organ damage
>
> you cited http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/14045678.php
>
> I read the first abstract linked on that page -- for an article published
> in "Diabetes Care," which is put our by ADA
>
> now you say don't trust the ADA (which you snipped)
>
> you have been pushing phlaunt.com pretty hard, yet that site links to
> research published by ADA
>
> anyone capable of critical analysis should be able to spot that you have
> contradicted yourself

That's just what she does!

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/22/2014 7:04 AM, John Kuthe wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:33:47 -0000, "Ophelia"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> It seems the below 7 is the acceptable highest number for blood sugar.
>>> Does
>>> anyone know what the lowest acceptable number is?
>>
>> You mean the A1c level?
>>
>> http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/guide/...bin-test-hba1c
>>
>> While not documented here, I'd say the lower bound is zero. But that's
>> never gonaa happen, as an A1c level is like a running indication of
>> how high your blood glucose level had been over the past "six to 12
>> week period" as this doc says.
>>
>> John Kuthe...
>>
> Normal A1C for people without diabetes is 5 to 5.7

5.7 is now considered pre-diabetes.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/22/2014 7:14 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> It seems the below 7 is the acceptable highest number for blood sugar.
>>> Does anyone know what the lowest acceptable number is?
>>
>> Depends on who you ask and why. I am supposed to keep my numbers
>> between 90 and 130 at all times. In your terms that would be about 5 to
>> 7.2.
>
> 7.2 is high. Most endocrinologists we know want their patients A1C below
> 7.0 and are happiest when they show 6.5 or lower.

Per my lab, >7.0 is considered poor control.

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...

> Here, my doc put me on Lantus for a time because I was close to 7, so I
> think it really does vary by doctor.

I think I was at 7.1 when I was put on it.

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/22/2014 11:59 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> That's never been an option for me either. My previous ones were all
>> blue and I hate the color blue. Current one is black and although I do
>> like black, I hate black for my meter because it blends in with
>> everything, especially the interior of the case that I keep it in. Wish
>> I could get a bright color like red, but no dice.
>
> My ReliOn is red.

But I can't use that kind. Needs to be USB.

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/22/2014 2:35 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>> I didn't know you were in Europe. As others have said we use a different
>> scale here in the US. Basically anything under 126 4 hours after eating
>> is
>> a good target.
>
> I don't know if this is unusual or not, but my fasting sugar is typically
> higher than an hour or two after eating. That's what concerns my doctor,
> just the fasting number. I can have a fasting number of like 119 and an
> hour or two after eating normally, the number can be around 102.

Very typical. Do you eat a snack before bed?

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/22/2014 10:25 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> I got this from Amazon. Lemme look.
>>
>> This is the stuff:
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm... Looks like it isn't white after all! Just tiny and no
>> hulls.
>
> Good grief that's expensive. It must be a rare treat!

I bought a whole case but... It takes a heck of a lot more of it to pop up
to the same volume as regular. I prolly won't buy it again but I paid
nothing OOP for it since I had a lot of Amazon credit when I got it.

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 1/23/2014 10:53 PM, DreadfulBitch wrote:
>
>> I've found that most of my hypos (not that I have many) occur overnight
>> and I'm usually awakened because I'm so sweaty.
>
> Can you please expand on this? I get horrible night sweats but I thought
> it was hormones due to age. I mean it could still be, because I have no
> reason to think I have hypos but I'm curious about this.

Aren't you the one who said you were waking up with higher numbers? You
probably are going low while you sleep and your liver is dumping glucose to
compensate.

Two things you should try. Snack before bed if you aren't already.

Waking up every hour throughout the night and testing to try to catch the
low. If you are actually waking, then you should keep your meter by your
bed and testing then.

One former poster to mhd said he knew of a woman who had this so bad that
even the snack wasn't helping. She had to keep some peanuts and water by
her bed, wake halfway through the night and eat and drink.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
eb.com...
> Ophelia,
>
> Can you get an appointment with a diabetes educator? It's probably the
> best thing to do when first diagnosed. You will learn how to count
> carbohydrates and what foods are good for you and what foods are not.
>
> It's a much more professional deal than a newsgroup, sweetie.

True I don't know anything about a diabetes educator. I will ask in
March when I go back.

I know about carbs though and I realised after the conversation with the
dietician that I knew more about them than she did I was looking for
personal opinion though because I know there are many diabetics here.

I have no meds and am just looking to diet. I was advised here to take a
fasting blood test, so this morning the numbers were 6.1. I just had some
toast so will take it again in 2 hours.

Thanks for your comments.

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

"Cheri" > wrote in message

> This is why I hate these discussions on a food group instead of a diabetes
> newsgroup! No good ever comes out of them, and they usually end this way.
> How about some religion, or politics? That always works well too.

I apologise if I have caused offence.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/