Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 > the latest numbers posted by ADA are 70-110. anything over that in > the long term can cause comlications, cheeky These are fasting blood sugar guidelines. Post meal (particularly peaks at, say 1 to 1 1/4 hrs. post meal) may, of course, be higher. My recollection (I don't have the reference handy) is that the current maximum suggested 2 hour post meal reading is now 140. Tom the Actuary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 > the latest numbers posted by ADA are 70-110. anything over that in > the long term can cause comlications, cheeky These are fasting blood sugar guidelines. Post meal (particularly peaks at, say 1 to 1 1/4 hrs. post meal) may, of course, be higher. My recollection (I don't have the reference handy) is that the current maximum suggested 2 hour post meal reading is now 140. Tom the Actuary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 the latest numbers posted by ADA are 70-110. anything over that in > the long term can cause comlications, cheeky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Art Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Wow, Rita, that's scary. It makes you wonder what they're teaching in medical school and nursing school (obviously not the right stuff!). Good thing he had you to advocate for him. Vicki In a message dated 04/09/2002 7:05:45 AM US Mountain Standard Time, rita.clack@... writes: > > When my Dad was in the VA hospital, they were going to treat a " low " of 65 > with a six ounce glass of apple juice w/2 tbls of sugar in it and an > orange. > I dumped the juice before he could drink it and let him have half the > orange. His breakfast came shortly after. When they tested him an hour > and > a half later he was in the 180's... > I had told the nurse, " You're going to have him on a roller coaster the > rest > of the time he is in here... again! " She was not happy with me... but > didn't say a word when she Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Wow, Rita, that's scary. It makes you wonder what they're teaching in medical school and nursing school (obviously not the right stuff!). Good thing he had you to advocate for him. Vicki In a message dated 04/09/2002 7:05:45 AM US Mountain Standard Time, rita.clack@... writes: > > When my Dad was in the VA hospital, they were going to treat a " low " of 65 > with a six ounce glass of apple juice w/2 tbls of sugar in it and an > orange. > I dumped the juice before he could drink it and let him have half the > orange. His breakfast came shortly after. When they tested him an hour > and > a half later he was in the 180's... > I had told the nurse, " You're going to have him on a roller coaster the > rest > of the time he is in here... again! " She was not happy with me... but > didn't say a word when she Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Art Mc wrote: > > the latest numbers posted by ADA are 70-110. anything over that in > > the long term can cause comlications, cheeky > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > Art Art, Yes, there are minor differences in the " normal " range depending on who you talk to. There is no absolute " government approved mandate " that states the range (as far as I have been able to find). What you will find is that if you get a full print-out of your lab work, along with your readings there will be the " normal " ranges for that particular lab. Individually, if we go by the " normals " from the lab we use, that would seem to be the best practice. FYI, my lab range is 70-110mg/dl and HbA1c <6.0% for " normal " . What I believe is cast in stone is that the official borderline for being hypoglycemic is 65mg/dl. I have never seen any other number quoted for that, although I may have missed it. BTW, I have also seen the top of the " normal non-diabetic " range stated as 115mg/dl in some writings. I prefer to quote the 70-110mg/dl range because it gives a little buffer above the official 65mg/dl hypoglycemia cut-off level. Please don't obsess about these minor differences in the numbers you have seen as the discrepancies are minor. What is important is that our goal should be the " normal non-diabetic " range, however you define that. Lower in that " normal " range is better as long as you can avoid hypoglycemia. Keeping your daily testing numbers lower will result in lower HbA1c results, and lower HbA1c means less risk of complications. , T2 Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Art Mc wrote: > > the latest numbers posted by ADA are 70-110. anything over that in > > the long term can cause comlications, cheeky > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > Art Art, Yes, there are minor differences in the " normal " range depending on who you talk to. There is no absolute " government approved mandate " that states the range (as far as I have been able to find). What you will find is that if you get a full print-out of your lab work, along with your readings there will be the " normal " ranges for that particular lab. Individually, if we go by the " normals " from the lab we use, that would seem to be the best practice. FYI, my lab range is 70-110mg/dl and HbA1c <6.0% for " normal " . What I believe is cast in stone is that the official borderline for being hypoglycemic is 65mg/dl. I have never seen any other number quoted for that, although I may have missed it. BTW, I have also seen the top of the " normal non-diabetic " range stated as 115mg/dl in some writings. I prefer to quote the 70-110mg/dl range because it gives a little buffer above the official 65mg/dl hypoglycemia cut-off level. Please don't obsess about these minor differences in the numbers you have seen as the discrepancies are minor. What is important is that our goal should be the " normal non-diabetic " range, however you define that. Lower in that " normal " range is better as long as you can avoid hypoglycemia. Keeping your daily testing numbers lower will result in lower HbA1c results, and lower HbA1c means less risk of complications. , T2 Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Art Mc wrote: << I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 >> Geez, Art, don't you think they are going overboard here? Sixty-five is, after all, the official threshhold for hypoglycemia! If I can nail a fasting somewhere close to 100, I'm tickled. There's no way I intend to strive for readings in the 60s. I don't want us all to get paranoid. Susie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Art Mc wrote: << I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 >> Geez, Art, don't you think they are going overboard here? Sixty-five is, after all, the official threshhold for hypoglycemia! If I can nail a fasting somewhere close to 100, I'm tickled. There's no way I intend to strive for readings in the 60s. I don't want us all to get paranoid. Susie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Art Mc wrote: << I got a brochure on diabetes today in the mail from the hospital I spent so much time in. They are recommending 65-110 >> Geez, Art, don't you think they are going overboard here? Sixty-five is, after all, the official threshhold for hypoglycemia! If I can nail a fasting somewhere close to 100, I'm tickled. There's no way I intend to strive for readings in the 60s. I don't want us all to get paranoid. Susie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 There's no way I intend to strive for readings in the 60s. I don't want us all to get paranoid. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Me either:-) Don't shoot the messenger:-) Art Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2002 Report Share Posted April 10, 2002 yes art that's what my dr said for random bs.....that can be done only on very low carb diet or very high insulin for me .....no prizes to guess which i chose!! cheeky _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2002 Report Share Posted April 10, 2002 yes art that's what my dr said for random bs.....that can be done only on very low carb diet or very high insulin for me .....no prizes to guess which i chose!! cheeky _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.