 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / April 2006Hypoglycemia Unawareness
http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp "Hypoglycemia Unawareness Some people have no symptoms of hypoglycemia. They may lose consciousness without ever knowing their blood glucose levels were dropping. This problem is called hypoglycemia unawareness. Hypoglycemia unawareness tends to happen to people who have had diabetes for many years. Hypoglycemia unawareness does not happen to everyone. It is more likely in people who have neuropathy (nerve damage), people on tight glucose control, and people who take certain heart or high blood pressure medicines. As the years go by, many people continue to have symptoms of hypoglycemia, but the symptoms change. In this case, someone may not recognize a reaction because it feels different. These changes are good reason to check your blood glucose often, and to alert your friends and family to your symptoms of hypoglycemia. Treat low or dropping sugar levels even if you feel fine. And tell your team if your blood glucose ever drops below 50 mg/dl without any symptoms." http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/neuropathies/ "Autonomic Neuropathy Autonomic neuropathy causes changes in digestion, bowel and bladder function, sexual response, and perspiration. It can also affect the nerves that serve the heart and control blood pressure. Autonomic neuropathy can also cause hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) unawareness, a condition in which people no longer experience the warning signs of hypoglycemia." http://www.diabetesselfmanagement.com/article.cfm?sid=2&tid=52&aid=925&sk=9AAG "Hypoglycemia unawareness can also result from the use of certain types of insulin. Longer-acting insulins, such as NPH and Lente, can have such a prolonged effect and can cause blood sugar levels to fall so slowly that the response mechanism is not triggered, even if the blood sugar level becomes quite low. It is almost always the rate of fall of blood sugar level that triggers awareness, not the blood sugar level itself." > http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp > "Hypoglycemia Unawareness [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > blood sugar level that triggers awareness, not the blood > sugar level itself." You quoted 3 items I agree with completely. There's a glimmer of hope for you yet! Dave >> http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp >> "Hypoglycemia Unawareness [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >> which people no longer experience the warning signs of >> hypoglycemia." http://www.diabetesselfmanagement.com/article.cfm?sid=2&tid=52&aid=925&sk=9AAG >> "Hypoglycemia unawareness can also result from the use of >> certain types of insulin. Longer-acting insulins, such as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You quoted 3 items I agree with completely. There's a glimmer of hope > for you yet! It's been a while since we discussed this topic. I hope people jump in. > http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp > "Hypoglycemia Unawareness [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Hypoglycemia unawareness tends to happen to people who have > had diabetes for many years. I've been type I for a quarter-century now. For the first fifteen years or so, the adrenalin rush/shakiness was an almost 100% guaranteed symptom. And it was usually the first symptom, happening at a blood glucose of 60 or 65 or so. Now it's not 100% guaranteed anymore. More often the first symptom's a unpinnable sense of mental fuzziness that a quick check with a meter coincides with a blood glucose of 60. I don't think it's the case that I've gotten better at sensing the fuzziness over the years. The adrenalin rush/shakiness just doesn't come first or at all anymore. > As the years go by, many people continue to have symptoms of > hypoglycemia, but the symptoms change. In this case, > someone may not recognize a reaction because it feels > different. I still seem to often wake up in the middle of the night if I go below 60, at least most of the time. There have been two ER trips for hypoglycemia in 25 years. One involved glucagon they gave me in the ambulance. Glucagon is NOT FUN STUFF. I was completely nauseated for half a day by that stuff. By the next day I was pretty much back to normal. Obviously I wasn't given a lot of choice in what they administered, but a glucose drip was much less traumatic. > "Hypoglycemia unawareness can also result from the use of > certain types of insulin. Longer-acting insulins, such as [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > blood sugar level that triggers awareness, not the blood > sugar level itself." The "rapid drop" symptoms for me have never been identical to "low glucose" symptoms, although there are some similarities. For me, rapid is (say) 400 to 150 in an hour or two. Part of the difference may be that I'm still feeling the hyperglycemia symptoms at the same time. Just to give a scale: 4 shots a day for the past 15 years. A1C's in the high 5's for most of the past 20 years. (I don't think they measured it for the first 5 years or so.) "Target" pre-meal range is 80 to 100 or so, but realistically will be 60 to 140 unless everything is running on rails. Post-meal spikes commonly in the 200's for most of the time, but not so big lately because of Humalog. "Bad days" (say, when I have a flu/fever or forget to take a shot or miss a meal and then way overcompensate) might see me bounce between 500 and 40. - on several occasions when I was sick my bg's have been too high for a meter to read (most meters seem to stop at 500 or 800). I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd love it (and consider myself "cured") if those were an extreme number for me. Tim. > I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks > whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd > love it (and consider myself "cured") if those were an extreme number > for me. What's so difficult about the idea that T1's and T2's are different kinds of disorders with different problems, different treatment regimes, and that what may be an extreme value for a T2 may not be extreme for a T1?  SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks >>whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > regimes, and that what may be an extreme value for a T2 may not be > extreme for a T1? The definition of extreme is at the heart of the argument, Chris. Being 130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are! I don't care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers are not a big deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. Dave >>>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks >>>whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd >>>love it (and consider myself "cured") if those were an extreme number >>>for me. >> What's so difficult about the idea that T1's and T2's are different >> kinds of disorders with different problems, different treatment >> regimes, and that what may be an extreme value for a T2 may not be >> extreme for a T1? > The definition of extreme is at the heart of the argument, Chris. Being > 130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are! I don't > care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers are not a big > deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. Only if other things are equal, which they may not be. For example, a snapshot measurement tells you nothing about the dynamics, which matter. It tells you nothing about the levels of various other hormones, which may matter. It may also be the case that someone is suffering from another medical problem, and a BG of 130 is, in that specific case, a marker of something else more important going wrong. Your problem is that you think in black and white stereotypes. You said "130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are!" It's true that generally speaking it's not an extreme number. It's most certainly not true that it is *always* not an extreme number in *all* possible medical conditions. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >>>>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks >>>>whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > most certainly not true that it is *always* not an extreme number in > *all* possible medical conditions. I don't have a "problem", Chris. You are nitpicking, as usual. Please grow up. Dave >>>>>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks >>>>>whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> most certainly not true that it is *always* not an extreme number in >> *all* possible medical conditions. > I don't have a "problem", Chris. You are nitpicking, as usual. Please > grow up. Being grown up has never looked like a lot of fun to me. In any case, having become a pensioner without having grown up, I think it's too late now to be worth bothering to try :-) SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >>I don't have a "problem", Chris. You are nitpicking, as usual. Please >>grow up. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > :) I like a guy with a sense of humor! Dave > >>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see folks > >>whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big deal. I'd [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers are not a big > deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. Perhaps because T2's are striving for that area where complications are less common. For example, if you look at a graph from the DCCT (admittedly a type 1 trial, but the same would go for type 2's in this instance) on retinopathy you will notice a sharp rise in the incidence of retinopathy from an A1c of 6.0. which is an "average" bg of 136. 6.0 is about the uppermost limit for non diabetics at a lot of labs. As most type 2's are capable of achieving a non diabetic A1c then it seems logical to heed the results of such a lengthy trial. Under 6.0 A1c is a good place to be. There has been more and more information coming out of trials that are showing that diabetic complications are appearing in lower bg numbers than once thought. >>>>I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David > [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > showing that diabetic complications are appearing in lower > bg numbers than once thought. Lower is always better, unless it results in debilitating hypos, no question. bg's of 130 and 140 for several hours a day, when combined with lower bgs the rest of the time will NOT result in an A1c over 6.0. that's why we are arguing--you have misconstrued my earlier comments about 130 and 140. I wasn't talking about a 24/7 AVERAGE by. I was talking about PEAKS. Like I said before, those peaks are no big deal. Dave "David" <David@invalid.com> wrote in message > Lower is always better, unless it results in debilitating hypos, no > question. bg's of 130 and 140 for several hours a day, when combined > with lower bgs the rest of the time will NOT result in an A1c over 6.0. > that's why we are arguing--you have misconstrued my earlier comments > about 130 and 140. I wasn't talking about a 24/7 AVERAGE by. I was > talking about PEAKS. Like I said before, those peaks are no big deal. Type 2 peaks are often longer lasting though. With insulin resistance and not knowing just how many remaining/functioning beta cells we have, spikes are better prevented. Our natural insulin can't cope with bringing down highs in a hurry unless we are still prone to RH, which is not an ideal way to treat higher numbers IMO. But on the other hand I wouldn't like to live with the roller coaster effect either. > "David" <David@invalid.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > other hand I wouldn't like to live with the roller coaster > effect either. OK, if that's the case (long peaks), then I understand where you are coming from. The time frame of the 130's and 140's wasn't qualified earlier, to the best of my recollection. Thanks for shedding some additional info on that. dave >> "David" <David@invalid.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > >dave hence the difference between a type 1 and a type 2. something you always fail to acknowledge when disparaging type 2s. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >The definition of extreme is at the heart of the argument, Chris. Being >130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are! I don't >care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers are not a big >deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. I think that's right. The question is, why do the Type 2's (at least the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? >On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think >it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? Maybe they do. Unfortunately, for me that's impossible. I've been abnormal all my life;-) But I don't think that's a bad aim. To have "normal" health. Whatever normal is. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 2x500mg SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. >Maybe they do. Unfortunately, for me that's impossible. I've >been abnormal all my life;-) > >But I don't think that's a bad aim. To have "normal" health. >Whatever normal is. I was a college student when I was first diagnosed, more than 40 years ago. Up to that point, I had been in perfect health. The news devastated me. I remember going to my English professor, a relatively young lady but wise beyond her years, to explain my absence from her classes. She told me something I'll never forget -- that *everyone* has something or other wrong with them. The difference lies in how well they deal with it. She told me something I'll never forget -- that *everyone* > has something or other wrong with them. The difference lies in how > well they deal with it. well said. make lemonade when you've got lemons on hand. dave And make it sugar free lemonade. :-) -- Cheri "I have learned that making a living, is not the same thing as making a life."... Maya Angelou >well said. make lemonade when you've got lemons on hand. > >dave > On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >> >>The definition of extreme is at the heart of the argument, Chris. >>Being 130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are! I >>don't care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers are >>not a big deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. >> > I think that's right. The question is, why do the Type 2's (at least > the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think > it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? And why not? If normal is achievable then why not do it? Apart from giving ourselves the best chance at avoiding or lessening complications there is also the fact that we are having regular checks of things that other non diabetics may not do. There are plenty of non diabetics with undiagnosed higher than normal BP, cholesterol etc. Developing diabetes means I can be on top of things like that because I know about them. What have you got against high expectations? Or a willingness to be as healthy as we can? >And why not? If normal is achievable then why not do it? >Apart from giving ourselves the best chance at avoiding or [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >about them. What have you got against high expectations? Or >a willingness to be as healthy as we can? In general, I agree with you. The danger, as I see it, is that the quest for "normality" is just another form of denial. I was mentally in denial of my diabetes for years (which was easier to do then because of the one-shot-a-day insulin regimen, and little or no testing). It's harder to think that you're "normal" when you have to test and take a shot before every meal, which is what I do now. Face it, this is a real handicap. A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." > >And why not? If normal is achievable then why not do it? > >Apart from giving ourselves the best chance at avoiding or [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the > realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." I don't follow how agressively treating a disease can equate to denial of the disease. Priscilla > A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the > realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." For a T1, that might be true - although I've yet to see any sign of abnormality in my T1 colleagues. They just get on with it... For me - I'm completely normal, thanks. <twitch, twitch> Nicky SignatureA1c 10.5/5.4/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine 95/74/72Kg >> A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the >> realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Nicky That's odd; I never pictured you before as Clouseau's boss (Herbert Lom:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 2x500mg SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. >>For me - I'm >>completely normal, thanks. <twitch, twitch> > That's odd; I never pictured you before as Clouseau's boss > (Herbert Lom:-) Muttley is closer : ) Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.4/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine 95/74/72Kg On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 11:49:31 +0100, "Nicky" <ukc802466929@btconnect.com> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >>>For me - I'm >>>completely normal, thanks. <twitch, twitch> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Nicky. snicker and all? SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . >>And why not? If normal is achievable then why not do it? >>Apart from giving ourselves the best chance at avoiding or [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > In general, I agree with you. The danger, as I see it, is that the > quest for "normality" is just another form of denial. That's a strange thing to say. Most people I know who are in denial shove all treatment under the rug and continue on in their old unhealthy ways. The proactive bunch take their disorder in their hands and deal with it. I was mentally > in denial of my diabetes for years (which was easier to do then > because of the one-shot-a-day insulin regimen, and little or no > testing). It's harder to think that you're "normal" when you have to > test and take a shot before every meal, which is what I do now. Face > it, this is a real handicap. I guess you and I perceive things differently. My son's teenage type 1 friend just does his thing and on with life. As he sleeps here a few nights a week and is here every other day as well, I have got to know him very well. He was diagnosed at 4 years of age and as he says, it's all just part of my life. I love his attitude but he is not alone in this. I used to get severe migraines that meant no oranges or chocolate, I never gave it any thought, just didn't eat the offensive foods. I am so tuned in to my proper diet and exercise that it is just like drving. I walk into a cafe or restaurant, I look at the menu and know exactly what I can eat, I never drool over anything not on my eating plan. Watching other people eating high carb, high fat foods in large quantities doesn't do a thing to me, other than wonder where it is all leading to. > A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the > realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." Well, I can't agree with you there so we will just have to think differently. I am perfectly normal. I only ever think "diabetes" while in the ng's. Once I leave here I don't give it another thought. >In general, I agree with you. The danger, as I see it, is that the >quest for "normality" is just another form of denial. I was mentally [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the >realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." To me, normal IS me. I'm the only me, so I must be a normal me. I'm the average me of a sample of one - me. So all of my afflictions are normal for me. However, that doesn't mean I don't attempt to ensure that they don't change me too quickly into a different, blind, maimed, me. Life is too short for contemplating hangups. Next:-) Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 2x500mg SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. THAT is for very SURE!!!! Signaturebh-wages at swbell.