I don't know for sure, but a non-diabetic friend of mine developed some
classic symptoms (thirst and constant peeing) after a steroid injection
(in her knee, I believe). She had no idea this was possible as a
consequence, and was disappointed that her doctor hadn't warned her. I
told her to go get checked (she was reluctant to waste her doctor's
time!), and, by the time she did, she had no symptoms and her blood
sugar was in normal ranges.

Depends on the person. But 1hr really is NOT a true example of
a glucose load. Despite what some might say here. NONE are doctors
and studied in length by a professional. So, take what is said with a
grain of sand.

I would agree with your doctor, those are not diabetic bg's.

Again, depends on the person. Stress, illness, injury WILL cause a NON-
diabetic's glucose to rise.

YES! ANY steriod use by diabetic or non-diabetic WILL cause the glucose
in a body to rise. Same effect as the bodies own Cortisol causing a rise.

Case in point. A friend of mine's 14mon old daughter was teething, also
exhibiting symptoms of DM, very mild but they were symptoms none the
less, she started testing and found the child to have HIGH glucose after
eating, in the 170-180-190's and a few 200's --- She took the child to the
doctor and they ran all sorts of tests on the child and all came back neg.
Oddly enough, once the child was finished cutting her 6 new teeth, low
and behold her glucose dropped back to the 70's and 80's as the child
munches on a bread stick.

I will agree, there really is NO real data showing what happens to a non
diabetic persons glucose.

Best advice I can give you is to make sure you get exercise daily and you
eat a healthy WELL balanced diet, lose weight if you need to for all sorts
of health reasons and go on with your life and not become consumed with
worrying about becoming diabetic.

Laura@notmy.com wrote in message ...

My experience:

Before I retired,   I had an open offer to test folks at work.   In general,
I caught them at two hours after breakfast or lunch and usually gave them a
candy bar about 30 minutes before the test to "force the issue".      Not
one of them ever exceeded 100 at two hours after eating.

That said,  these scientists saw a maximum rise of about 25 - 60 mg/dL
(~1.5 - 3.4 mmol/L) at one hour in their healthy test subjects who ate meals
based on various low fat carbs    (low bG= pasta,   high bG = bread)

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/48/4/1035.pdf#search=%22jacques%20mourot%20r
elationship%20between%20gastric%20emptying%22

http://tinyurl.com/gxnme

Jenny found a cite which reported smaller peaks with pure glucose,  i.e.

http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/15/6/1266

"Scroll down to Figure 1 to see the chart giving these values.

GLUCOSE: After 75 gm of glucose the thin and obese controls (people
without PCOS, in this study) top out at 126 mg/dl at half an hour, and
then the thin people drop back to under 100 mg/dl at one hour, while the
obese normals drop only a tiny bit by an hour. Both groups are around
100 mg/dl at 2 hours."

These folks found that if you "force it" by adding water to the 75 gram
glucose,   you can generate an 80 mg/dL spike at one hour but that's a
somewhat artificial situation.     In general,  heavy meals of real food
slow digestion and tend to squash the peaks.

http://www.ecmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/162/7/993

Keep checking your numbers.    I think you are closer to joining our Club
than your doctor thinks.   But if you never join us,  good for you.

Regards
 Old Al

Hi Laura,

I posted a link to an article a few days back that, to some extent at
least, addresses what you may be asking.

Here it is.../

http://tinyurl.com/oeezt

Also, my reading suggests that the info on the diabetescaregroup
website at the following  link is accurate, generally

http://www.diabetescaregroup.info/high-blood-sugar-hyperglycemia/

"Hyperglycemia or high blood sugar occurs when levels of sugar in the
blood go above range. The correct range for a normal person is to have
blood sugar levels between 80-120 mg/dl. Doctors tend to try and keep
their diabetic patients under 160 mg/dl. When blood sugar levels go
above these ranges the result is hyperglycemia."

You might also want to take a look at the following article, published
in "Clinical Diabetes" and what it says about postprandial BG readings
in normal non-diabetic people...., especially where it says,

"In healthy, nondiabetic subjects, 2-h postprandial blood glucose
levels are usually <120 and rarely >140 mg/dl. Glucose levels peak at
1 h after the start of the meal and then return to preprandial levels
within 2–3 h. This rise and fall of postprandial glucose levels is
mediated by the first-phase insulin response, in which large amounts
of endogenous insulin are released, usually within 10 min, in response
to nutrient intake. In individuals with type 2 diabetes, the
first-phase insulin response is severely diminished or absent,
resulting in persistently elevated postprandial glucose throughout
most of the day"

http://tinyurl.com/sywyd

I hope this has  been helpful in answering your question.

