Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / August 2005
Low 1-hr BG
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Christine - 05 Aug 2005 00:30 GMT Hey everyone, I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up all the wisdom. ;) I was diagnosed as prediabetic (111 fasting/173 2-hr PP, 105 and 102 fasting on subsequent lab tests) a few weeks ago, and I've bought a Walgreen's-brand BG monitor made by Prestige. I really haven't done that much with it (used up the 10 strips that were included), but this evening I bought a new box of strips and tested myself 60 and 90 minutes after I had my evening meal. I'm getting readings of 80--the meal was low-carb but large, and I'm really surprised I'm getting a reading that low. Any idea what that could be? Is that low enough to qualify as hypo, given that I just ate? (I feel just fine, except I'm having a bit of indigestion from some lactitol chocolates I had for dessert)
This whole BG self-testing thing is unexpectedly confusing... not to mention annoying/painful, as the instructions tout that this monitor requires "as little as" 4 microliters ("little"?!), and not being the best bleeder, I've gone through a lot of fingers this evening...
Christine
Jenny - 05 Aug 2005 00:59 GMT > Hey everyone, > I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Christine Christine,
Low on most meters for a person who is not on insulin is 70mg/dl or less and trust me, if you're low, you'll know it. You'll feel shaky or sleepy or wacky or like you're going to pass out.
If you have decent blood sugar control (which you still do) you should stay somewhere around 85 with a low carb meal. Meters vary, so that 5 mg/dl isn't anything to worry about.
I hope you are getting the blood from the side of your fingers, not the tip. The area on the side next to the your fingernail where it kind of puffs out is the easiest to stick. Most people's pinky's are the most productive.
Lacitol is EVIL. I'm much rather have a nice serving of Ex-lax. Much easier on the system.
Susan - 05 Aug 2005 01:04 GMT > Hey everyone, > I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > readings of 80--the meal was low-carb but large, and I'm really > surprised I'm getting a reading that low. Any idea what that could be? It could be that you're not diabetic, and the meal was sufficiently low carb not to spike you. Or that you were low before you ate. Or that you're hyperinsulinemic and had a strong insulin response that dropped your glucose low.
You might try testing right before your first bite, then maybe half an hour after, then one and two hours to see if you get a spike then a big drop.
Or you could just eat low GL from now on and get on with it. :-)
> Is that low enough to qualify as hypo, given that I just ate? Nope.
(I feel
> just fine, except I'm having a bit of indigestion from some lactitol > chocolates I had for dessert) If you feel fine, you're not hypo. You may be hyperinsulinemic, or not.
> This whole BG self-testing thing is unexpectedly confusing... not to > mention annoying/painful, as the instructions tout that this monitor > requires "as little as" 4 microliters ("little"?!), and not being the > best bleeder, I've gone through a lot of fingers this evening... If you take Alan's wise advice and wash your hands or just run warm water over the fingers and rub them dry first, you'll find it really easy to get the blood you need with no discomfort or extra effort.
HTH,
Susan
rleone@hotmail.com - 05 Aug 2005 02:10 GMT SNIP
HI! I just want to ask if you remembered to change the "Code" in the meter to match the new batch of test strips you'd bought?
And yeah, this IS confusing. If diabetes were more straightforward it'd be the "disease of the week" on the medical dramas a LOT more often.
Robert Leone rleone@hotmail.com
Alan S - 05 Aug 2005 02:32 GMT >Hey everyone, >I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Christine Hi Christine
I've read Jenny's and Susan's replies - they're right and said it better than I would have anyway.
I've copied my standard advice on painless testing below - maybe it can help:
Wash your hands in warm water first, and shake them to get the circulation going. Check your lancet - it should be adjustable. Mine is Soft-clix, made by Roche and is usually painless. I get an occasional tiny sting, and it lets me know if it's getting blunt sometimes, but I've tested close to 4000 times in the past 3 years without any trauma. That's from a guy who was, and is, needle-phobic. Start with the second lowest setting (1 or 1.5), hold it firmly against your skin on the side of a finger near the tip. Don't flinch when you release the button. The button releases a spring-loaded tiny needle which makes a tiny hole in your skin and instantly retracts. Incidentally, using the sides has two advantages - there are less nerve-ends than on the pads, and it doubles the number of test-points so you can rotate through the positions.