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : Life is too short for contemplating hangups. On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:37:29 GMT, Alexander Arnakis <invalid@address.none> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >>And why not? If normal is achievable then why not do it? >>Apart from giving ourselves the best chance at avoiding or [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >A positive attitude is good, but part of that is coming to the >realization that we are not, and never can be, "normal." I accept that one day I may become handicapped because of diabetic complications. But it hasn't happened yet. And since I have taken control of things I have expanded my life and now do things I once thought I would never do. I just won a bet on the shooting range the other day against 4 cops, 25.00 each. I out scored them all. I have had to learn to shoot with visual problems as a result of my diabetes. None of those guys even wear glasses. redefine your definition of "normal". For me diabetes "is normal" and that includes testing before and after each meal, fasting am and before bedtime, wearing a pump, injecting via syringe when needed etc etc etc. If you can't grasp the true concept of "normal" watch the movie "The Family Stone" pay attention to the scene at the dinner table from the perspective of the Mother. "Normal" can never be defined by looking at everyone else. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . > I just won a bet on the shooting range the > other day against 4 cops, 25.00 each. I out scored them all. Heh - cool : ) Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.4/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine 95/74/72Kg >On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:37:29 GMT, Alexander Arnakis ><invalid@address.none> Huffed and Puffed the following into the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >>test and take a shot before every meal, which is what I do now. Face >>it, this is a real handicap. My hat is off to you, Mack... I do understand what you have overcome. I cannot even see a target with my right eye. I could probably do OK with the left, on a good day.... Will, T2 >My hat is off to you, Mack... I do understand what you have overcome. >I cannot even see a target with my right eye. I could probably do OK >with the left, on a good day.... > >Will, T2 actually I take my prescription glasses off so that I can see the sights on the gun clearly. Can't see the target clearly. I think the others are still learning to not focus on the target as much as the sight alignment. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . > actually I take my prescription glasses off so that I can see the > sights on the gun clearly. Can't see the target clearly. I think the > others are still learning to not focus on the target as much as the > sight alignment. Well, with the right eye, I doubt I could see the target either clearly, or unclearly..... Virtually the entire center of my field of vision in that eye is simply gone... Will, T2 Will, is the vision that you *do* have, is it clear? I have *droopy eyelids* due to the Cushing's disease, and I realized the other day that part of my vision problem is my left lid is drooping down into my line of vision. Then, the right eye, my really good distant vision eye (permanent lens implant) is really blurry right now. My ophthalmologist said that, and when it feels like my eye ball is too large for the socket is from my thyroid disease. Then there is the astigmatism which she gave me an rx for some glasses for that. After my cataract surgery I had the most beautiful vision anyone would ever want........ all sans glasses which I'd worn since a child. Now these other diseases, RA included, are messing with that! Makes me mad! LOL Wonder what they can/could do for my drooping lid???? That is my left eye, my near vision eye, but it affects my total vision. I *do not* like having vision problems! I need to call my doc and let her know what I've discovered about the drooping lid. The thyroid stuff also makes the lids puffy. It is summer-like weather here today. Have a good one! Billie Signaturebh-wages at swbell.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : > actually I take my prescription glasses off so that I can see the : > sights on the gun clearly. Can't see the target clearly. I think the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : : Will, T2 >Will, is the vision that you *do* have, is it clear? I have *droopy eyelids* due to the >Cushing's disease, and I realized the other day that part of my vision problem is my left lid is [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >It is summer-like weather here today. Have a good one! >Billie I have droopy eyelids. A year ago I asked the walmart optomitrist about it. She said it is a common old age problem. The muscles above the eyelid which control the eyelid weaken with age. A plastic surgeon or opthamologist can perform simple surgery to remove the excess skin. http://endocrine.niddk.nih.gov/pubs/cushings/cushings.htm Cushings http://www.stlukeseye.com/Conditions/Ptosis.asp droopy eyelid >> actually I take my prescription glasses off so that I can see the >> sights on the gun clearly. Can't see the target clearly. I think the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Will, T2 Then your left becomes dominant. In time your brain will make adjustments. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . >Then your left becomes dominant. In time your brain will make >adjustments. Yes, I think that is already happening... Will, T2 >>Then your left becomes dominant. In time your brain will make >>adjustments. > >Yes, I think that is already happening... > >Will, T2 Take a piece of paper and using a pencil poke a whole in the center. Now stand about 10 feet or so away from a wall and choose an object or a visible point, dot etc on the wall to focus on. Now place the paper in front of your face and focus on that point through the whole with your hands stretched out fully and both eyes open. Keeping both eyes open slowly draw the paper to your nose. It makes no difference if you have perfect vision in both eyes or not, as you bring the paper in closer to your face your brain will actually shut down your passive eye and you will move the paper in front of the dominant eye. When you touch the paper to your nose you will know which is the dominant eye simply by tilting the paper forward and looking at it. The whole will be in front of the dominant eye. For you and me having basically the same blind spot in the same eye, (different causes) to improve aim with monocular vision we simply move the weapon slightly to the left so that the sights align in front of the left eye, the isosceles stance works great for this. Right now I am getting my instruction from a retired cop/active DCJS instructor/range owner. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . >>>Then your left becomes dominant. In time your brain will make >>>adjustments. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >Right now I am getting my instruction from a retired cop/active DCJS >instructor/range owner. That's good information, Mack. Thanks. Will, T2 > I think that's right. The question is, why do the Type 2's (at least > the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think > it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? > It IS possible to be "normal" with TYPE 2 diabetes. Especially if a person still has enough beta cells to preserve 2nd phase insulin response, which is what most newly diagnosed type 2s still have. It is because you have neither insulin phase left that control for the type 1 is so difficult. But if type 2s act to preserve their remaining beta cells they can be physiologically normal, though they usually can't eat "normally" ever again. --Jenny http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes Diabetes Info http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/newlydiagnosed.htm Get Your Blood Sugar Under Control > On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? > The T2's on this NG are not the norm. Most T2's don't control their bgs as tightly. Dave >> On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >> >>>The definition of extreme is at the heart of the argument, Chris. >>>Being 130 or 140 is not an extreme number, no matter what you are! >>>I don't care if you are T1, T1.5, T2.0 or an alien, those numbers >>>are not a big deal. Only the T2's expectation isn't met. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The T2's on this NG are not the norm. Most T2's don't control their > bgs as tightly. Like a friend of mine, type 2, not particularly overweight, mostly around the middle. Her MD told her 14.0's didn't need medication. I have never seen her eat anything other than large, junky meals. Thickshakes, fries, subs etc all in the same meal, regularly. She had a stroke in her early 30's, has two kids. I can't understand her attitude towards her health but she has listened to me, just doesn't want to change anything. So I don't talk about her diabetes anymore. Then there is my neighbour. 30 years old - native Australian (with the typical skinny arms and legs and large upper body). Complaining of the Metformin gastric side effects since she started the drug 4 months ago and I have never seen her drink anything other than real coke or eat anything that has a vegetable in it other than potatoes. Meat and processed carbs with a few chocolates thrown in is the usual fare. She sometimes calls me over for a cuppa while she is having breakfast and it is always at least 2 slices of white bread with coffee, milk, sugar and whatever protein, eggs, a bit of bacon etc and a couple of cigarettes. She doesn't own a meter and isn't interested in getting one or testing on mine. She doesn't eat large meals but what she eats is obviously enough for the doctor to start the Metformin. She has had diabetes, or at least known about it for 6 years. On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 05:51:00 GMT, Alexander Arnakis <invalid@address.none> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think >it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? Diabetes isn't normal? SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . > On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:04:50 -0700, David <David@invalid.com> wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the ones on this board) have such expectations? Maybe they still think > it's possible to be "normal" with diabetes? Alexander; Perhaps the question is really, why do several of the Type 1's on A.S.D have such low expectations for Type 2's? I have been a type 2 for two years and 11 days. My first A1c was 5.4. Following my doctor's advice to limit sugar, I went up to 6.2. Then I found A.S.D and Alan S. pointed me to Jennifer's advice. I also discovered Jenny's web pages. Three months later, I was 4.8. I switched health plans, and since January 2005 my A1c is 4.2 on a lab reference range of 4.2 to 6.0 My fasting glucose went from 149's at diagnosis to an average in the mid 90's I am doing all this with diet alone. Type 1's who think Type 2's CAN'T have normal glucose readings are flat out wrong. That doesn't mean every Type 2 can have a 4.2, or even a 5, I know I am lucky. Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a "cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have proved successful for some. It may not work, but worth a try if you haven't already? > I know you might not believe it, Ozgirl, but when David and I see > folks whining about numbers of 120 or so we just don't see the big > deal. I'd love it (and consider myself "cured") if those were an > extreme number for me. I fully understand the need for some type 1's to aim for higher bg goals than type 2's. It's the criticizing of type 2's "whining" that gets to me. We have the opportunity to decrease our complication risks by aiming for non diabetic numbers and a lot of us do just that. Remember that type 2's have often been diabetic for many years before diagnosis and if there is damage there we certainly don't want to risk worsening the odds. We should be allowed to vent about numbers that are above what we aim for and in return expect others who know where we are coming from to share their ideas and experiences without ridicule. That is not a big ask. We are not here to be heckled and mocked by the peanut gallery. More sensitive people, who are in need of help might just walk back out the door again. Once again, the key word in this group is "support". > Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a > "cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have proved > successful for some. It may not work, but worth a try if you > haven't already? LOL! A cure? Yeah, right. I'll take that "cure" too. Send me the