MaryL wrote:
>
> My doctor says that anything over 100 (fasting BG) is now considered to be
> diabetes.

Not officially. Officially a repeated fasting BG of 100-125 is
considered "prediabetes." A repeated fasting BG of >125 is considered
diabetes. However, many of us consider "prediabetes" to a
mispronunciation of "early diabetes." ;-)

Priscilla
--
"Just because I don't throw a hissy fit and leave on account of the
'Jesus is my boyfriend' music doesn't mean I approve of it --- it just
means I've learned to understand the difference between having a
different opinion from someone and having a different religion."
- Leslie Terrell in newsgroup alt.religion.christian.episcopal

"Priscilla H. Ballou" wrote:
> Katra wrote:
> > I just hate making mistakes like this in public! <lol>
> > It's embarassing.......
>
> BTDT. Now, what *were* the real numbers?

Never mind. I found them in another reply.

Priscilla
--
"Just because I don't throw a hissy fit and leave on account of the
'Jesus is my boyfriend' music doesn't mean I approve of it --- it just
means I've learned to understand the difference between having a
different opinion from someone and having a different religion."
- Leslie Terrell in newsgroup alt.religion.christian.episcopal

In article >,
"Priscilla H. Ballou" > wrote:

> Katra wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Damsel in dis Dress > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 19:39:58 -0600, Katra >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >I'm an idiot, sorry! <cringe>
> > >
> > > Stop That! I have spoken!
> > >
> > > Damsel
> >
> > Sorry! :-)
> > I just hate making mistakes like this in public! <lol>
> > It's embarassing.......
>
> BTDT. Now, what *were* the real numbers?
>
> Priscilla

Well, the fasting glucose was correct, averages around 90.

The A1C was 4.6 which is borderline low.
Might have to watch out for hypoglycemia, but it
has not been a problem, probably because I avoid
sugar and fresh fruits.

--
K.

Sprout the Mung Bean to reply...

As we go through life thinking heavy thoughts, thought particles
tend to get caught between the ears causing truth decay- so be sure
to use mental floss twice a day.

>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<Katraatcenturyteldotnet>,,<

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...user id=katra

In article >,
"Priscilla H. Ballou" > wrote:

> Katra wrote:
> >
> > Remember, it usually takes around 2 months to change an A1C as that is
> > approx. how long your red blood cells live if I recall correctly?
>
> 3 months, but the A1c is weighted towards the final month.
>
> > I've been trying very hard to low carb now for about 3 years...
> > I'm pretty good most of the time. The worst thing I did last year was a
> > couple of pieces of apple pie over the holidays.
> >
> > It bugs me that I'm still having problems with insulin resitance. :-P
> > Maybe if I can get the weight off, that will improve? <sigh>
>
> Have you tried metformin? I'm finding it's helping me.
>
> Priscilla

Been on it for 4 weeks exactly. :-)
Oh, thanks for reminding me!
Gotta take my morning dose.....

--
K.

Sprout the Mung Bean to reply...

As we go through life thinking heavy thoughts, thought particles
tend to get caught between the ears causing truth decay- so be sure
to use mental floss twice a day.

>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<Katraatcenturyteldotnet>,,<

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...user id=katra

In article >, "Priscilla H. Ballou"
> wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:

> > Are you talking about fasting bg? I thought that 140 was on the edge of
> > acceptable. Mine was 143 last time I had blood drawn, and the doctor said
> > that that was OK. Of course, I also had an A1C of 6.1, so maybe that's
> > why. I took a look at the American Diabetes Association website, and they
> > are saying that under 100 is normal, over 126 is diabetes and in between
> > is pre-diabetes.
>
> Yes, those are the current ranges. A repeated fasting BG of over 125
> confirms a diagnosis of diabetes. If your doctor said a fasting BG of
> 143 is "ok" then you need another doctor! And a second fasting BG test
> to confirm the diagnosis.

