Higher fasting morning blood sugars.

[Sulfate]

I hope someone can help me? My fasting morning readings have been pretty good in the last month average 5.2 to 5.7.
This last week they have been 6.0 to 6.1, 6.3.
I don't understand why when the previous days food has not been very high carb?
Why do they change so much and what can I do to lower my BS again?
Thanks ☺️

 

[Proud to be erratic]

Hi @Sulfate, there is a real danger in getting too obsessed by numbers. Even though your machine displays to one decimal point the truth is these devices are not that accurate. They are made to a price point and their accuracy is +/- 15 %. In real terms a reading of 5.7 is the same as 6.3. You should round the reading up or down to the nearest whole number and work with that.

Blood Glucose varies, minute by minute and both any 5 or 6mmol/L is still brilliant. Even a moment of emotion (happy or sad) can cause a small change in your BG. If you ate a meal in the last few hours, it's possible that your body is digesting a last remnant and any glucose from that can arrive in your blood. If you drank some alcohol your liver gives priority to managing that ahead of managing food. I could go on. My point is you could take 5 readings from the same finger in 2 minutes and get 5 different answers.

It's the trend that matters, not the precise readings and you are not diabetic, just at risk. With the numbers you've written above you are highly likely to no longer be at risk. Well done.

 

[harbottle]

Slightly elevated levels might be natural due to the circadian rhythm and in particular certain hormones that up production of glucose and make muscles more insulin resistant.

I get the same. Waking levels are usually 4-5.6, but between 8:00 and 9:00 when I get to work it goes up slightly into the sixes. (Even after I've seen a rise and fall due to breakfast.)

There is something called 'physiological insulin resistance' that can happen on low-carb diets, which can cause a modest rise of fasting glucose.

 

[Sulfate]

Hi @Sulfate, there is a real danger in getting too obsessed by numbers. Even though your machine displays to one decimal point the truth is these devices are not that accurate. They are made to a price point and their accuracy is +/- 15 %. In real terms a reading of 5.7 is the same as 6.3. You should round the reading up or down to the nearest whole number and work with that.

Blood Glucose varies, minute by minute and both any 5 or 6mmol/L is still brilliant. Even a moment of emotion (happy or sad) can cause a small change in your BG. If you ate a meal in the last few hours, it's possible that your body is digesting a last remnant and any glucose from that can arrive in your blood. If you drank some alcohol your liver gives priority to managing that ahead of managing food. I could go on. My point is you could take 5 readings from the same finger in 2 minutes and get 5 different answers.

It's the trend that matters, not the precise readings and you are not diabetic, just at risk. With the numbers you've written above you are highly likely to no longer be at risk. Well done.

Thanks so much for your really helpful reply. It can all be so confusing

 

[Proud to be erratic]

Thanks so much for your really helpful reply. It can all be so confusing

You are welcome @Sulfate. Yes: "Diabetes is Confusing, Complicated and Contradictory" according to Gary Scheiner in his book 'Think Like a Pancreas'. Although he was writing for insulin dependent T1s, I really do think it applies to the much wider audience of folk with or at risk of Diabetes.

You obviously took your March '21 result seriously and heard the "wake-up" bell (and really well done for doing that and continuing to sustain it). Yesterday's announcement by DUK heralds not so well, in that the incidence of diabetes is growing and seemingly in the slightly unexpected younger age groups.

One in five adults now live with diabetes or prediabetes in the UK

One in five adults in the UK now live with diabetes or prediabetes, and we are calling on the government to address the hidden health crisis we are facing. Our new diabetes prevalence figures show that there are now 4.6 million people in the UK who have a diagnosis of diabetes. This is an...

www.diabetes.org.uk

In the 4 years I've been an active member of this forum I have gained a perception ["Perception is reality, never mind the Facts"!] that:

NHS advice is patchy, bordering on incorrect (particularly in respect of what is a healthy diet).​

​

Parliament intervenes with dubious legislation (eg colour coded nutritional data, ignoring the significance of carb content) (packaging for the catering industry doesn't have to provide even as much nutritional data (? !) that retail has to provide).​

​

GPs are overloaded generally and their guidance to newly diagnosed T2s seems mixed.​

​

Hospitals often don't provide carb counting (or carb awareness) guidance in their menus. Yet they all have very exacting nutritional requirements in their Catering contracts​

​

So (surprise, surprise) Diabetes is on the rise here in UK and we are all confused.​

​

Out of simple curiosity how often do you still finger prick? Is your fp sampling following some form of structured testing? Are you still gently losing weight, or have you now reached a plateau? Please don't feel you need to share stuff if you'd rather not.

