 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / October 2005Stupid Question
Hey When I am testing 2 hours after meals, Do I start the clock when I begin a meal or after I am done? Thanks. Everyone's previous advise has been very helpful Nirvana > Hey > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Nirvana Time from your first bite. And test one hour later for the most info. Susan from the first bite of your meal actually it's not hugely important as long as you are consistent......... but does it take you 5 min to eat dinner as does breakfast? kate  SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ http://www.diabetic-talk.org/freeveggies.htm I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience. Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be an expensive teacher. > Hey > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Nirvana >from the first bite of your meal > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >kate FIVE MINUTES??? That isn't time enough to eat even one piece of toast without bolting your food. People in this country eat way too fast now days. That too is one reason so many of us are heavier than we should be. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. >>from the first bite of your meal >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > That isn't time enough to eat even one piece of toast without bolting > your food. Course it is if the slice of toast is the correct size and not a Supersize you thing. I like my toast HOT and it's stone cold after 3 minutes. > People in this country eat way too fast now days. That too is one > reason so many of us are heavier than we should be. I think "fast food" rather than "fast eating" is the problem these days. SignatureBeav Reply to "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com" (with the obvious changes) >>>from the first bite of your meal >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >you thing. >I like my toast HOT and it's stone cold after 3 minutes. I eat mine very slowly savoring every morsel except the last little corner that I give to Pepper, my beagle while I am reading the newspaper. Besides, I love to watch her as she stares at me while I'm eating it. She doesn't beg but the closer I get to the last bite the more excited she becomes. >> People in this country eat way too fast now days. That too is one >> reason so many of us are heavier than we should be. > >I think "fast food" rather than "fast eating" is the problem these days. Fat eating adds to the problem because people have a tendency to overeat when they eat so fast. Their body doesn't have a chance to tell them they are full. I have heard more than one dietician say the same thing. The job I had only allowed 30 minutes to get your lunch, eat it and be ready to get back to work. Thirty minutes isn't enough time to fully enjoy a meal even if it were setting on the table ready to eat at the beginning of the time. But then I always have been a very slow eater. No one ever had to tell me to chew each bite twenty-five times. I just always have. Eating to me is a very sensual experience when done slowly with my lovely wife, Laurie. Sensual, not sexual that is. Of course if it is a good meal with good music and mood lighting in our dining room it may lead to a wonderful no carb desert. ;-) -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. >>>>from the first bite of your meal >>> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > oh, plu-ease! "sensual"? food is "food". Unless it's chocolate. :) (Get a room) dave >>>>>from the first bite of your meal >>>> [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > >dave See Dave, I just knew you'd get the word sensual confused with the word sexual. I love all of my senses. Things that are sensual may become sexual, but they are just as interesting when they do not. Life is meant to be enjoyed to its fullest. I love the smell of many things from good food cooking to most flowers and herbs to the sent of my wife's skin. I feel the same way about touch, taste, hearing and sight. Our senses can be as interesting as we allow them to be. OTOH, when Scooter our basset pretends to be asleep and pollutes the air I wish I didn't have such a sensitive sense of smell. ;-( -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. >>>>>>from the first bite of your meal >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] > > Next thing, you'll be telling us you like to watch Oprah. Dave >>>>>>>from the first bite of your meal >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > >Dave LOL That is a good one Dave. To answer you question - maybe once every three months I will watch about five minutes of it just to remind me why I don't watch her. Love her - don't like her show. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. <snip> >> See Dave, I just knew you'd get the word sensual confused with the >> word sexual. I love all of my senses. Things that are sensual may [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> didn't have such a sensitive sense of smell. ;-( >> -- <snip> >Next thing, you'll be telling us you like to watch Oprah. > >Dave Hi guys. There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: <snip> In case you missed it, here it is again: <snip> It's free, and can be used as often as you like. No need for thanks - it's yours, free of charge. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. >Hi guys. >There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. I am so happy to see that our self-appointed moderator is back and in fine condition. Oops - I snipped his post without using the word for the day. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:21:26 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa Chuck@B4ME.org> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >>Hi guys. >>There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Oops - I snipped his post without using the word for the day. smile when you that chuck. He was only being helpful. SignatureMâck©® Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.diabetic-talk.