Doctors like the hemoglobin test better. I'm not even sure why he put the
fasting bg on there. With the hemoglobin at 6.1, he may have assumed that
the 143 was just a fluke.



> I think it's time for you to start learning. Sorry!

Well, to continue learning. In the years since I was first diagnosed
(1972), they've changed the rules a billion times. I find it hard to get
very concerned. Of course, you need to have a certain amount of concern
to get motivated to stay in control. In a diabetes management class I
took some years ago, there was a woman there who admitted to letting her
bg get over 1100! They put her in the hospital for that.

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

In article >, Hahabogus
> wrote:

> (Dan Abel) wrote in
> :
>
> > Are you talking about fasting bg? I thought that 140 was on the
> > edge of acceptable. Mine was 143 last time I had blood drawn, and
> > the doctor said that that was OK. Of course, I also had an A1C of
> > 6.1, so maybe that's why.


> Get another doctor!


I like my doctor pretty well, he doesn't get excited at stuff.


> 7.0 at a 1AC is around 126 mg/dl which is the mark of the curse up
> here...in the UK 6.8mmol is. So 7.0 * 18.06= roughly 126 or 127 give or
> take.

If that math is consistent, then my 6.1 translates into 110, which isn't
too bad.

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

In article >, Katra
> wrote:

> In article >,
> (Dan Abel) wrote:

> > that that was OK. Of course, I also had an A1C of 6.1, so maybe that's


> It sounds to me that, if that is your FASTING BG and you have that high
> of an A1C, you are headed for type II diabetes.


Been there, done that. I was diagnosed as a type II diabetic in 1972.
And the letter with the results said 6.0 was the high end of normal. And
I'm sure that a couple of years ago 7.0 was the high end of normal (and
mine was 7.5).


> Better do something now. :-o


I'm happy with things as they are. I'm down from 2 500mg of metformin and
2 250mg of tolinase down to one tolinase a day. I lost 15 pounds in the
last year, due to walking 3 hours a day.


> My fasting is only 90 and my A1C is 2.6.


2.6? Wow! Are you sure you are alive?


:-)

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

Priscilla H. Ballou wrote:

> MaryL wrote:
>
>>My doctor says that anything over 100 (fasting BG) is now considered to be
>>diabetes.
>
>
> Not officially. Officially a repeated fasting BG of 100-125 is
> considered "prediabetes." A repeated fasting BG of >125 is considered
> diabetes. However, many of us consider "prediabetes" to a
> mispronunciation of "early diabetes." ;-)
>
> Priscilla

actually my understanding (being a nurse and
working with diabetics as well as at times having
non diabetics on insulin drips) is that there is
no such beast as "pre-diabetes" terminology
anymore. You either are or are not, and the cut
off level is a LOT lower than in years past. I
think the goal is to get people in range a lot
earlier now.
Goomba

In article >, Goomba38
> wrote:

> Priscilla H. Ballou wrote:

> > Not officially. Officially a repeated fasting BG of 100-125 is
> > considered "prediabetes." A repeated fasting BG of >125 is considered
> > diabetes. However, many of us consider "prediabetes" to a
> > mispronunciation of "early diabetes." ;-)

> actually my understanding (being a nurse and
> working with diabetics as well as at times having
> non diabetics on insulin drips) is that there is
> no such beast as "pre-diabetes" terminology
> anymore. You either are or are not, and the cut
> off level is a LOT lower than in years past. I


The numbers above are on the website of the American Diabetes Association,
including the "pre-diabetes" definition. Of course, every doctor is free
to come up with his/her own "official" cut off.

