• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
  • We seem to be having technical difficulties with new user accounts. If you are trying to register please check your Spam or Junk folder for your confirmation email. If you still haven't received a confirmation email, please reach out to our support inbox: support.forum@diabetes.org.uk

HbA1c

Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
Peeny

Peeny

Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
I have had 3 tests so far, when I was diagnosed my HbA1c was 8.4.... my second, 4 months later was 3.3, and my latest one was 3.4. I was talking to a friend, who didn't believe that you can get a reading that low, it 'must be wrong'. Does anyone know if she is correct? Should I be worried? In the 10 months, I have lost 54lb in weight, and am eating a low carb diet.
 
Peeny said:
I have had 3 tests so far, when I was diagnosed my HbA1c was 8.4.... my second, 4 months later was 3.3, and my latest one was 3.4. I was talking to a friend, who didn't believe that you can get a reading that low, it 'must be wrong'. Does anyone know if she is correct? Should I be worried? In the 10 months, I have lost 54lb in weight, and am eating a low carb diet.
Click to expand...
Well HBA1C used to be reported in percentages which 8.4 sounds like, having said that the results have been reported in mmol/mol for a number a number of years, so your 8.4 would have have been 68 mmol/mol. I would think your 3.3 and 3.4, are acutally 33 and 34(about 5.2%).
 
I agree with grovesy, I'd take a look at how they were reported, whether % or mmol value

If your hba1c was 3.3% then that would mean your average BG was 3.8mmol which would not indicate diabetes at all whereas 33mmol would mean an average of 5.7mmol
xx
 
Agree with the comments above. Might even be that the 8.4 is in fact 84 mmo/mol. It's a message for everybody, when somebody gives you a test result always ask for the units in which it is reported.

Congratulations on the weight loss by the way!
 
Docb said:
Agree with the comments above. Might even be that the 8.4 is in fact 84 mmo/mol. It's a message for everybody, when somebody gives you a test result always ask for the units in which it is reported.

Congratulations on the weight loss by the way!
Click to expand...
What suprises me is that is quite a few years ago that % results were replaced but some Medics still give results in %. I am sure for the first few times following the change I was given in both.
I presumed as the first result was stated as 8.4 that that was % , the following results made no sense.
 
Docb said:
Agree with the comments above. Might even be that the 8.4 is in fact 84 mmo/mol. It's a message for everybody, when somebody gives you a test result always ask for the units in which it is reported.

Congratulations on the weight loss by the way!
Click to expand...
Thank you, I'm a bit lost with the results. I do my blood sugar test and keep an eye on that, it's usually in the 5's, so I will have to wait to see my nurse and chat to her.
 
If it's usually in the 5's then that would tie in with a hba1c of 33mmol like I mentioned in my first reply xx
 
Well whilst in my head I'm still a teenager, I freely admit for ages I was saying 'What's that on old money then?' to whoever was telling me my HbA1c result and it worked fine until the consultant got younger! :D Not to mention the GPs and all the nurses both specialist and otherwise ......

Most don't even remember £sd, let alone DDCT/IFCC .....
 
trophywench said:
Well whilst in my head I'm still a teenager, I freely admit for ages I was saying 'What's that on old money then?' to whoever was telling me my HbA1c result and it worked fine until the consultant got younger! :D Not to mention the GPs and all the nurses both specialist and otherwise ......

Most don't even remember £sd, let alone DDCT/IFCC .....
Click to expand...
Well £sd, was 50 years , it was on the news recently.
 
Kaylz said:
If it's usually in the 5's then that would tie in with a hba1c of 33mmol like I mentioned in my first reply xx
Click to expand...
Thank you grovesy, I will have to see my nurse and have a chat about it. She was really pleased with it..... :confused:
 
Peeny said:
Thank you grovesy, I will have to see my nurse and have a chat about it. She was really pleased with it..... :confused:
Click to expand...
I'm not grovesy lol, why the confused/concerned face? 33mmol is good as a hba1c level
 
On my blood test results it reports the DCCT and IFFC results separately, so which one is talked about is a matter of personal choice for the physician and patient. I seem to hear both used randomly. But once I learn a system I find it difficult to change, so as I was diagnosed in percentages that is how I think. I need a translator to understand very tiny moles.

Were you given your results on the phone, Peeny? If so it is possible they spelled out the digits "eight-four" rather than saying the number to make it clearer. That is quite a common thing to do, so could have caused the confusion.

A normal non-diabetic reading on the DCCT scale is 4–5.9%. Being in the 3s would mean you are frequently hypo-ing, and if that were the case you would be very aware of it and your doctors would be treating you for it.

As that translates as 20–41 mmol/mol on the IFCC scale, readings of 33 and 34 are very good. The usual target for diabetics is to get you level at or below 48 mmol/mol / 6.5% so you have exceeded that by quite a bit. Congratulations.
 
Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
Back
Top