 |
 | 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 2005Pre Diabetes? Or Full Blown Diabetes? Somebody Please help!
Hello, Let me start by saying I'm a white male,36,6'1 208 Lbs. My mother has diabetes, so every once in a while I check my blood sugar on her Glucose meter. Usually the results are within normal ranges(70 to 95 fasting). Today something strange happened. I started off with normal ranges, I then went out to dinner and had a large pasta dish and 2 rolls of bread and a glass of water. Unfortunately I also get panic attacks, and had a very bad one an hour before the meal. Also under lots of stress lately. Anyway, after the meal about an hour later, I had 2 pieces of chocolate cake. I then decided to take my blood sugar about an hour and half later and it was 229! I have never seen this number before. Of course I got nervous and tried to relax. I took it again 7 minutes later and it was 198. Then again 20 minutes later, and it was 186, and once more 15 minutes later and it was 161. I then waited 2 hours later and took it again and it was 87, back to a normal range. Is this diabetes? I'm under the impression that with diabetes the numbers would not come down that fast. Also, I thought any number after eating, a number over 200 is diabetes, and when it eventually comes down, the number is still high (over 126-140). Mine comes down into the 90's or 80's. On other occasions when eating a well balanced meal with some carbs, the numbers only spikes to about 140-146 and then comes down. Was this episode of a high number due to the insane amount of carbs I ate? And if so, is 229 normal for this amount of carbs? Any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Tom P.s. - The lowest blood sugar i've had was 70. This happens if I wait too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half hour later, I'm fine. > Hello, > Let me start by saying I'm a white male,36,6'1 208 Lbs. My mother has [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half > hour later, I'm fine. First, it's very good that you check your sugars. As to the numbers you had, considering what you say you ate I'm surprised that your number was not higher. The meal you had is LOADED with carbs. This number _may_ not be a problem _if_ your numbers go back to normal. Reminder, Diabetes is a blood sugar _control_ problem and if your sugars occasionally go high when you eat the "wrong" things, but if your sugars _go_back_to_normal later you may be OK. As always, see your Doc and get a Diabetic Panel (battery of blood tests) that will give the 3mth average of your blood sugars. Also, if you haven't in awhile, your Doc should include liver blood tests. Other problems with liver function can be a warning or contribute to problems of people prone to Diabetes. -- ==== Tecknomage ==== "Four people on a lifeboat are not entitled, as an act of democracy, to vote to eat the fifth." -Stephen Scott, Professor of Law, McGill University > Was this episode of a high number due to the insane amount of carbs I > ate? And if so, is 229 normal for this amount of carbs? Any help on > this matter would be greatly appreciated. Tom > P.s. - The lowest blood sugar i've had was 70. This happens if I wait > too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half > hour later, I'm fine. Though many doctors don't know this, the official ADA diagnostic criteria for diagnosing diabetes say that two readings over 200 at any time are diagnostic. So if you see an number like that again (regardless of what you eat) yes, you are diabetic. Unfortunately, many doctors only will diagnose you only when your fasting blood sugar has deteriorated, which may be years after you first start experiencing diabetic blood sugars. There is a lot of evidence that exposure to blood sugar levels over 140 will damage nerves, capillaries, etc. I have gathered this data together on my web site at http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/ You are fortunate in that you have discovered your abnormal blood sugar early enough that you can take steps to control it and avoid the complications that develop after years of undetected post meal numbers like yours. I am in my 8th year since similar testing showed my blood sugar to be over 240 mg/dl. I am only now developing the fasting blood sugars that would have led most doctors to diagnose me. Because I have controlled my blood sugar aggressively over this period, I have no diabetic complications. In contrast almost half of those diagnosed with the fasting glucose test have serious complications, usually nerve damage (which leads to amputation and/or dysregulation of nerves controlling heart beat which leads to death.)  