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

(Dan Abel) wrote in
:

> In article >, Goomba38
> > wrote:
>
> > Priscilla H. Ballou wrote:
>
> > > Not officially. Officially a repeated fasting BG of 100-125 is
> > > considered "prediabetes." A repeated fasting BG of >125 is
> > > considered diabetes. However, many of us consider "prediabetes"
> > > to a mispronunciation of "early diabetes." ;-)
>
> > actually my understanding (being a nurse and
> > working with diabetics as well as at times having
> > non diabetics on insulin drips) is that there is
> > no such beast as "pre-diabetes" terminology
> > anymore. You either are or are not, and the cut
> > off level is a LOT lower than in years past. I
>
>
> The numbers above are on the website of the American Diabetes
> Association, including the "pre-diabetes" definition. Of course,
> every doctor is free to come up with his/her own "official" cut off.
>

Read somebody else as well,Dr Bernstien comes to mind. If I followed the
ADA program of 45 carbs per meal my BG would be a lot worse than it is.
But my heart would be healthier maybe. So I'd be legless and blind, with
nerve damage and bad kidneys but still heart smart.

Think about it too much glucose and it combines with the fats and you're
in trouble...too much glucose and too much insulin...turns the glucose
into fat...fatter you...higher BP, higher cholesterals.

What is glucose, it is converted carbs mostly, but required to live. So
let your liver convert the fats and protiens into glucose(makes your body
work harder for its sugar), reducing your weight, the strain on insulin
producing cells, and reducing the 'free floating' glucose in your system.
Glucose and fat(cholestral) make (from a diabetic class) cookie dough,
which sticks to artery walls, your retnas, and nerve cells.

Reducing the fat is what the ADA wants to do. I reduce the glucose by low
carbing....my BG is now in the low 5's and mid-range to high 4's. My
cholesteral is lower than it has been in years and my triglycerdes are
good too. I just eat fewer carbs...no portion control. I eat less,
(gradually my appetite reduced on its own) and feel better than I ever
have.

--
No Bread Crumbs were hurt in the making of this Meal.
Type 2 Diabetic 1AC 5.6mmol or 101mg/dl
Continuing to be Manitoban

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:43:10 -0600, "MaryL"
-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:

>Can anyone suggest some good (but *easy*) recipes for beef, lamb, pork or
>chicken stew or roasts?

Hi Mary,

This thread has gotten way off course. I'll post a bunch of recipes for
you. They'll be marked LC-REC. Sorry for the delay in responding.

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:43:10 -0600, "MaryL"
> -OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote:
>
>>Can anyone suggest some good (but *easy*) recipes for beef, lamb, pork or
>>chicken stew or roasts?
>
> Hi Mary,
>
> This thread has gotten way off course. I'll post a bunch of recipes for
> you. They'll be marked LC-REC. Sorry for the delay in responding.
>
> Carol
> --
> "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
> 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
> Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."
>
> *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

Thanks, Carol. Those recipes look great! I'm going to copy all of them for
my files.

MaryL

My BG was 289 when first diagnosed in
>June 2004 but I now average 94. I do eat most of the items on your list
>(lots of fresh veggies, low fat meat, low fat cheese, eggs, nuts in
>moderation, etc.). My carbs are not *nearly* as low as what you list, but
>so far I have been doing well on this regime. My only diabetes medication
>is one 500mg Metformin ER per day. My doctor even suggested that I try
>eliminating that now and watch my meter to see if there has been any effect.
>However, I am concerned about doing that and have continued with the
>Metformin -- I want to discuss this some more at our next meeting.

if you don't eat many carbs and it does not sound like you do don't cut out too
much fat or you won't have any fuel for energy. you can't make it on low carb
and low fat.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

my body is weird in that a doc friend thinks I am glucose intolerant. as I can't
handle any carbs. I get no energy at all from any form of carb and usually have
an allergic reaction to them. though that park could be the leaky gut talking.
but I could eat a 7oz Hershey bar and get no sugar high or any extra energy from
it.
so fat and protein are my only sources of energy. (yes I was tested for
diabetes) my doc friend thinks it is weight related and as I loose weight it
may get better.
but the good thing is I have pretty much lost all my carb/junk food cravings.
when I do eat such things they don't taste like they used to. nothing thrilling
any more.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