details. Dave >> Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a >> "cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have proved [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > LOL! A cure? Yeah, right. I'll take that "cure" too. Send me the > details. I wonder what quote marks mean, hmmm... >>>Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a >>>"cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I wonder what quote marks mean, hmmm... stop stalling. where's the solution to hypo unawareness? put up or shut up! dave >>>>Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a >>>>"cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > stop stalling. where's the solution to hypo unawareness? put up or > shut up! Oh, I see now, I read your next post first. Are you really sure there are no cites from medical sources that show what you can do to bring back awareness? I wonder if I should wait until you do so before I take your post seriously. Could save some embarrassment and the need for you to apologise. > Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a > "cure" for the unawareness? I think "unawareness" is a gross oversimplification here. If you had to pick a single word then I'm sure it's an inappropriate word. "Unawareness" is certainly what we all want to prevent, but realistically there seems to be a long list of possible hypo symptoms and for me several are still there. Others on that list have never occured for me. And I have had symptoms (including at one point a strange thirst) that are completely inconsistent with all the textbook descriptions of hypo symptoms. "Differently aware" might be a better term (I know it's not hip to make fun of the politically correct wording anymore but that's part of the inspiration). I'm still mostly aware it's just not the same symptoms as 25 years ago or 15 years ago. All my reading and personal experience is that different people (and different times) have different symptoms. Adernalin shakiness used to be at the very top for me, but it's not at the very top anymore (even though it still happens). I do believe that in the past, the first symptom I would notice was the adrenaline-rush shakes, but maybe that was because I wasn't attuned to the other symptoms that were present but not noticed. It is possible that I'm just getting more aware of those symptoms, and catch them before the shakiness kicks in. Lots of times now I first catch a mental fuzziness, and then (after I've tested and eaten something) then the adrenalin kicks in. So, it is POSSIBLE (although I'm not sure this is what's happening) that I'm actually more aware than before. > Some of the methods have proved > successful for some. It may not work, but worth a try if you > haven't already? I did recently switch from 25 years of using Regular to using Humalog instead, and part of the reasoning was to keep my spikes down, and maybe capping those spikes will change many things, including how I feel hypos. Certainly the suddeness of Humalog feels very different than the 25 years of using R and waiting an hour for it to start and several hours for it to really kick in. It also means that instead of spreading my meals/snacks around throughout the day I am switching back to 3 big meals a day with less emphasis on spreading out carb consumption. Tim. On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 22:51:48 GMT, "Ozgirl" <are_we_there_yet@maccas.com> Huffed and Puffed the following into the madness of usenet: >Tim, have you spoken to an endo about trying to find a >"cure" for the unawareness? Some of the methods have proved [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >door again. Once again, the key word in this group is >"support". I'm a type 1 who discourages the mocking of type 2s who complain for these reasons. Type 1s need to learn to keep things in perspective and to remember that the world does not revolve around us and that we are in the minority in the diabetic community. Type 1s also forget that a great deal of the research that has lead to advances in type 1 care and treatment is due to type 2 research. They are not independent of each other. The other thing that I have seen that is universal is that type 1 adults and type 1 children are light years apart in social skills. The kids do far better. SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . >I'm a type 1 who discourages the mocking of type 2s who complain for >these reasons. Type 1s need to learn to keep things in perspective [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >adults and type 1 children are light years apart in social skills. The >kids do far better. Thanks Mack. Well said. We learn from each other here. Well, most of us do. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 2x500mg SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. Thanks, Tim. It's nice to hear from a "kindred spirit." I have used Glucagon only once in 10 years on insulin. That occurred when I bolused too much for my lunch at work, and upon testing found I was in the 30's (thank goodness I worked in an office, and not in the OR at the time). The first time I hit the 30's I was at the wheel of my car during the first week on insulin. I just had no idea. If I'm awake, I will feel low around 70, providing I'm not biking. If I'm on a long bike ride, I won't feel the low until around 50 or lower, until I stop and get off the bike. Then I feel dizzy as heck! When I'm sleeping, I know I won't awaken (I will be sleepier) until about 55 or lower, which seldom happens anymore. This morning I was 65, and when I was getting ready for work I felt very shaky, until I took a glucose tablet which helped. At work I will actually feel more energetic (adrenalin rush), but I will realize the nervous-feeling reaction and will immediately eat some candy or tablets. It's a real bummer, but I seem to manage, thank goodness. Mary >>http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp >>"Hypoglycemia Unawareness [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > > Tim. >I've been type I for a quarter-century now. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >fuzziness over the years. The adrenalin rush/shakiness just doesn't >come first or at all anymore. Yes, and I think in my case this is a really dangerous development. The other night I had a vague feeling of unease, tested, and found my BG to be 39 ! I used to have lots of shakiness and sweating long before that! So tighter control and its attendant "reprogramming" does have its downside. Type 2 since '72, on insulin since '99. Never had a problem with hypos until I added Symlin two months ago. Since then I've been having regular and largely unpredictable hypos. Over the past couple of weeks I've noticed that I can go as low as the upper 60s with no symptoms whereas two months ago I would have been shaking, sweating, and light headed. Jan, thanks for this useful information, This is another reason I will test on the schedule I do which is about every two hours Loretta -- In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. > http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp > "Hypoglycemia Unawareness > Some people have no symptoms of hypoglycemia. They may lose > consciousness without ever knowing their blood glucose > levels were dropping. This problem is called hypoglycemia > unawareness. And let me tell you, it's not fun. One minute you're at work, sitting at your desk working and the next thing you know some strange guys are poking you and asking dumb questions. A week or so ago I was having problems with lows. A couple of days 8/10 of my readings were hypo. One day I tested in the 20's twice. No clue. Sometimes I'll notice my vision getting blurry or dark but that's it. Changed a whole bunch of rates and it's been better since then. Several months ago, after being on the pump for half a year, I woke up in the middle of the night sweating and feeling weird. Not the shakes like I used to have but I knew something was wrong. I tested, 42. I was actually happy that I woke up drenched in sweat. That hasn't happened again, but I also don't think I've gone low in the middle of the night since. Haven't woken up with a high rebound reading and haven't woken up seizing, so I think I'm doing good at night. When I go low during the day I wish I'd get some kind of warning, though. SignatureLiz Type 1 dx 4/1987 MM Paradigm 5/2005 >> http://www.diabetes.org/type-1-diabetes/hypoglycemia.jsp >> "Hypoglycemia Unawareness [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And let me tell you, it's not fun. One minute you're at work, > sitting at your desk working and the next thing you know some strange > guys are poking you and asking dumb questions. A week or so ago I > was having problems with lows. A couple of days 8/10 of my readings > were hypo. One day I tested in the 20's twice. No clue. Sometimes > I'll notice my vision getting blurry or dark but that's it. Changed > a whole bunch of rates and it's been better since then. > > Several months ago, after being on the pump for half a year, I woke > up in the middle of the night sweating and feeling weird. Not the > shakes like I used to have but I knew something was wrong. I tested, > 42. I was actually happy that I woke up drenched in sweat. That > hasn't happened again, but I also don't think I've gone low in the > middle of the night since. Haven't woken up with a high rebound > reading and haven't woken up seizing, so I think I'm doing good at > night. When I go low during the day I wish I'd get some kind of > warning, though. Do you want to share how you changed it for the better. There may be some people who just accept the unawareness as part and parcel of the condition. >> Several months ago, after being on the pump for half a > year, I woke [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > There may be some people who just accept the unawareness as > part and parcel of the condition. When I started my pump last year the CDE wanted me to run my BG higher, because that can often bring back awareness of hypos. Before the pump I was on NPH and then Lantus. I was on Lantus only for a matter of a couple of months before pumping, so for practically all of my diabetic life I used NPH. When I moved from 2 shots a day to 3, and then to MDI, I began having frequent lows. Eventually my body just got used to being low and my hypo awareness vanished. Now, when I started pumping I had a hard time allowing myself to stay around 160 like the CDE recommended. The numbers just botherd me and I'd end up correcting. I got yelled at with each visit. But, I did have fewer lows while pumping and I think that's what helped. Instead of being used to a BG of 40 all the time, my body was used to being at 80 or 90. I still have lows and my awareness is still pretty much off. Except for that one time I woke up during the night, I don't think I've gone low while asleep but I have woken up low. I've been changing basal rates to avoid that. I know that I should try, for at least a couple of months, to set my target for 140 or so but my brain just won't let me. If it's 3 hours after a meal or bolus and I see 130, I'm reaching for the pump to correct. Humalog seems to be mostly gone from my system between 3 - 3.5 hours. Mostly I test, test and test so I can avoid lows, or have a small snack if I see I'm heading down and still have insulin on board. If I'm at 63 two hours after lunch and still have about 1/3 of my insulin left, I know I'll need a little something extra. A graham cracker & peanut butter is my favorite snack for situations like that, or some crackers & cheese. Depending on what I've had for a meal, I sometimes won't eat anything extra if I'm in the 60's -70's because I know my food isn't finished digesting. If it was a big meal or one with a lot of protein and/or fat I won't bother eating anything else. SignatureLiz Type 1 dx 4/1987 Minimed Paradigm 715 5/2005 Elizabeth Blake wrote: >> Do you want to share how you changed it for the better. >> There may be some people who just accept the unawareness as >> part and parcel of the condition. > > When I started my pump last year the CDE wanted me to run my BG > higher, because that can often bring back awareness of hypos. Before > the pump I was on NPH and then Lantus. I was on Lantus only for a > matter of a couple of months before pumping, so for practically all > of my diabetic life I used NPH. When I moved from 2 shots a day to > 3, and then to MDI, I began having frequent lows. Eventually my body > just got used to being low and my hypo awareness vanished. > > Now, when I started pumping I had a hard time allowing myself to stay > around 160 like the CDE recommended. The numbers just botherd me and > I'd end up correcting. I got yelled at with each visit. But, I did > have fewer lows while pumping and I think that's what helped. > Instead of being used to a BG of 40 all the time, my body was used to > being at 80 or 90. I still have lows and my awareness is still > pretty much off. Except for that one time I woke up during the > night, I don't think I've gone low while asleep but I have woken up > low. I've been changing basal rates to avoid that. I know that I > should try, for at least a couple of months, to set my target for 140 > or so but my brain just won't let me. I haven't heard of people being asked