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ...Theodore Roosevelt (o o) --ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------------- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve." Jesus never hated anyone. >On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:21:26 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa >Chuck@B4ME.org> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >smile when you that chuck. He was only being helpful. I know. How does one express sarcastic humor? A smiley face just doesn't seem to cover it -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:00:09 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa Chuck@B4ME.org> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >>On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:21:26 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa >>Chuck@B4ME.org> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >I know. How does one express sarcastic humor? A smiley face just >doesn't seem to cover it like this ;P sticking your tongue out. SignatureMâck©® Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.diabetic-talk.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ...Theodore Roosevelt (o o) --ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------------- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve." Jesus never hated anyone. >On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:00:09 GMT, Grandpa Chuck <Grandpa >Chuck@B4ME.org> <snip> >>I know. How does one express sarcastic humor? A smiley face just >>doesn't seem to cover it > >like this ;P > >sticking your tongue out. Got it. I wondered if that isn't what that emoticon means. SignatureGrandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ The following information is given with the utmost respect for the armed forces and civilians who have died in the current war in Iraq. According to http://icasualties.org/oif/ The number of Americans killed in Iraq as of Oct 27, 2005 is 2,009. Each star represents one person killed. ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** 500 ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** 1,000 ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** 1,500 ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ********* 2,009 United Kingdom = 97 ************************************************** ********************************************* Other = 102 ************************************************** ************************************************** ** Iraqi civilian deaths are unknown because the Bush administraion doesn't want us to know the totals. >>Hi guys. >>There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Oops - I snipped his post without using the word for the day. Not quite what I mean by "everything in moderation" - but if it makes you feel good, no problem, enjoy. Try something really, really, difficult for 24 hours. You have no idea what a great feeling of accomplishment it will generate. Don't respond to any posts from anyone whose name starts with "A". Then the next day, don't answer any posts from anyone whose name starts with "B. And to make it really wonderful - stay with that phase and letter for the following month. There's another poster here who might want to skip straight to the letter "C". I've been trying this with the letter "T" but I slipped yesterday:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. >>>Hi guys. >>>There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >yesterday:-) >Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. Is it okay if I go straight to "B"? ;-) -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. "Grandpa Chuck" <Grandpa > wrote in message .com... > Is it okay if I go straight to "B"? pretty please............ and ignore it for the rest of usenet history.......... i have B blocked..... i don't want to block Grandpa (remember the rucous it cause because i blocked B because i don't need to listen to that and i'm taking care of myself....... somehow he turned that into me NOT PROVIDING HIM with his needs!!!!!) so......... not only will life get quieter here, you too will be with holding information against B's wishes ! !! >"Grandpa Chuck" <Grandpa > wrote in message >.com... [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >you too will be with holding information against >B's wishes ! !! All was quiet here until a certain "B" had such an overblown ego that they assumed (making an a.s of themselves and me) that something I said absolutely, positively had to be about them. I am going to a gathering of about twenty of my best buds tonight and none of them are named Budd. IOW, B chose to take offense and had apparently been waiting for me to say something, anything that he could start a flame war over. I hadn't had an argument here for awhile so I chose to participate just to keep my senses sharp. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. "Grandpa Chuck" <Grandpa Chuck@B4ME.org> wrote in message ... > All was quiet here until a certain "B" had such an overblown ego that > they assumed (making an a.s of themselves and me) that something I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > had an argument here for awhile so I chose to participate just to keep > my senses sharp. yeah............. so it's all over now? i can look at your posts more closely??? pretty please kate >"Grandpa Chuck" <Grandpa Chuck@B4ME.org> wrote in >message ... [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >kate I would expect so. If I answer him at all, I intend to keep it brief. He puts me in mind of Joe Pyne when he was on the radio, except Joe was much more entertaining. Here are a couple of links with a bit of history of Joe Pyne: http://www.tvparty.com/empyne.html http://broadcastpioneers.50g.com/pyne.html -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. >>There's another poster here who might want to skip straight >>to the letter "C". [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Is it okay if I go straight to "B"? > ;-) It is if you don't leave a whole thread in a message just to post one line. SignatureBeav Reply to "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com" (with the obvious changes) > >>Hi guys. > >>There's a new word out today. Just letting you know: [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > -- > Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. I'll remember not to ask you any questions tomorrow, Alan. ;-) Vicki > See Dave, I just knew you'd get the word sensual confused with the > word sexual. I love all of my senses. Things that are sensual may [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > wife's skin. I feel the same way about touch, taste, hearing and > sight. Food IS very sensual. But I think perhaps only some of us can experience it this way. I am very much into the texture of foods. Some textures don't set well with me. Like peaches and avocados. I love the