"Steve Knight" > wrote in message
...
> My BG was 289 when first diagnosed in
>>June 2004 but I now average 94. I do eat most of the items on your list
>>(lots of fresh veggies, low fat meat, low fat cheese, eggs, nuts in
>>moderation, etc.). My carbs are not *nearly* as low as what you list, but
>>so far I have been doing well on this regime. My only diabetes medication
>>is one 500mg Metformin ER per day. My doctor even suggested that I try
>>eliminating that now and watch my meter to see if there has been any
>>effect.
>>However, I am concerned about doing that and have continued with the
>>Metformin -- I want to discuss this some more at our next meeting.
>
> if you don't eat many carbs and it does not sound like you do don't cut
> out too
> much fat or you won't have any fuel for energy. you can't make it on low
> carb
> and low fat.
>
> --
> Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
> Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
> See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

This is an area where I am still learning -- trying to learn just what
balance I should try to attain. I don't have a true low carb diet, but I am
trying to restrict certain types of carbs (no flour, rice, pasta, added
sugar). However, I eat a variety of fresh fruit, which is a source of
carbs. Likewise, I am trying to eat as little saturated fat as possible,
but I do eat fat -- nuts, eggs, cheese (albeit low-fat cheese). Still, you
make a good point, and I am still trying to learn a proper balance of these
things. I use FitDay so I can see what I am eating, and I am always
surprised to see how much fat and carbs I still get (protein is always in
3rd place).

Thanks,
MaryL

http://www.camacdonald.com/lc/LowCar...ng-Recipes.htm
this should help!

--
http://img195.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img1...dcp00330kx.jpg

" rosie readandpost" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.camacdonald.com/lc/LowCar...ng-Recipes.htm
> this should help!
>
>

Oh, great source for the type of recipes I need. I have bookmarked it.
Thanks!

MaryL

>That not just carbs, hey, that sounds like junk-carbs A good thing to
>eliminate anyway!

pretty much most carb sources. I can seem to handle small amounts of berries.
but sometimes two grams of carbs will get me.
I tried pure glucose and it really nailed me. worse then the cake I finally
broke down and had because of a week long craving (G)



>> but the good thing is I have pretty much lost all my carb/junk food cravings.
>> when I do eat such things they don't taste like they used to. nothing thrilling
>> any more.
>
>So you do eat carbs, but not junk carbs, right?

not really only if they are in foods like nuts and such. bacon is ok but I have
had problems with sausages with 3 grams of carbs or fillers. I could handle
regular national Hebrew hotdog's but not the low fat ones as they had other
things in them. a grapefruit is ok sometimes.
but since I don't get any energy it is more for nutrition.
I think it has been going on a real long time. grains have given me heartburn
most of my life.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 03:01:33 -0600, "MaryL" <

>This is an area where I am still learning -- trying to learn just what
>balance I should try to attain. I don't have a true low carb diet, but I am
>trying to restrict certain types of carbs (no flour, rice, pasta, added
>sugar). However, I eat a variety of fresh fruit, which is a source of
>carbs. Likewise, I am trying to eat as little saturated fat as possible,
>but I do eat fat -- nuts, eggs, cheese (albeit low-fat cheese). Still, you
>make a good point, and I am still trying to learn a proper balance of these
>things. I use FitDay so I can see what I am eating, and I am always
>surprised to see how much fat and carbs I still get (protein is always in
>3rd place).