Massage gently (milking a cow) until a drop of blood forms sufficient to put on the test strip. If this setting doesn't provide an adequate quantity, move the lancet setting up one notch for the next one. If you got a large sample and it hurt a little, go to the lower setting.
And that's all there is to it. Sometimes it helps to shake your hands a little more, or warm them up if it's cold. The manufacturers advise changing the lancet needle every time; I change mine when I remember or if it gets a bit blunt - that's about once a month or every 150 tests :-) You do what you are comfortable with.
Cheers Alan, T2, Australia.
 Signature Diet and not enough exercise. I have no medical qualifications beyond my own experience. Choose your advisers carefully, because experience can be an expensive teacher.
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
oldal4865 - 05 Aug 2005 03:07 GMT Christine wrote in message <1123198251.137448.262350@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>...
>Hey everyone, >I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Christine The normal blood sugar of a non-diabetic tends to oscillate between 80 and 90 mg/dL.
In a non-diabetic, the beta cells start releasing insulin at 90 mg/dL, the liver starts releasing glucose at 80 mg/dL. A normal person can get as low at 70 mg/dL following that cycle and not be considered "low".
"Pre-diabetic" means that your glucose metabolism is a lot closer to "non-diabetic" than most of ours. Your ability to stay in the non-diabetic range after a low carb meal isn't too surprising
FWIW, there is an opinion among some of the specialists that "below 70" is low but you aren't really hypo until you drop below 55. Some perfectly normal folks drop as low as 60 after a fast.
Pre-diabetic almost always means that you are in the Standard Type 2 Diabetic Progression and will become full-blown diabetic sooner or later. "Later" is better than "sooner". You've figured out one way to accomplish "later" , i.e. ". . . .the meal was low-carb . . ." Another is daily exercise. A third is "lose abdominal fat".
Sounds like you have the right ideas so far.
Regards Old Al
Chris J. - 05 Aug 2005 03:16 GMT >Hey everyone, >I've posted just once before and have since been lurking and soaking up [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >readings of 80--the meal was low-carb but large, and I'm really >surprised I'm getting a reading that low. Any idea what that could be? Christine, I've been experimenting with a Walgreens meter and though my results may be an anomaly, it looks to me like the meter is inconsistent. Have you tried a control solution test?
Christine - 05 Aug 2005 04:04 GMT Yep, code set right, control solution worked fine. With the first ten strips that came with the meter, I was getting inconsistent results, too, but I've tested 5 times tonight and every time it's been 78/80 (2 pairs of tests, each within minutes of each other), except for one reading of 64 that I think happened because there was insufficient blood on the strip - it took over 60 seconds to register. I also think my meter's results have gotten better because I've become better at testing myself, getting enough blood, whereas before I was kinda clueless, heh. I dunno, I was leery of it at first, but I'm hopeful that it does all right--they wouldn't keep selling them if they didn't, right? By the way, there are two Walgreen's meters, Prestige and Relion; are we using the same one?
Thanks for the finger-testing suggestions, everyone! (especially your detailed advice, Alan) I'm sure I'll get used to it quite soon.
Chris J. - 05 Aug 2005 04:37 GMT >Yep, code set right, control solution worked fine. With the first ten >strips that came with the meter, I was getting inconsistent results, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >that it does all right--they wouldn't keep selling them if they didn't, >right? Much to my surprise, I've found out here and confirmed it that the actual accuracy required by law is low, around 15% variance.
>By the way, there are two Walgreen's meters, Prestige and >Relion; are we using the same one? I thought Relion was by Walmart? My Walgreens one is a "truetrack".
>Thanks for the finger-testing suggestions, everyone! (especially your >detailed advice, Alan) I'm sure I'll get used to it quite soon. Best of luck!
Christine - 05 Aug 2005 05:10 GMT Oh, whoops, you're right about the Relion being Wal-Mart! But there are two from Walgreen's; I don't see the word "truetrack" on mine's box anywhere, so you must have the other one.
Chris J. - 05 Aug 2005 07:47 GMT >Oh, whoops, you're right about the Relion being Wal-Mart! Heh, I always get the names Walmart and Walgreens mixed up! Very easy to do.