smell of onions but hate the smell of garlic, or certain things cooking, like cabbage or broccoli. People who wolf their food down don't notice this. I am thinking of the time I made an asparagus cookie for my dad. We used to call him Cookie Monster because he would wolf down whole cookies, seemingly in one bite. We didn't think he could taste them. So after dinner one night, I had some leftover canned asparagus. I make a small amount of plain cookie dough and mashed in the aspargus. Just as expected, the cookie went on his tongue and he swallowed it whole. Thanked me and said it was good. Eek! Another time, we used to get huge cakes where I used to work. We'd have one each month to celebrate whatever birthdays there were and occasionally for other things. The leftovers would sit in the employee lounge until someone ate them all or threw them out. One day there was the remains of a 3 day old chocolate cake that nobody had bothered to cover. Some guy came in, cut a slice of it, began eating it and told me that while it was very stale, he could tell it was a good cake because it had good flavor. He then ate the whole slice and took another. I looked at him aghast and asked him how he could eat it if he knew it was stale! He just shrugged and said, "It's cake!" Some people would call the texture thing, "mouth feel". This is the term they use when adjusting things to make up for something taken out. Such as fat. This is why they often add sugar or other sweeteners to fat free foods. To give them a better feel on the tongue. And this is why most of my attempts at making a gluten free, egg free, dairy free and soy free bread for Angela have failed miserably. Even when the bread "looks" like bread and has a good flavor, the texture is off. I have to add stuff like Xanthan gum to help it hold together due to the lack of gluten. But the Xanthan gum makes it...well...gummy! Yuck! To lessen the gumminess factor, the bread has to be toasted. But since the flours being used come from rice, potatoes, tapicoca, corn, or even beans, the bread doesn't get a toasty flavor or take on a toasty color like wheat bread would. So it's pretty disappointing. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm > > Our senses can be as interesting as we allow them to be. OTOH, when [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Love is giving all with no conditions. > Love is expecting nothing in return. >> See Dave, I just knew you'd get the word sensual confused with the >> word sexual. I love all of my senses. Things that are sensual may [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >flavor or take on a toasty color like wheat bread would. So it's pretty >disappointing. My second full time job was in a private milk laboratory where one of the things we did was make cultures for cheese factories. It was there that I learned the proper way to eat cottage cheese in order to get the most true taste from it. I doubt if there are very many people that know or do this. If fact I don't usually do it anymore. To get the most flavor from cottage cheese you mash it with your tongue against the roof of our mouth, then move it around before swallowing. OTOH, I am one of these weird people that chew things like Jello, puddings and ice cream. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. >>See Dave, I just knew you'd get the word sensual confused with the >>word sexual. I love all of my senses. Things that are sensual may [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > flavor or take on a toasty color like wheat bread would. So it's pretty > disappointing. People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [I'm joking. sigh. every time I write something w/o a smiley everyone takes me literally. ] Dave "David" <David@invalid.com> wrote in message ... > People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. > And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Dave that's what a smiley does Dave......... it's called COMMUNICATION....... As Roseanne Barr used to say quite often. "People who like sex better than food, never were able to afford good food." ;-) -- Cheri David wrote in message ... >People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Dave <snip according to Alan's instructions - LOL ) >People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >And they tend to abuse themselves with it. Not really. We actually eat more slowly and thus usually eat less. It doesn't take as much to satiate our appetite. Up till age 41 I used to try to overeat in a vain effort to gain weight. Then my metabolism changed or some such thing. When I finally went over 130 pounds and hit 140 I was very pleased. When I went over 150 I was delighted. When I went past 160 I thought, 'well that's alright, I was underweight most of my life.' This all took about five years. Then I quit smoking and my doctor said, "You are going to gain 20-25 pounds more, but that is better than smoking. We'll talk about that after you have been off the cigarettes for over two years." When I finally settled at a weight that fluctuated between 205 and 210 I still really felt good unless I tried to bend way over. My head would look like the bulb of a thermometer with red liquid then. My highest weight was 217 after a very long, cold winter and no one had to tell me that was way too much. Now I am at 193 and just trying to hold there and hopefully keep losing slowly. You know; the same way I put it on. >[I'm joking. sigh. every time I write something w/o a smiley everyone >takes me literally. ] No! Wouldn't happen. ;-) But then I thought you just wrote "literarily." >Dave -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. >People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Dave Whipped with wet noodles? I'm getting too old - I immediately thought of a book whose name I can't remember and unspeakable things done with offal...Portnoy's? Peyton? No matter. Try adding the smileys - you're obviously too subtle for us:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > >People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. > >And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > -- > Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. "Portnoy's Complaint"? An absolutely hilarious read. Mama was making schmaltz from the chicken fat. Can't remember the author, I was very young when I read it. Vicki >> >People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >> >And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Vicki Philip Roth. Great writer. c >>People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >>And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. I feel like when I add a smiley it's the same as turning on the laugh sign in a studio so the audience will respond to the comedian... Dave >>>People who find food "sensual" have too cozy a relationship with it. >>>And they tend to abuse themselves with it. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Dave With so many cultures here seperated by a common language, it's occasionally necessary. Out here there are many different ways to say "You silly bastard!" to the man beside you at the bar in a pub - and only a couple that would lead to lost teeth. But we can't see the smile or hear the tone of voice or inflections on the net. With a smiley, at least we can see the smile. I found out early in my exposure to usenet that dry ironic Oz humour tends to have a high "whoosh" factor and often led to anger and misunderstandings. Americans, in particular, took things so literally and seriously. I would say something I assumed would obviously be read as a joke - and back would come high dudgeon and recriminations. When you, as an American, use irony it is so unexpected it whooshes past me as well, until I get to know a poster like you or Chris J. And there seem to be so many taboos. I can still remember the incredible nonsense when Pete, a Brit, used "goddamit!" here. So I add smileys:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > this way. I am very much into the texture of foods. Some textures don't > set well with me. Like peaches and avocados. I love the smell of onions Don't think I have any problem with any particular texture, but I don't care for crunchy mixed with soft, e.g., celery in potato salad. > time I made an asparagus cookie for my dad. We used to call him Cookie > Monster because he would wolf down whole cookies, seemingly in one bite. We > didn't think he could taste them. So after dinner one night, I had some > leftover canned asparagus. I make a small amount of plain cookie dough and > mashed in the aspargus. Just as expected, the cookie went on his tongue and > he swallowed it whole. Thanked me and said it was good. Eek! Maybe it was. Did you taste it? I have had avocado ice cream in the Philippines. Weird, but with all the cream and sugar, it really did not taste like avocado in the least. > Some people would call the texture thing, "mouth feel". This is the term > ........... Even when the bread "looks" like bread > and has a good flavor, the texture is off. I have to add stuff like Xanthan > gum to help it hold together due to the lack of gluten. But the Xanthan > gum makes it...well...gummy! Yuck! To lessen the gumminess factor, the I've noticed that many of the sweet things I used to like but have avoided since diagnosis (doughnuts, cookies, etc.) when I do indulge, make my mouth feel like I just smeared lard or shortening all over my tongue. Blecch! Wasn't like that before, and I don't think the recipes all changed. SignatureWes Groleau "Grant me the serenity to accept those I cannot change; the courage to change the one I can; and the wisdom to know it's me." -- unknown > > this way. I am very much into the texture of foods. Some textures don't > > set well with me. Like peaches and avocados. I love the smell of onions > > Don't think I have any problem with any particular texture, > but I don't care for crunchy mixed with soft, e.g., celery > in potato salad. That doesn't bother me. > > time I made an asparagus cookie for my dad. We used to call him Cookie > > Monster because he would wolf down whole cookies, seemingly in one bite. We [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Weird, but with all the cream and sugar, it really > did not taste like avocado in the least. No. Don't like cookies or asparagus. > > Some people would call the texture thing, "mouth feel". This is the term > > ........... Even when the bread "looks" like bread [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > lard or shortening all over my tongue. Blecch! Wasn't > like that before, and I don't think the recipes all changed. Hmmm... I've never liked fried foods for that reason. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm > FIVE MINUTES??? > People in this country eat way too fast now days. That too is one > reason so many of us are heavier than we should be. One way to train yourself to eat more slowly is to get your food blazing hot. Trouble is I can't pronounce my fricatives because my tongle is swollen. Granpa Chuck: You are 300% right. We do not eat. we gulp! Freddy >Granpa Chuck: You are 300% right. >We do not eat. we gulp! > >Freddy Now that is funny Freddy - far too true, but still funny. Thank you for the laugh. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. I don't eat breakfast in 5 minutes. More like 20-25. But then I'm eating some of those "nasty carbs" -- fruit & hi-fiber cereal -- which take time to eat. Reading the paper with it also slows me down. bj > from the first bite of your meal > > actually it's not hugely important as long as you > are consistent......... but does it take you 5 min > to eat dinner as does breakfast? > I don't eat breakfast in 5 minutes. More like 20-25. But then I'm eating > some of those "nasty carbs" -- fruit & hi-fiber cereal -- which take time > to eat. Reading the paper with it also slows me down. I generally eat just cottage cheese or maybe an egg. Takes me longer than 5 minutes to eat that! I hate eating in a hurry. Some mornings I've put off eating my breakfast until after I get Angela to the bus so I don't have to rush and eat it. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >Hey > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Nirvana It doesn't make much difference, but the standard seems to be two hours after the first bite of food or sip of whatever you are drinking with the meal. BTW, there are no stupid questions. Tis better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. > Hey > > When I am testing 2 hours after meals, Do I start the clock when I begin a > meal or after I am done? > > Thanks. Everyone's previous advise has been very helpful I test when I am done eating. Depending on what I am eating, it can take me well over an hour to finish a meal. I'm a very slow eater. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm > Hey > > When I am testing 2 hours after meals, Do I start the clock when I begin a > meal or after I am done? Do you think it REALLY matters to that degree? Well of course it doesn't. You test to get information on TRENDS, as much (if not more) "right this second" information, so 10/15/20 minutes either way is MORE than good enough. It also doesn't make much difference if you inject before or after the meal either, so long as it doesn't take you two hours to eat that is. SignatureBeav Reply to "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com" (with the obvious changes) >Hey > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Nirvana Not a stupid question at all. I'm different - I time from the last bite. What's more important is finding YOUR personal peak post-prandial spike timing. To do that, for a couple of meals, try a concentrated effort. It doesn't matter whether you time from starting or finishing eating - but then do a test every 30 minutes - 30, 60, 90, 120. I think you'll find your peak is not at 120 (some are, but not many). You'll only need to do it a few times for each main meal (breakfast, lunch, dinner) before your peak time becomes clear to you. It may be slightly different for each meal. Mine is generally one hour after eating. Then, you only really need to test at that time; I only bother with a later test if the one-hour is odd. Similarly, I don't bother any more with pre-meal tests (except fasting) because they have become predictable for me. It's like an investment. The more tests you do in the early days to gather knowledge, the fewer you'll need to do eventually to maintain good control. But first, you must test, test, test to get that knowledge. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > From: Alan S <loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> > Organization: self [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > eventually to maintain good control. But first, you must > test, test, test to get that knowledge. Alan, your experience is like mine. I test one hour from the last bite, again in two hours if it runs too high. My peak is one hour after breakfast, even if I eat a high protein breakfast. I get carryover from last night's dinner which, oddly enough, does not show up yet in a fasting test. I have to have eaten something first. I have an occasional high one hour after lunch, an even more occasional high one hour after dinner. But it always comes down again two hours after the last bite - generally way down. Like you, I don't bother with pre-meal testing at this point. It is always very low, below 100. Donna Evleth > Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. > Alan, your experience is like mine. I test one hour from the last bite, > again in two hours if it runs too high. My peak is one hour after > breakfast, even if I eat a high protein breakfast. I get carryover from > last night's dinner which, oddly enough, does not show up yet in a fasting > test. I have to have eaten something first. Higher insulin resistance in the morning, that incretin effect thing someone was talking about is supposed to help that. SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes This post not CC'd by email On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 21:03:53 GMT, "Nirvana" <dcalaniz@verizon.net> wrote: >Hey > >When I am testing 2 hours after meals, Do I start the clock when I begin a >meal or after I am done? Dunno ... your secret is safe with you. <grin> Internet hasn't yet evolved to the point where we can see what you do. Frankly I can't imagine clock watching while eating a leisurely meal. As far as health goes, enjoying good conversation and things other than food might such as the company of others might well be more important than whatever gains there are from clock watching. G'day G'day Nirvana, OK, on a more serious note I believe the official timing used by researchers is from the first bite. Sometimes they do a whole area under the curve. Sometimes they only focus on the two hour reading. There is some rationale behind their using the two hour reading. With non-diabetics blood glucose has to all intents and purposes returned to fasting levels. With T2 diabetics it hasn't. Doing a two hour readings gives a measure of diabetic vs non-diabetic response. Best wishes, SignatureQuentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin >There is some rationale behind their using the two hour reading. With >non-diabetics blood glucose has to all intents and purposes returned >to fasting levels. With T2 diabetics it hasn't. Doing a two hour >readings gives a measure of diabetic vs non-diabetic response. Quentin, is there any chance this could be a YMMV issue? The reason I ask is that my two hour PP is almost always at or below my morning FBG, or has been for the past couple of months at least. The only exception I can think of would be the time I tested dreamfields pasta. > Quentin, is there any chance this could be a YMMV issue? The reason I > ask is that my two hour PP is almost always at or below my morning > FBG, or has been for the past couple of months at least. The only > exception I can think of would be the time I tested dreamfields pasta. Maybe because you are so low carb. I think I eat more carbs than you, sometimes I'm back down to my normal in two hours, sometimes I'm not. SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes >> Quentin, is there any chance this could be a YMMV issue? The reason I >> ask is that my two hour PP is almost always at or below my morning [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Maybe because you are so low carb. I think I eat more carbs than you, >sometimes I'm back down to my normal in two hours, sometimes I'm not. Hmmm... That could be... But, I do recall that when I've spiked due to accidentally eating a large amount of carbs, I was back to normal at 2hrs.. On the other hand, I did go running to get the BG down, so I have no idea what it would have been without exercise. I've been experimenting with more carbs lately, up to 40 per meal as a test, but whole grains. So far, I'm down below 100 at two hours. However, it's certainly true I'm not eating "normally", so that's probably a big factor as you say. It's not as if I am eating a big mac, fries, and coke then returning to under 100! > Hey > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Nirvana you are right. it is a stupid question. I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an atomic clock from the moment your first bite meets your mouth, or when you put down your fork? You'll get different readings from the same meter, even if you take them 2 minutes apart, so why do you think a