I think fruit and fat are ok. While I could eat fruit I did fine on the two. but
fat has a bad rep that it does not deserve. natural saturated fats are fine.
coconut oil is healthy to consume. You need to go visit
alt.support.diet.low-carb
You will get a lot of info. fats are a good source of calories and nutrition.
good fats like coconut oil nut oils olive oils butter and such and meat fats are
fine. it's the processed crap that we are told is healthy that is a problem.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

"Steve Knight" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 03:01:33 -0600, "MaryL" <
>
>>This is an area where I am still learning -- trying to learn just what
>>balance I should try to attain. I don't have a true low carb diet, but I
>>am
>>trying to restrict certain types of carbs (no flour, rice, pasta, added
>>sugar). However, I eat a variety of fresh fruit, which is a source of
>>carbs. Likewise, I am trying to eat as little saturated fat as possible,
>>but I do eat fat -- nuts, eggs, cheese (albeit low-fat cheese). Still,
>>you
>>make a good point, and I am still trying to learn a proper balance of
>>these
>>things. I use FitDay so I can see what I am eating, and I am always
>>surprised to see how much fat and carbs I still get (protein is always in
>>3rd place).
>
> I think fruit and fat are ok. While I could eat fruit I did fine on the
> two. but
> fat has a bad rep that it does not deserve. natural saturated fats are
> fine.
> coconut oil is healthy to consume. You need to go visit
> alt.support.diet.low-carb
> You will get a lot of info. fats are a good source of calories and
> nutrition.
> good fats like coconut oil nut oils olive oils butter and such and meat
> fats are
> fine. it's the processed crap that we are told is healthy that is a
> problem.
>
> --
> Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
> Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
> See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

I have been reading some about this, but must admit that I am still leery of
saturated fats. I do add fats such as olive oil to my diet and have even
started to us a little butter in cooking. I also eat (and enjoy) peanut
butter, but all those years of warning about saturated fat has left an
impression on me -- I'm doing some reading, but as I said, still leery of
saturated fats (lots of heart problems in my family although I have not
shown signs so far; I do have diabetes plus high cholesterol and
triglycerides).

Thanks for the help,
MaryL

In article >,
Goomba38 > wrote:

> Priscilla H. Ballou wrote:
>
> > MaryL wrote:
> >
> >>My doctor says that anything over 100 (fasting BG) is now considered to be
> >>diabetes.
> >
> >
> > Not officially. Officially a repeated fasting BG of 100-125 is
> > considered "prediabetes." A repeated fasting BG of >125 is considered
> > diabetes. However, many of us consider "prediabetes" to a
> > mispronunciation of "early diabetes." ;-)
>
> actually my understanding (being a nurse and
> working with diabetics as well as at times having
> non diabetics on insulin drips) is that there is
> no such beast as "pre-diabetes" terminology
> anymore. You either are or are not, and the cut
> off level is a LOT lower than in years past. I
> think the goal is to get people in range a lot
> earlier now.

Not in my neck of the woods. I personally consider "prediabetes" to be
really "early diabetes" but that's not what the medicos in these parts
say. I'm in Boston, Mass.

Priscilla

--
"It is very, very dangerous to treat any human, lowest
of the low even, with contempt and arrogant whatever.
The Lord takes this kind of treatment very, very personal."
- QBaal in newsgroup alt.religion.christian.episcopal

In article >,
(Dan Abel) wrote:

> In article >, "Priscilla H. Ballou"
> > wrote:
>
> > Dan Abel wrote:
>
> > > Are you talking about fasting bg? I thought that 140 was on the edge of
> > > acceptable. Mine was 143 last time I had blood drawn, and the doctor said
> > > that that was OK. Of course, I also had an A1C of 6.1, so maybe that's
> > > why. I took a look at the American Diabetes Association website, and they
> > > are saying that under 100 is normal, over 126 is diabetes and in between
> > > is pre-diabetes.
> >
> > Yes, those are the current ranges. A repeated fasting BG of over 125
> > confirms a diagnosis of diabetes. If your doctor said a fasting BG of
> > 143 is "ok" then you need another doctor! And a second fasting BG test
> > to confirm the diagnosis.
>
> Doctors like the hemoglobin test better. I'm not even sure why he put the
> fasting bg on there. With the hemoglobin at 6.1, he may have assumed that
> the 143 was just a fluke.

In the US, A1c is not considered diagnostic.