>But there are >two from Walgreen's; I don't see the word "truetrack" on mine's box >anywhere, so you must have the other one. One thing I've found with the strips this one uses: The drop size and thus intake rate seems to affect the reading. A small drop goes in a bit slower and results in a lower reading. This is with the control solution, so it seems application technique is important. I have no idea if this would apply to your or not.
palm - 05 Aug 2005 07:48 GMT I would like to warn you against blindly taking advice from this group.
This group is not moderated, which means, that anybody can post here. The main thing is: do not change your blood sugar testing regimen or any medications on advice from people, you don't know! Ask your doctor, or your diabetic educator, first! Here you will run into spammers (commercial advertisements, disguised like advice from friendly "experienced diabetic") and "trolls" (one person, using different handles, to make his point) and such. I posted about some of most dangerous things that ignoratnt people will try to lure you into
(like increasing number of blood sugar tests or amount of medications by 4-8 times) without
consulting with your doctor. http://tinyurl.com/8wc59 and http://tinyurl.com/7lx8u Also, I would recommend another message board, which is endorsed by American Diabetes Association and moderated by health professionals, so they weed out ads for snake oils and other crap http://tinyurl.com/7vtuy Good luck
oldal4865 - 05 Aug 2005 13:19 GMT palm wrote in message <1123224530.473512.239660@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>...
>I would like to warn you against blindly taking advice from this group. >. . .(snip). . . > >(like increasing number of blood sugar tests or amount of medications >by 4-8 times) without From Parker, Robert B. "Perish Twice"
"Elizabeth's scorn for anything she didn't understand was profound. There was a lot she didn't get, and if she accepted that, she might be forced to conclude that she was stupid"
Mr... Palm: Your remarks would be acceptable if we were discussing Ford Carburetors. However, you are advocating obsolete therapies for a deadly disease.
You are trying to convince new, unskilled diabetics to follow Rene's path.
http://www.ifip.com/pempals.htm
". . .I am 43 years old, married now for 12 years, no children, and diabetic type 1 for 27 years. . . . Today, I have almost all complications related with diabetes; Kidney transplant since 1990, I have vision impairment, I can see with only one eye about 30%, high blood pressure, neuropathy, heart operation, also I have a kind of osteophaty in my left foot. I am an Oceanographer, now retired because of diabetes. . . . . . . I simply follow the advice of my doctor, but the main reason for my good control [ ! ! ! ! ! ] is that I always accepted my diabetes. No blame for anybody, I just accept it. . . ."
Failed kidneys, nearly blind, high blood pressure, severe artery damage, (no kids. . . E.D. ??). . .all because he followed obsolete advice.
Regards Old Al
Hi_Therre - 05 Aug 2005 11:32 GMT >Oh, whoops, you're right about the Relion being Wal-Mart! But there are >two from Walgreen's; I don't see the word "truetrack" on mine's box >anywhere, so you must have the other one. You will find huge swings between different meters. Since we live in a world of numbers where we strive for our BG's to be between 80 and 120, these swings send us for a loop. One meter says your BG is 110, and another meter says 140. Which is right? Are you in control, or are your numbers high and need to be corrected? The FDA regs allows the meters to be made very inaccurate. We take the meter readings at face value and act accordingly. The FDA definitely needs to tighten up on the meters from 15% to about 5% variance. My Accu chek Advantage meter consistently reads 20 - 30 points higher than any other meter I use.
When you use different meters, you can see patterns of rise and falls in the graphing of BG's. Shouldn't be that way, but is.
_____________________________________________ http://wave.prohosting.com/ugleeeee/ Health Diabetic Software - Free
None Given - 05 Aug 2005 18:10 GMT > I thought Relion was by Walmart? I thought so, too.
> My Walgreens one is a "truetrack". There's a truetrack and a prestige, the prestige needs a bigger sample and you wait for the blood to soak into the spot and then stick the end with the spot into the meter.
 Signature No Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes
Loretta Eisenberg - 05 Aug 2005 14:12 GMT 80 is not technically low, But if you have had numbers in the high 100s the drop to 80 would be a low for you.
If you had any fat with your meal, there could be a delay to a rise at the two hour mark. If not, and you really had very low carb. It could be, I hope you tested at two hours just in case you went low and needed to cover it.
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.
|
|
|