I hope you are enjoying a really nice weekend.

Good luck.

Will, T2

Others have already given you good links and personal experiences to
help answer your question.

Here's my 2 cents:  It sounds like your pattern of sugar spikes mirror
my own.  My FBS is normal at 90, but if I eat something carby (not
including sugar, which I never eat), I will spike @ 180 at one hour,
but be back below 140 at the 2 hour mark.  (I don't know how I would do
on an actual glucose tolerance test--that's a lot of sugar.)  In any
case, I know I am at least glucose impaired.  Given the fact that I
don't want my sugar problem to worsen (no matter whether I'm
technically "only" glucose impaired or whether a glucose tolerance test
would reveal diabetes), I carefully monitor and keep my glucose down to
<140 at one hour, and < 120 at 2 hours.  To me, the label of glucose
impaired versus diabetic is moot.  The initial treatment is the same.
And keeping those BGs under control are the best way to preserve
pancreatic function.

Michelle T2 (on the spectrum somewhere....)
diet & exercise

The beta cells that make insulin also have some ability
to store it.  When you eat, they can do a quick release
to handle the rise.  If this storage ability is somehow
reduced (I've heard), BG will rise much higher before
the pancreas "catches up" with insulin release.  Meanwhile,
the much higher level makes the pancreas work harder and
produce more insulin--making the drop faster when it finally
occurs.

The high levels will cause some diabetic damage, but if
your levels are normal most of the time, the damage will
heal enough to avoid significant complications.

However, the excess insulin also causes problems, and some
people feel that the beta cells will "burn out" because
they're working so hard.

I'd recommend limiting the amount of carb at any one time,
having extra snacks if you need them with at least two hours
between.  Also, to avoid "fast" carbs.

Laura , there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

To me your hitting 180 at one hour means to me that you are diabetic and
140 at two hours is also an indication.  If you werent, you would not
reach those numbers with regularity.

jmo

speak to your doctor

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.

Doesn't sound like you're non-diabetic.  People without diabetes stay in the
80's to 90's no matter what they eat.  Readings over 110 indicate a problem
of some sort.  Steroids can raise BG and can even cause diabetes.

A true non diabetic person with a fully functioning pancreas
should have little increase in bg's even after a large carb
meal. My kids for example stay around 5.0 even after
megaloads of carbs.   That's around 90 I think.  Anyone with
large rises after carbs, like your "up to 180's" is
diabetic. A properly functioning pancreas should be able to
handle anything you toss at it.

Hi guys.

To everyone who took the time to respond, I want to say thanks for
that.  To oldal and Will - I have added the links to my list of
reading.  I will keep what you've all had to say in advisement.

rk, the information about the infant was very interesting.  I recall
that episode started just before you took your hiatus.  Thanks for
filling us in on the baby.  I'm really glad for momma and baby that it
was just a response to teething.  Six teeth at once!  It's a wonder
the child wasn't trying to gnaw through the furniture!  Or did I
misread that.

To Ozgirl, thanks for the insight on what your kids glucose reaction
is.

Wes, thanks for reminding me about the insulin phases.  I hadn't
thought about.  Very interesting input.

Jeff & Alice, thanks for your input about the steroids.  I guess my
concern was that the "bump" in levels was higher this time around than
it was a few months ago when I had one and the effects lasted a day or
so longer as well.

Julie & Loretta.  Thanks for your concern.  I have a regular
appointment scheduled with my PC next week, so I will be discussing my
concerns.  She might do an A1c with my lipids.  Or, she might chalk it
up to the steroids and tell me to "avoid concentrated sugars".
Whatever she says, I'm keeping my eyes on it.

Michelle.  Thanks for your input as well.  For some reason I thought
you had "graduated" from Pre-D to D.  Glad to hear you're still on
that side of the fence.  Definately going to keep a watch on my carbs

Thanks everyone.
I'm trying to avoid being obsessive.  There is a fine line between
being alert and being neurotic. :)  I'm trying to stay on the saner
side of the line.