Priscilla

--
"It is very, very dangerous to treat any human, lowest
of the low even, with contempt and arrogant whatever.
The Lord takes this kind of treatment very, very personal."
- QBaal in newsgroup alt.religion.christian.episcopal

In article >,
Priscilla Ballou > wrote:

> In article >,
> (Dan Abel) wrote:
>
> > In article >, "Priscilla H. Ballou"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Dan Abel wrote:
> >
> > > > Are you talking about fasting bg? I thought that 140 was on the edge
> > > > of
> > > > acceptable. Mine was 143 last time I had blood drawn, and the doctor
> > > > said
> > > > that that was OK. Of course, I also had an A1C of 6.1, so maybe that's
> > > > why. I took a look at the American Diabetes Association website, and
> > > > they
> > > > are saying that under 100 is normal, over 126 is diabetes and in
> > > > between
> > > > is pre-diabetes.
> > >
> > > Yes, those are the current ranges. A repeated fasting BG of over 125
> > > confirms a diagnosis of diabetes. If your doctor said a fasting BG of
> > > 143 is "ok" then you need another doctor! And a second fasting BG test
> > > to confirm the diagnosis.
> >
> > Doctors like the hemoglobin test better. I'm not even sure why he put the
> > fasting bg on there. With the hemoglobin at 6.1, he may have assumed that
> > the 143 was just a fluke.
>
> In the US, A1c is not considered diagnostic.
>
> Priscilla


Depends on how up to date your doctor is. ;-)

The Endocrinologist I am seeing uses it almost exclusively for
diagnosing diabetes or hypoglycemia... The old GTT is pretty well gone
bye bye except for catching early gestational diabetes. I only see they
OB-Gyn's doing them now.

--
K.

Sprout the Mung Bean to reply...

As we go through life thinking heavy thoughts, thought particles
tend to get caught between the ears causing truth decay- so be sure
to use mental floss twice a day.

>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<Katraatcenturyteldotnet>,,<

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...user id=katra

In article >,
Katra > wrote:

> In article >,
> Priscilla Ballou > wrote:

> > In the US, A1c is not considered diagnostic.
>
> Depends on how up to date your doctor is. ;-)
>
> The Endocrinologist I am seeing uses it almost exclusively for
> diagnosing diabetes or hypoglycemia... The old GTT is pretty well gone
> bye bye except for catching early gestational diabetes. I only see they
> OB-Gyn's doing them now.

In the US, it's fasting BG which is used for diagnosis for the most
part. Repeated fasting BG of over 125 = formal diagnosis of DM.

Prsicilla

--
"It is very, very dangerous to treat any human, lowest
of the low even, with contempt and arrogant whatever.
The Lord takes this kind of treatment very, very personal."
- QBaal in newsgroup alt.religion.christian.episcopal

>I have been reading some about this, but must admit that I am still leery of
>saturated fats. I do add fats such as olive oil to my diet and have even
>started to us a little butter in cooking. I also eat (and enjoy) peanut
>butter, but all those years of warning about saturated fat has left an
>impression on me -- I'm doing some reading, but as I said, still leery of
>saturated fats (lots of heart problems in my family although I have not
>shown signs so far; I do have diabetes plus high cholesterol and
>triglycerides).

the media has really done a number on us. they like to blame all of our bad
cholesterol on our fats. but they are starting to find it is not so.
I have trouble getting enough fat because I was so hyped about low fat for so
long.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

>I can't tolerate grains either, hey. I like seeds though.
>
>So what can you/do you eat?

well right now meats and cheese (I can only handle cows milk) nuts some veggies
like onions garlic tomatoes cauliflower broccoli green beans cabbage and such.
eggs. I can't handle cream cheese and only somewhat cream. anything with milk
products I will react to.
I react to strange things too I can have diet pop but not plain carbonated
water. yellow mustard but not the powdered stuff. all of the supplements that
would help leaky gut I react too. even over the counter meds. I could not handle
much splenda in the powdered form though the liquid is fine.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

In article >, Katra
> wrote:

> In article >,
> Priscilla Ballou > wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > (Dan Abel) wrote:

> > > Doctors like the hemoglobin test better. I'm not even sure why he put the
> > > fasting bg on there. With the hemoglobin at 6.1, he may have assumed that
> > > the 143 was just a fluke.
> >
> > In the US, A1c is not considered diagnostic.