Also, I notice from an early post by you that your Mum has T2. Again out of simple curiosity, does your Mum manage her BG well? I have an older cousin (relative from marriage, not blood) that I keep an eye out for and she had a burst of enthusiasm 6 or 7 yrs ago to manage her new T2 diagnosis, then followed by a total disregard. But given her age (mid 80s) it now makes sense for her to enjoy an easy lifestyle. There is a lot of both T1 and T2 in my maternal family and my brother lost both legs to his T2 D; this was a big contributor to my motivation to keep my T3c in its place! Sorry, I'm rambling!

 

[Sulfate]

Slightly elevated levels might be natural due to the circadian rhythm and in particular certain hormones that up production of glucose and make muscles more insulin resistant.

I get the same. Waking levels are usually 4-5.6, but between 8:00 and 9:00 when I get to work it goes up slightly into the sixes. (Even after I've seen a rise and fall due to breakfast.)

There is something called 'physiological insulin resistance' that can happen on low-carb diets, which can cause a modest rise of fasting glucose.

Thank you for your helpful reply

You are welcome @Sulfate. Yes: "Diabetes is Confusing, Complicated and Contradictory" according to Gary Scheiner in his book 'Think Like a Pancreas'. Although he was writing for insulin dependent T1s, I really do think it applies to the much wider audience of folk with or at risk of Diabetes.

You obviously took your March '21 result seriously and heard the "wake-up" bell (and really well done for doing that and continuing to sustain it). Yesterday's announcement by DUK heralds not so well, in that the incidence of diabetes is growing and seemingly in the slightly unexpected younger age groups.

One in five adults now live with diabetes or prediabetes in the UK

One in five adults in the UK now live with diabetes or prediabetes, and we are calling on the government to address the hidden health crisis we are facing. Our new diabetes prevalence figures show that there are now 4.6 million people in the UK who have a diagnosis of diabetes. This is an...

www.diabetes.org.uk

In the 4 years I've been an active member of this forum I have gained a perception ["Perception is reality, never mind the Facts"!] that:

NHS advice is patchy, bordering on incorrect (particularly in respect of what is a healthy diet).​

​

Parliament intervenes with dubious legislation (eg colour coded nutritional data, ignoring the significance of carb content) (packaging for the catering industry doesn't have to provide even as much nutritional data (? !) that retail has to provide).​

​

GPs are overloaded generally and their guidance to newly diagnosed T2s seems mixed.​

​

Hospitals often don't provide carb counting (or carb awareness) guidance in their menus. Yet they all have very exacting nutritional requirements in their Catering contracts​

​

So (surprise, surprise) Diabetes is on the rise here in UK and we are all confused.​

​

Out of simple curiosity how often do you still finger prick? Is your fp sampling following some form of structured testing? Are you still gently losing weight, or have you now reached a plateau? Please don't feel you need to share stuff if you'd rather not.

Also, I notice from an early post by you that your Mum has T2. Again out of simple curiosity, does your Mum manage her BG well? I have an older cousin (relative from marriage, not blood) that I keep an eye out for and she had a burst of enthusiasm 6 or 7 yrs ago to manage her new T2 diagnosis, then followed by a total disregard. But given her age (mid 80s) it now makes sense for her to enjoy an easy lifestyle. There is a lot of both T1 and T2 in my maternal family and my brother lost both legs to his T2 D; this was a big contributor to my motivation to keep my T3c in its place! Sorry, I'm rambling!