to do it for a few months, a few weeks yes. I wonder why the doc recommended such a long period. > I haven't heard of people being asked to do it for a few > months, a few weeks yes. I wonder why the doc recommended > such a long period. I think we all want to see instant results but after you've had it for decades, you stop worrying so much about individual numbers and start thinking about the bigger picture. For instance, I switched from R to Humalog 3 weeks ago. And by no means do I think that I've mastered this new treatment regime. I'm still adjusting many aspects of my life (not just food and shots and exercise, but everything) to it. If something had happened disastrously bad I would've certainly been in touch with the doctor again right away. But a single BG reading never triggers the "oh no I'm doing bad I better post that number on Usenet" reaction. It's just a data point we learn from (assuming we don't just pin it on "brittleness" - that's a word you don't hear much anymore, but was a regular part of the lexicon 25 years ago.) Not to make excuses for me or David, but long experience makes us not so crybabyish about a single BG measurement that prompted all the bickiering in that other thread. Heck, I've seen threads where a single BG measurement starts prompting other members of the group to begin diagnosing neuropathy over Usenet! Tim. >>I haven't heard of people being asked to do it for a few >>months, a few weeks yes. I wonder why the doc recommended [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Tim. LOL! You should see Mary and I roll our eyes at the attention afforded non-events that the drama queens here try to build up to a life and death situation. The endless discussion over next to nothing is what's even more amazing to us than the original complaint from the OP about some little thing. This NG should be renamed, "alt.pity.party." Dave > This NG should be renamed, "alt.pity.party." I was going to be a little more heavy-handed and vote for "alt.i.ate.a.bagel' Although the thread where everyone was sure that two BG readings of 119 and 113 meant neuropathy was a real hoot. Tim. >> This NG should be renamed, "alt.pity.party." > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Tim. LOL! Thank gawd I missed that one. I might have hurt myself laughing! You should hear my wife Mary when she comes across all this unimportant, painfully detailed complaining on this NG about "nothing". I know what's causing it: too many viewers of Seinfeld have picked up the habit of discussing, ad nauseam, NOTHING! Dave > > This NG should be renamed, "alt.pity.party." > > I was going to be a little more heavy-handed and vote for > "alt.i.ate.a.bagel' Mmmmmm.... bagels. I can eat them no problem as long as I can weigh it and get the carb count. I don't like packaged bagels much. Guess I shouldn't post about the carb-tastic lunch I had yesterday. I generally don't go carb crazy but yesterday I had 2 servings of oat bran pancakes, cottage cheese & blueberry preserves, and a piece of German Chocolate cake. I did have sugar free syrup with the pancakes, though. BG readings were great for the tests after the meal. SignatureLiz Type 1 dx 4/1987 MM Paradigm 5/2005 >> This NG should be renamed, "alt.pity.party." > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Tim. I seemed to have missed that one. was it actually in this newsgroup? SignatureMâck©® Deltec CoZmore Pumper 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 ô) --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." ....Bilbo Baggins Jesus never hated anyone. DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... . >LOL! You should see Mary and I roll our eyes at the attention afforded >non-events that the drama queens here try to build up to a life and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Dave and the scorpion lives up to it's nature after all. > For instance, I switched from R to Humalog 3 weeks ago. And by no means > do I think that I've mastered this new treatment regime. I'm still [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > word you don't hear much anymore, but was a regular part of the lexicon > 25 years ago.) When I have a reading that's way out of range I can usually figure out quite easily why it happened. I know that if I'm 486 after breakfast, my infusion set is bad. So, I may get pissed about it but I change the set and continue on. If I eat something new for the first time and have a bad reading, I know that I either miscalculated the carbs, or that particular food might need a dose outside the norm. I have this problem with cornbread/corn muffins. I love the damn stuff, and even when I know the carb count (homemade, for example) bolusing for that amount doesn't always work. I need more. So, I can not eat the cornbread or I can take an extra 25% insulin for it. Good luck with the switch from R to Humalog. When I first started Humalog, it seemed very powerful. I always had to be very careful about any activity for at least 2 hours after taking it. Now I still use it, but in a pump. I'm sure it wasn't just the Humalog messing with me, but the combination of Humalog + NPH (later, Lantus) doing it. Humalog alone is wonderful (for me). SignatureLiz Type 1 dx 4/1987 MM Paradigm 5/2005 > I haven't heard of people being asked to do it for a few > months, a few weeks yes. I wonder why the doc recommended > such a long period. I think she said "2 or 3 months". I've spoken with some people who have run high for a couple of months and did get awareness back and others who never regained the sensation of going low. Rather than running high I'm trying to just not run low. I still have a big problem with that and as I've lost weight over the past year, I've become much more sensitive to insulin and if the dose is even half a unit too high I can be in trouble. My biggest problem was waking up low and I'm working on that. It's hard to figure if my basals are okay because before bed I've either been low and had to snack, or last night I was 147 and took a correction (and a snack, with extra for the food). Since I made a bunch of basal rate changes in the last 2 weeks I haven't had a night where I went to bed with a normal reading. Insulin and/or a snack has been involved every night. I go to bed late, 1-2am is normal, so doing a 3 or 4am check is pretty useless for me. No way I'm going to wake up an hour after finally falling asleep. Still, my numbers are getting better and I think that as long as I don't constantly drop into the 20's - 40's range I have a change of regaining some symptoms. SignatureLiz Type 1 dx 4/1987 MM Paradigm 5/2005 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.