I'm not sure what that means. If it means exactly what it says, than it
isn't applicable, because I was diagnosed with diabetes in 1972. The
concern now is control of the diabetes.


> Depends on how up to date your doctor is. ;-)


> The Endocrinologist I am seeing uses it almost exclusively for
> diagnosing diabetes or hypoglycemia... The old GTT is pretty well gone


I thought it was gone decades ago if you are referring to the glucose
tolerance test, aka the glucose torture test. I think I took it three
times. I loved watching the little graph they drew afterwards, but the
test itself was pretty horrible.

For those who have never heard of it, the gtt consists of fasting for 12
hours and then getting a blood and urine sample. Immediately after that
you consume 100g (about a quarter pound) of pure glucose. Then you get
another blood and urine sample at 1/2 and then one hour, then every hour
after that.

After taking the test three times (about a year apart), my doctor
announced that they didn't do that test anymore, and they went to the two
hours after eating blood test. Now they don't do that one anymore, and
they do fasting tests. Who knows what will come next?

--
Dan Abel
Sonoma State University
AIS

In article >,
(Dan Abel) wrote:

> In article >, Katra
> > wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Priscilla Ballou > wrote:
> >
> > > In article >,
> > > (Dan Abel) wrote:
>
> > > > Doctors like the hemoglobin test better. I'm not even sure why he put
> > > > the
> > > > fasting bg on there. With the hemoglobin at 6.1, he may have assumed
> > > > that
> > > > the 143 was just a fluke.
> > >
> > > In the US, A1c is not considered diagnostic.
>
> I'm not sure what that means. If it means exactly what it says, than it
> isn't applicable, because I was diagnosed with diabetes in 1972. The
> concern now is control of the diabetes.
>
>
> > Depends on how up to date your doctor is. ;-)
>
>
> > The Endocrinologist I am seeing uses it almost exclusively for
> > diagnosing diabetes or hypoglycemia... The old GTT is pretty well gone
>
>
> I thought it was gone decades ago if you are referring to the glucose
> tolerance test, aka the glucose torture test. I think I took it three
> times. I loved watching the little graph they drew afterwards, but the
> test itself was pretty horrible.

I agree!!! I had it back when I was in high school in the 70's!

>
> For those who have never heard of it, the gtt consists of fasting for 12
> hours and then getting a blood and urine sample. Immediately after that
> you consume 100g (about a quarter pound) of pure glucose. Then you get
> another blood and urine sample at 1/2 and then one hour, then every hour
> after that.

4 hours is usually the max.

And yes, it makes you feel like crap. :-P If you are hypoglycemic, you
generally pass out. ;-)

>
> After taking the test three times (about a year apart), my doctor
> announced that they didn't do that test anymore, and they went to the two
> hours after eating blood test. Now they don't do that one anymore, and
> they do fasting tests. Who knows what will come next?

That's not entirely true... The 2 hr. PP was more popular for awhile,
but most docs now seem to do just a fasting BG and the A1C.

But, the GTT is STILL used by OB-GYN's! We still do them all the time in
our lab. They use it to diagnose gestational diabetes in pregnant women.

The 2 hr. PP is more common, but there are still a few baby docs that
prefer the GTT.

--
K.

Sprout the Mung Bean to reply...

As we go through life thinking heavy thoughts, thought particles
tend to get caught between the ears causing truth decay- so be sure
to use mental floss twice a day. -- Swami Beyondanada

>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<Katraatcenturyteldotnet>,,<

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...user id=katra