Signature--Jenny http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/ Type 2 Diabetes info http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Low Carb info > Hello, > Let me start by saying I'm a white male,36,6'1 208 Lbs. My mother has [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > waited 2 hours later and took it again and it was 87, back to a normal > range. You know, diabetes aside, did you really need *2* pieces of chocolate cake? The exact numbers to get you diagnosed as diabetic, or pre-diabetic, are pretty hard to ascertain with a big, tasty slice of cake or two of unknown size. If you're concerned about this, have your *doctor* do a glucose tolerance test with you, where the actual amount of glucose or sucrose entering your system is known. > Is this diabetes? I'm under the impression that with diabetes the > numbers would not come down that fast. Also, I thought any number after [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half > hour later, I'm fine. We couldn't begin to guess: we don't know how big those slices are, and if you had a little sugar on your fingertips from handling the cake, that could also distort the results quite a lot. dream7939@aol.com wrote in message <1128935341.211089.231780@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>... >Hello, > Let me start by saying I'm a white male,36,6'1 208 Lbs. My mother has [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half >hour later, I'm fine. Sorry, a non-diabetic could easily have been below 100 after your "insane amount of carbs" especially since you ate pasta which is one of the "easiest" to tolerate if you're sensitive to carbs. Here are some blood sugar curves for normal and diabetic folks taking a massive amount of glucose (the fastest absorbing carb around) on an empty stomach (a technique calculated to make their sugars as high as possible) http://www.rajeun.net/gtt.html#Diabetes and Hypoglycemia Note the "normal" fellow displaying a value of 90 at 2 hours; not the high-max fellow displaying 130 at 2 hours (and the comment that the high-max fellow is well on the way to diabetes). You spiked over 200 despite a meal with one of the slowest absorbing carbs around) Before I retired, I often took my blood sugar testing meter to work and tested the guys to see if anybody was having problems. I would test them after a high-carb lunch, and give them a small candy bar to make it worse. Not one of them every went above 100! I didn't find breaking 100 until 5 years after I retired. Sorry again, but 70 is a "normal" sugar. On the low side, but normal. Folks who have serious discomfort at 70 often do so because they have been habitually exposed to high blood sugars in the recent past and the high sugars have acclimatized their bodies to regard "high" sugars as "normal" and normal sugars as "low". Diabetes is hereditary. Sorry, but all signs say that you have joined our Club, the Club nobody wants to join. For what it's worth, the standard defense for folks in your situation is: a. Lose fat lb. anyway you can b. Gain muscle lb. c. Exercise every day d. Ration your carb, eat slowly-digesting carb (like pasta, not cake), spread your daily carb over several small meals and of course, see a doctor. BTW, metformin is a good "first med" for folks in Early Days. Regards Old Al >dream7939@aol.com wrote in message ><1128935341.211089.231780@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>... [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >>too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half >>hour later, I'm fine. (Let's try this one again with out my 2-year old and 6-year old grandsons "helping") Sorry, a non-diabetic could easily have been below 100 after your "insane amount of carbs" especially since you ate pasta which is one of the "easiest" to tolerate if you're sensitive to carbs. Here are some blood sugar curves for normal and diabetic folks taking a massive amount of glucose (the fastest absorbing carb around) on an empty stomach (a technique calculated to make their sugars as high as possible) http://www.rajeun.net/gtt.html#Diabetes and Hypoglycemia Note the "normal" fellow displaying a value of 90 at 2 hours; note the high-max fellow displaying 130 at 2 hours (and the comment that the high-max fellow is well on the way to diabetes). You spiked over 200 despite a meal with one of the slowest absorbing carbs around) Before I retired, I often took my blood sugar testing meter to work and tested the guys to see if anybody was having problems. I would test them after a high-carb lunch, and give them a small candy bar to make it worse. Not one of them every went above 100! I didn't find anyone breaking 100 until 5 years after I retired. Sorry again, but 70 is a "normal" sugar. On the low side, but normal. Folks who have serious discomfort at 70 often do so because they have been habitually exposed to high blood sugars in the recent past and the high sugars have acclimatized their bodies to regard "high" sugars as "normal" and normal sugars as "low". Diabetes is hereditary. Sorry, but all signs say that you have joined our Club, the Club nobody wants to join. For what it's worth, the standard defense for folks in your situation is: a. Lose fat lb. anyway you can b. Gain muscle lb. c. Exercise every day d. Ration your carb, eat slowly-digesting carb (like pasta, not cake), spread your daily carb over several small meals and of course, see a doctor. BTW, metformin is a good "first med" for folks in Early Days. Regards Old Al > Hello, > Let me start by saying