few minutes one way or the other will affect your control?? This is not a disease that responds well to micro manipulation. STRIVE for good control, but don't send yourself crazy with minute by minute differences. Dave > I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several > courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an > atomic clock from the moment your first bite meets your mouth, or when you > put down your fork? And some of us take 20-30-40 minutes or more for a meal, even at home. I know I do. Does your mother approve of your gobbling your food??? :) bj > > I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several > > courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Does your mother approve of your gobbling your food??? > :) Eating fast is also a good way to eat too much. When one eats more slowly one has a chance to notice that one is sated before one's finished cleaning one's plate. Priscilla > Eating fast is also a good way to eat too much. When one eats more > slowly one has a chance to notice that one is sated before one's > finished cleaning one's plate. > > Priscilla not piling on a ton of food in the first place is another way to avoid overeating. or having seconds or thirds. the point i was making was that it doesn't really matter if you check from the second you begin your salad or the time you pay the check. meter variations and food variations will all impact the reading one get's at the "two hour" mark. Dave >> I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several >>courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > :) > bj if it takes you 40 minutes to eat a meal, you are eating WAY TOO MUCH! dave >>> I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several >>>courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >dave A good dinner with my wife and friends takes at least an hour and none of us overeat at all. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. >>>> I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several >>>>courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > that's not "dinner". that's a dinner PARTY. >>>>> I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several >>>>>courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >> >that's not "dinner". that's a dinner PARTY. Okay, but when it is just Laurie and I in a restaurant it normally takes us at least forty five minutes. Here at home lunch usually takes us over half an hour from the time we set down until we get up to clear the dishes. Like I said before, I eat very slowly on purpose. Also, meal time is also a wonderful time for conversation. Laurie has learned to do the same thing. She used to be completely done with her meal while my plate was still half full. Then she learned to relax and enjoy her food. Another thing I have always done is that I do not take a single bite of anything until everything is arranged on my plate, any side dishes and if we are having bread it is buttered. I hate the whole idea of "digging in" before everything is ready or like someone who is half starved. I put my fork or spoon down between bites rather than let it hover over the dish or worst yet have it already filled with the next bite. It has been proven that if you lay your fork down between bites you will automatically eat less. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. <snip> (this was a demonstration) >if it takes you 40 minutes to eat a meal, you are eating WAY TOO MUCH! > >dave Or, like me, you talk too much as you savour your food and sip your wine. And keep your BGs from spiking. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > Or, like me, you talk too much as you savour your food and > sip your wine. > > And keep your BGs from spiking. Heh. My family often makes forking motions to their mouths then they shout, "Shut up and eat!" SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >> Or, like me, you talk too much as you savour your food and >> sip your wine. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Heh. My family often makes forking motions to their mouths then they shout, >"Shut up and eat!" How the heck can you enjoy a meal with that going on? -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. > How the heck can you enjoy a meal with that going on? They don't start making me hurry until after about an hour has passed. And then they can't stand it any more. So I do get to enjoy that first hour! SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >> How the heck can you enjoy a meal with that going on? > >They don't start making me hurry until after about an hour has passed. And >then they can't stand it any more. So I do get to enjoy that first hour! My oldest aunt used to delay or purpose and say, "I'll clean the table off when I'm done. You all just go in the living room." Well, she did that because she would eat everything that was left on the plates before taking them to the kitchen. She was one of the lucky ones who was never overweight and could eat anything she wanted to. She died at age 91 and still had all of her teeth including her wisdom teeth. She was quite a woman and is missed by many. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. >>> I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several >>>courses at a restaurant. do you really think it matters if you start an [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >dave or they actually enjoy a slow casual meal over conversation. you know, some people do enjoy each others company. SignatureMâck©® Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.diabetic-talk.