Happy to share! It was such a shock to be diagnosed as prediabetic as I've always been slim and fairly active. My best friends reaction was "that's outrageous " !!
I have always had a very sweet tooth and my weight had gradually increased over 2/3 years though still a size 12.
I don't want to become diabetic if I can possibly avoid it. I have found this forum excellent and downloaded Nutracheck on my phone and each day I log everything I eat and drink. I try to stick to average of 130carbs a day as a guide.
Since my shock diagnosis I have changed my diet and lost over one and a half stone. I still do have sweet treats but on the whole my diet is very different I'm aware of what I'm putting on my body now.
I am little paranoid about my BS going up as I was so happy when my result was 40!
I put about 4/5lbs on after a cruise last August so dud Michael Mosley 800 blood sugar diet the 5:2 version so lost the weight and my hba1c was due and it had gone down to 40. Michael M suggested in his book to do a fasting blood sugar occasionally to keep track that BS is not going high which is why I do finger trick.
My mum is 86 , not sure how long she has been T2 but from the age of 50 she led a very very sedentary lifestyle so I think that may be part of it. I haven't found it easy so really don't want to undo all my hard work.

 

[helli]

NHS advice is patchy, bordering on incorrect (particularly in respect of what is a healthy diet)

Parliament intervenes with dubious legislation (eg colour coded nutritional data, ignoring the significance of carb content) (packaging for the catering industry doesn't have to provide even as much nutritional data (? !) that retail has to provide).

Both of these points refer to diet which I wanted to comment upon.
I find myself becoming nearly obsessed by carbs which isn't surprising when I have to count all the ones I eat. So I have to keep reminding myself, when most people refer to a "healthy diet", they are talking about a diet that is healthy for the majority of the population not the 20% (picking up on the article you posted earlier) who have diabetes.
The proportion of the population with coeliac is lower but when it was suggested I may have this, I started to see all gluten as unhealthy and had to remind myself it is something I (may) have an intolerance to due to my body's make up. This is different to it being unhealthy for all diets.

With regards to food packaging, I have always found the traffic light labelling misleading. Unless you are buying a complete meal, it depends upon how much you are going to eat and what else you will eat it with. Taking your idea of colour coding carb content as an example, bread would have a red label but, if I was having one slice of bread with a huge salad of fresh vegetables and seeds topped with a drizzle of olive oil, unless you have an intolerance to the contents of the bread (carbs, gluten, etc.) most people would struggle to see it as unhealthy in that meal. Whereas, if the bread was used in a stack of chip butties, that would be a different matter.

I see diet as something you need to put into the context of the person eating it and their lifestyle (the diet of a full time professional athlete would not be considered healthy for most of us).

[Sorry, @Sulfate I hope you don't mind my tangential comment on your thread.]

 

[Proud to be erratic]

Thanks, @helli. I think the main point here is that, as you say, much of the packaging is unhelpful or misleading to possibly many people. My older cousin is a smart and astute individual. At the time of her T2 diagnosis she was clinging to hight carb cereal for breakfast, partly because that had been her normal choice and then because she proudly pointed out that the packaging told her it was healthy. Her GP and his Surgery offered her zero advice

I agree there could be challenges in colour code describing bread in the context of what else goes with it, but at the very least shading bread at 22% as better than the Swedish "giant" crackers we are currently using up after our impulse purchase when we were in IKEA just before Xmas. This is 64% and we think delightfully crunchy and moreish.

All of those packaging colour codes would be better if described in context of what else is on the plate. Only a "ready" meal makes much overall sense, when colour coded for its nutrition; and even those today, without a clear carb colour code, isn't great - never mind a nutrition alert for the dgree of processing and chemically altered content. The whole thing could do worse than being taken back to the drawing board and thought through again, with the benefit of hindsight. But that won't happen, any more than domestic cars being banned to get better public transport, particularly local buses. The personal steering wheel can't be uninvented! [said by someone with 2 cars, each doing too little mileage to be financially justifiable!].

But as I recall the nutritional data on packaging was in large part intended to encourage (cajole, bully or intimidate) the "ignorant" populace into adopting more healthy diets in light of the fear of increased obesity in most age groups. I suspect those are a significant part of the 1 in 5 now already identified in the diabetes bracket. So is the nutritional packaging data remit in any way measurable? Successful? Useful? My perception (= Reality, never mind the Facts...) is that a significant cost has been caused with limited benefit. That cost, of course, is ultimately paid for by us as consumers.

Overall, you are right of course. This is and always will be about diet: understanding the effects of choices. Finding simple ways of making that clear, without bogging ourselves in all sorts of variations is beyond my availsble headspace. I'm glad I don't have to do that AND be accountable for what I did!