I'm a white male,36,6'1 208 Lbs. My mother has [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > too long to eat. I start to get shaky, and after I eat, about a half > hour later, I'm fine. Sounds like diabetes to me! And you are wrong in thinking that the BG (blood glucose/sugar) of a person with diabetes is always high. Many of us started with reactive hypoglycemia and are still prone to hypos. See your Dr. ASAP! SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm Dreamteam, I had these same symptoms in my own experience. I was lucky mine was caught relatively early, as are you. For me, eating a big pasta meal with bread like that would send my blood sugar sky-rocketing, even with a low fasting number. In fact, mine probably wouldn't go quite that high, and I'm definitely diabetic. I can get away with a limited serving of pasta if I surround it with a lot of green leafy veggies and some lowfat protein, like chicken, with no bread--but that's the only way I can do it without sending my sugar up. I used to be hypoglycemic when I went too long between meals, just like you. The information furnished by Jenny and Old Al is priceless. If you can get it under control early, you can really improve the rest of your life. pc Hello, I would like to thank all that responded to this post. I looked at the link Old Al list on his post http://www.rajeun.net/gtt.html#Diabetes and decided to take an "at home" glucose test. I ate the 150 grams of white bread, nothing to drink but a few sips of water to wash it down, and here are the results. (Please let me know what you think): Starting glucose level before eating: 85 30 minutes later: 147 1 hour: 151 90 minutes : 112 2 Hours: 119 (strange why it would go up 7 points) 2 1/2 hours: 106 3 hours: 102 3 1/2 hours: 94 I stopped taking it at that. Usually when I get up in the morning it is anywhere from 82-97 fasting. I also forgot to state in my original post that when I went into a panic attack 30 minutes before I ate, I did take a Xanax which gets rid of the panic since it's a beta blocker.Could it be possible since it slows down the brain, heart rate, etc. that it keeps blood glocuse levels high allowing for a higher reading than normal? Now that coupled with what I ate: Large plate of pasta, 2 rols of bread, and the 2 slices of chocolate cake( they were big slices). I know this meal sounds like a nightmare, I do regret it. It makes me wonder since I have never seen this number before. Have there ever been instances where a blood sugar has been this high without diabetes possiby due to severe trauma, stress or sickness? Tom > Hello, > I would like to thank all that responded to this post. I looked at the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > where a blood sugar has been this high without diabetes possiby due to > severe trauma, stress or sickness? Tom I'd go see your Doctor. That way you will find out for sure if you are a diabetic. Best way. You can do it this afternoon or tomorrow. -- Dave > Hello, > I would like to thank all that responded to this post. I looked at the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > where a blood sugar has been this high without diabetes possiby due to > severe trauma, stress or sickness? Tom Please stop fooling around and see the Dr. There is no test that I know of that involves eating white bread. The OGTT is what you need and it has to be done by a Dr. Reason being, you could have a hypo or get sick while the test is being done. You are also supposed to sit or lie down quietly during the 2-3 hours it takes to do the test. Your numbers following the bread indicate that there is a problem. People without blood sugar problems do not see such numbers. Stop trying to find excuses and get to the Dr. so you'll know what you're dealing with for sure. I did not get a proper diagnosis. As a result, I now have neuropathy in my feet and legs. It's painful at times and very troublesome. Now I do have other medical problems involving my legs. But my activities are very limited now. I can't walk very far or very fast. Nor can I stand up for long. And driving a car can be difficult when you can't distinguish between the gas and brake pedals. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm dream7939@aol.com wrote in message <1129017071.294477.13730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>... >Hello, > I would like to thank all that responded to this post. I looked at the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >where a blood sugar has been this high without diabetes possiby due to >severe trauma, stress or sickness? Tom The Rajeun site has a few peculiarities. He offers good medical citations in the raw numbers from OGTT tests, then goes a bit awry with his very personal (and unsupported) recommendations to use starch-based carbs in a home-grown OGTT. I repeat: many if not most non-diabetics could eat 150 gram of bread and test at 100 or less in one hour. FWIW, bread is about half as powerful as pure glucose in raising blood sugar. The rules for qualification as a Type 2 diabetes are very arbitrary. It is a progressive disease