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ...Theodore Roosevelt (o o) --ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------------- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve." Jesus never hated anyone. >> Hey >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >you are right. it is a stupid question. I eat most meals in less than >10 minutes, Why? Most doctors would tell you that is not good for you at all. Do you even take time to chew? LOL > unless I'm eating several courses at a restaurant. do you >really think it matters if you start an atomic clock from the moment >your first bite meets your mouth, or when you put down your fork? Probably doesn't, but some people are obsessive about it. I don't really care. If I think of it and I want to test at the exact two hour mark I click on the countdown timer on my watch. Otherwise I will casually look at the time and recheck somewhere around the two hour mark if I have eaten something that I think might spike me. >You'll get different readings from the same meter, even if you take them >2 minutes apart, so why do you think a few minutes one way or the other [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >for good control, but don't send yourself crazy with minute by minute >differences. I agree completely Dave. The stress of worrying about micro managing will probably have a detrimental effect on BG readings as does any stress. >Dave -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. > you are right. it is a stupid question. That's not very nice! >I eat most meals in less than 10 minutes, unless I'm eating several courses at a restaurant. Well, we can't help it if you wolf down your food. Doesn't mean we're all Hoovers. >do you really think it matters if you start an atomic clock from the moment > your first bite meets your mouth, or when you put down your fork? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > for good control, but don't send yourself crazy with minute by minute > differences. Actually for those of us with type 2, it can require micro manipulation. I remember eating Cheeze-Its crackers for breakfast during one cross country move. 7 of those tiny little crackers provided me with enough carbs, protein and fat to keep my numbers within range and stable until lunch. Not enough to make it a satisfying meal mind you, but doable. If you've ever seen those crackers, you'll know how tiny they are. By trial and error, I discovered that I had to eat 7 of them. If I ate 6, I could have a hypo before lunch. If I ate 8, I spiked. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >>you are right. it is a stupid question. > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > discovered that I had to eat 7 of them. If I ate 6, I could have a hypo > before lunch. If I ate 8, I spiked. spiked? to what? some micro-mangers on this NG think 145 is a "spike". gimme a frickin' break. Dave > spiked? to what? some micro-mangers on this NG think 145 is a "spike". > gimme a frickin' break. 145 is not a spike. Let's say I woke up at around 112. If I go from 112 to 218 without eating what I would call a large amount of carbs, I'd call that a spike. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >>spiked? to what? some micro-mangers on this NG think 145 is a "spike". >> gimme a frickin' break. > > 145 is not a spike. Let's say I woke up at around 112. If I go from 112 to > 218 without eating what I would call a large amount of carbs, I'd call that > a spike. 218 is a spike eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. what's your point?? dave >218 is a spike >eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. I can go from 100 FBG to over 200 with nothing to eat at all. I could believe that someone is sensitive enough to spike from one extra cracker. >>218 is a spike >>eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. > >I can go from 100 FBG to over 200 with nothing to eat at all. That is called a liver dump and usually is brought on by not eating or by eating too little too late. > I could >believe that someone is sensitive enough to spike from one extra >cracker. -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. > >>218 is a spike > >>eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That is called a liver dump and usually is brought on by not eating or > by eating too little too late. <snip> It could be. But the problem I am currently having is figuring out once again how many carbs I can eat. I seem to go in phases where I can safely eat a certain meal or food for some time and then suddenly it no longer works. I find that if I eat too little in the way of carbs, my BG goes too high. But just a tiny bite or two too much shoots me way higher too. It's not like the old days where I'd maybe get another 10 points higher from an extra slice of bread. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm All I know is that 100 calories will raise my blood sugar about 100 points For me it will takes two and a half units of humalog to correct it There is little difference as to the type of food except the timing. Due to my condition it is very easy to measure and very repeatable. at any blood sugar level. I measure --no speculation, Cracker vary in calorie content from about 40 to 100 calories. So I expect to see these rises. People vary a lot and it hard to measure for many. Unfortunately, I have no response to low blood glucose levels so no natural glucose release to cloud the issue.. I do get a glucose release (liver dump) when I drop below a basal insulin level pr do very hard work. It is a gross release. It takes time and effort to find these parameters. Guy It is NOT a stupid question , We need more of these on topic type. >> >>218 is a spike >> >>eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >not like the old days where I'd maybe get another 10 points higher from an >extra slice of bread. >All I know is that 100 calories will raise my >blood sugar about 100 points Calories? What do calories have to do with BG? <snipperuni> -- Grandpa Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle, and twice the brightness can then be shared by all. Love is giving all with no conditions. Love is expecting nothing in return. A religious person is trying to avoid hell; a spiritual person has already been there. >>All I know is that 100 calories will raise my >>blood sugar about 100 points > >Calories? What do calories have to do with BG? Guy is type 1 and has repeatedly mentioned that for him, calories directly affect his BGs, not carbs. YMMV must apply, because he's the only person of either type I've ever heard of that that applies to. Many type 1's have noted that they must allow for protein, but not just on a simple calories basis and certainly none have mentioned an allowance for fats. But it seems to work for Guy. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > 218 is a spike > eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. Well, for me it can. > what's your point?? That is my point. YMMV. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >>218 is a spike >>eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That is my point. YMMV. ONE little cracker will cause a spike of over 100 points? C'mon! Maybe ALL the crackers, or you were going up from something else, at the time... Dave > ONE little cracker will cause a spike of over 100 points? C'mon! Maybe > ALL the crackers, or you were going up from something else, at the time... You are type 1, are you not? I'm type 2. That could be the difference. Recently I've been having spikes of 100 points or more from eating anywhere from 5-10 grams of carbs in the form of cottage cheese, eggs, and maybe the addition of some non-starchy vegetables. Nothing more. Damned annoying when I can't even eat that! SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >>>218 is a spike >>>eating ONE extra cracker will not cause a 218 reading. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Dave Hi Dave Not a cracker, and not 100 points, but I have had some startling rises from tiny serves. In the post-meeting chat after a recent diabetes support meeting, I ate a tiny (1" square, 1/2" thick) piece of fruit cake. The lady who brought it assured me that it was "sugar-free" - I didn't argue, but it was chock-full of dried fruits. Tasted lovely:-) My starting BGs in mid-afternoon are consistently and predictably around 4.6(83). An hour after that fruit-cake I was 8.4(151), a rise of nearly 70 points. I ate nothing else, and I didn't do any exercise in between. This was before I started on metformin. Some foods with some of us have an effect way beyond their portion size. Maybe there was something in that cake that triggered a liver dump, I don't know, but a similar thing had happened last Christmas with the fruit cake then - and I just put it down to the Christmas overload. I've learnt my lesson. No more fruit cake for me. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. <snip> > Some foods with some of us have an effect way beyond their > portion size. Maybe there was something in that cake that > triggered a liver dump, I don't know, but a similar thing > had happened last Christmas with the fruit cake then - and I > just put it down to the Christmas overload. I've learnt my > lesson. No more fruit cake for me. I had a problem today after lunch. Woke up at 166. Ate not quite 1/2 cup of cottage cheese and 2 small sausages. Total of 5g of carbs for that meal. Have been eating as few carbs as possible for lunch, the that isn't working for me and only seems to cause higher numbers. So I ate part of a turkey sandwich I bought for my husband (but he didn't eat). I bought it at a store that sells organic foods and is very good to label everything with ingredients and such. It was a small sandwich, not one of those huge deli ones. It was cut in two pieces, but they were not equal. I took the smaller "1/2", then took the lettuce, cheese and turkey from the other part and made a thick, tiny sandwich. I'd estimate an ounce of Swiss cheese and 2-3 ounces of turkey. The bread was not overly thick, so I'd estimate it at 15g if that. There was a little mayo on the sandwich. I also ate part of a yellow pepper (about 1/2 of a smallish one) and 1 1/2 stalks of celery. I would have eaten more but it tasted really bitter. After that, I was active. Went to Angela's school for the Halloween parade and party. Her classroom is about as far from the parking as it can be. Not a lot of walking, perhaps, but a lot for me. The distance is so far that I have to stop several times on the way there and back. Can't walk very well or very far because I am disabled. Went to the grocery store after that and raced home to put away the food. Tested at 2 hours after lunch at 256! Yes, I know I didn't test before I ate or after breakfast. But since I am limited to 3 strips per day, I can't do as much testing as I need to right now. Just makes no sense to me that I could have gone up almost 100 points for that small amount of carbs. And I've been finding that if I eat less carbs than that, my numbers rise even higher. Oddly, I am doing better with and after dinner. I can't eat as many carbs with dinner as I was before, but I can safely handle a serving or two, depending on my numbers prior to eating. Perhaps this is because I take slightly more meds with dinner than with breakfast. I don't know. By bedtime, my BG has usually dropped back to about 110. My morning reading seems to depend on what I eat before bed. If I eat popcorn or high protein pretzels and cheese, then I wake around 110 or slightly higher. But better than I had been running prior in the morning. Last night I had some corn chips with cheese. That apparently doesn't work for me. *sigh* I know I've been sick and now I feel like I am coming down with a cold. I just don't understand this shift in BG. Used to be my morning fasting was the highest number. Now it is after lunch. And I can't explain the rise after breakfast. Doesn't seem to matter what I eat, be it cottage cheese, sausage or eggs. BG still shoots up too high. And if I add any more carbs to that in any form, it shoots up higher still. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm ><snip> > [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >cheese, sausage or eggs. BG still shoots up too high. And if I add any >more carbs to that in any form, it shoots up higher still. Sounds like you are a candidate for thinking about using insulin since quite high fastings. You sound like me sometimes, no matter what I eat, I just explode. Since we T2's have IR, and it varies with each second of the day, trying to use the correct amount of insulin for a given condition is just a guess. All that extra insulin adds weight on to your behind. Since you can't exercise adequately to burn off the BG's, insulin in the most logical solution to maintain normal level BG's for you. Talk to your doctor about it. If you decide to use insulin, use the newer 31 gage syringes with the 5/16" long needles. I can get 10 uses out of each 31g syringe, whereby I could get only 4 uses out of 28 gage and 30 gage syringes. _____________________________________________ http://wave.prohosting.com/ugleeeee/ Health Diabetic Software - Free > Sounds like you are a candidate for thinking about using insulin since > quite high fastings. You sound like me sometimes, no matter what I [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > needles. I can get 10 uses out of each 31g syringe, whereby I could > get only 4 uses out of 28 gage and 30 gage syringes. My morning fasting number has been coming down, on most days. I highly doubt that the Dr. would put me on insulin since I've been tested and I already produce a ton of insulin. He did mention Byetta but only if my A1C is over 7. I have a cold now. I think all these illnesses I've been having are the problem with my BG. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message