which develops slowly. The current standards for diagnosis merely pick an arbitrary point in the slow deterioration of blood sugar control experienced by diabetics as the disease progresses. A few more arbitrary points in the slow deterioration: a fasting blood sugar above 87 indicates that you are in the Standard T2 Diabetic Progression. A fasting blood sugar of 125 means you have breeched current target levels. Ten years ago, you had to breech 140 to be diagnosed as "full blown" Twenty years ago, this discussion would not have taken place. The standards were so loose that you would not be regarded as diabetic. Twenty years from now, this discussion might also not take place since in all likelihood, the progressive tightening of standards might have caught you 5 years earlier. As others have posted, two readings above 200 on different days FOR ANY REASON are sufficient to diagnose diabetes. It is in your best interest to start an intensive anti-diabetic endpoint campaign right now. (diabetic endpoint = crippling diabetic injury or premature death) The principal cause of Type 2 diabetes is the death of beta cells. Working to fight diabetes slows the beta cell death rate. That's good. Working to fight diabetes allows you to live longer. That's also good. Being sloppy or lazy increases the beta cell death rate. That's why some teenagers have experienced so much beta cell death that they lose control of blood sugars at age 15. (and I don't think anybody will be willing to sell them life insurance either) You are lucky. You noticed the alarm bells early. There are many folks in these newsgroups who were ambushed and consequently suffered serious organ damage before anybody noticed they had a problem. Now they are working desperately to preserve their eyes, kidneys and remaining nerve function. Regards Old Al > dream7939@aol.com wrote in message > <1129017071.294477.13730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>... [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > Regards > Old Al Hello, I just wanted to include this information for the original poster: Call this toll free number and order paper test strips for pH, keytones, urobilinogen, bilirubin, glucose, nitrate, blood and white blood cells in the urine: 1-800-443-9942 Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. > dream7939@aol.com > > The Rajeun site has a few peculiarities. More than a few. For starters, the GTT has been standardized for decades at 75 grams of glucose, not 100. What he describes is not a GTT, it's a Meal Tolerance Test, which is also something done by labs. I prefer the "Bagel Tolerance Test" version of the MTT myself, which is about 60 gm of starchy carb and gives a better idea of how the person is responding to actual meals. I have detailed instructions on how to do this test on my http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/selftest.htm page. Using glucose runs the risk of causing serious hypoglycemia which can cause auto accidents. My father-in-law-to-be was given one and ended up in the 50s 3 hours later. He was given a glass of orange juice at the lab which got him home and caused another reactive low later which made him sick. So doing a Meal TT at home rather than a GTT is safer. > Twenty years ago, this discussion would not have taken place. The > standards were so loose that you would not be regarded as diabetic. Twenty years ago standards were rigorously set, since the ADA/WHO diagnostic criteria were set in 1978. Unfortunately, they were set much too high, on purpose, resulting in hundreds of thousands of people not being diagnosed with diabetes until serious damage had been done by years of high blood sugars. Ironically, before 1978, many doctors diagnosed diabetes in patients with 2 hr GTT test results of 160 mg/dl or higher. Diagnosis was better for many patients before the adoption of the ADA standard. All this and more, about how diabetes diagnostic standards were established is documented in http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/misdiagnosis.htm > Twenty years from now, this discussion might also not take place since in > all likelihood, the progressive tightening of standards might have caught > you 5 years earlier. We may hope, but given what a crummy job the ADA did with their revision of the 1978 standard 20 years later in 1998, and the way that they decided to still set the diagnostic criteria HIGHER than the level at which European and American populations develop complications, it isn't by any means a given. --Jenny http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/ Type 2 Diabetes info http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Low Carb info I personally think you have the best answer you're going to get--your numbers clearly suggest you need to see a doctor right away. If you want more immediate information, I suggest your check out Gretchen Becker's book on Type 2 diabetes from the library. She presents a lot of medical facts in a readable format. pc |
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
|
©2010 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.