Other Diabetics?

[JohnCo]

Would I be correct in assuming that the majority of fellow D`s, in the general populace, don`t bother with keeping as close control of BG. as possible?
It just seems to me that whenever I meet (in the last 5 Months) another D., they are blarse' about their levels! A typical answer would be "I test once/twice a day/week" or "I just cut out sugar"! One didn`t want to know at all!!
Ok, maybe the 86 year old gent this week didn`t test because of his age - but He was fit enough to walk his lurcher 2 miles daily and I reckon He was as fit as a lot of 60 year olds!
Or am I taking this illness too seriously? (Although I did go 4 days this week without doing any finger pricking )

 

[Twitchy]

I think I lot of it might be down to lack of education & lack of access to resources - if you can't get test strips you can't test, after all. Also if you've been unlucky & your GP is an ignorant muppet who has told you you have 'mild' diabetes you might just take them at their word...after all, we tend to assume they know best after all... 🙄

And of course there's always good old denial & diabetes fatigue, which none of us is immune to...

 

[DeusXM]

I think the complication rate stats from the NHS probably show quite clearly just how many people with diabetes don't take it seriously. It also doesn't help that the NHS shows absolutely no inclination to even bother to reach out to these people. The NHS still considers an A1c of 7 as something to be proud of, rather than a clear sign that the person in question needs to get their diabetes under control. If the NHS set an A1c of 6.5 as the highest possible number to be considered 'satisfactory', far fewer people with diabetes would go on to develop complications and far more people out there would live longer, happier, healthier lives.

But no, instead it just sits there and applauds people who feel the opportunity to stuff themselves with bread is more important than having a pair of feet. And then of course, the Government starts whinging about the cost of treating diabetes complications.

 

[Clarkey]

Without knowing any country wide statistics I would bet that a large portion (over half) of diabetics in the country don't manage their BG levels to very close control.

This I feel would mainly be down to education. There are hundreds of thousands that have not had education such as DAFNE or DESMOND, and therefore will have significantly less understanding of BG levels, managing BG etc.

When you say a typical answer is "I just cut out sugar" that to me screams out lack of education/understanding of diabetes, because it is NOT sugar that causes a rise in BG in the traditional sense of sugar. If you said to those people that say "I just cut out sugar", do you realise that eating a slice of bread will increase your BG by approx 5-6 mmol? They wouldn't believe it because they don't think of carbohydrates, they just think of sugar.

So to answer your question in regards to "am I taking this illness too seriously", the answer is no.

 

[Northerner]

I think some people have a mental block and see the whole control thing as highly confusing. This may be in part due to lack of care/education, but I think a lot is also down to misconceptions or folklore from past family experiences etc. I personally know quite a few people who just can't get their heads around it, and I am sure there are thousands more just like them, and resign themselves to the same fate as Uncle Eric or Auntie Ethel. Some are perhaps not made aware of how serious it can be so aren't driven to make the effort. All the scare stories may be a deterrant, but not if you are told that your >9% HbA1c is good - you just imagine that you are doing OK.

 

[Clarkey]

The NHS still considers an A1c of 7 as something to be proud of, rather than a clear sign that the person in question needs to get their diabetes under control. If the NHS set an A1c of 6.5 as the highest possible number to be considered 'satisfactory', far fewer people with diabetes would go on to develop complications and far more people out there would live longer, happier, healthier lives.

I agree to an extent, but sometimes an "applaud" is to encourage.

In my personal circumstance I have always had high A1c over the years, this is mainly because I didn't have the education/understanding at a very high level so never had excellent control for a good number of years.

Over the past two years i've been learning a lot more and then prior to my DAFNE course my A1c was 7.0. I was applauded by my specialist for this because of my efforts to get it down to such a point without having the DAFNE education. But at the same time I was also told it still needs to come down further. So I do believe in some cases applauding is a form of encouragement. Because you don't want people getting their A1c down to 7.0 just to have their specialist tell them it's not good enough.

 

[DeusXM]

So I do believe in some cases applauding is a form of encouragement. Because you don't want people getting their A1c down to 7.0 just to have their specialist tell them it's not good enough.

Absolutely - what I'm talking about are doctors who tell their patients that their 7.1 A1c is fine and they're doing a good job of controlling their diabetes, rather than telling them they are going in the right direction and that with more work they can get a healthy A1c.

I realise the importance of encouragement but I also think too many people and doctors get complacent. Doctors can't let people go round thinking that once they get in the low 7s that there's no room for improvement and people shouldn't bother trying. I don't get great A1cs (last one was 7.2) but my current self-imposed target is 6.8, for now. My doctor has tried to discourage me from this by telling me that my A1c is apparently a lot better than most of the people she sees at the clinic. My response to this is always the same - I won't have better health by having better numbers than unhealthy people, I'll have better health by getting the same numbers as healthy people.

The attitude that something is 'good for "a diabetic"' is the single biggest reason why so many people suffer complications. It's the equivalent of telling someone with cancer that they don't need to worry about getting treatment because they've fewer tumours than someone else with cancer. The NHS (and gosh darn it, Diabetes UK while we're at it) needs to chuck out the idea that our health should be held to a lesser standard than everyone else if it wants to help us stay healthy.

 

[robofski]

my current self-imposed target is 6.8, for now. My doctor has tried to discourage me from this by telling me that my A1c is apparently a lot better than most of the people she sees at the clinic.

I was talking with my DSN about the number to be aiming for at my last A1c result (9.2), she told me to target 7.5! When I questioned it and suggested that maybe 6.5 or even lower would be a better target she said getting less than 6.5 is very difficult without loads of hypo's! My app is currently predicting an A1c of 6.0 (last time it predicted 9.1 so I have some confidence in the prediction) and I've only recorded two 3.8's. If the 6.0 comes in I won't consider two 3.8's too many hypo's, getting into the 5's however will be more tough but I like a challenge!

And in answer to the original question, I didn't take my D seriously for the first 6 years and really did believe if I wasn't on insulin it wasn't 'real' diabetes so I can just pop a pill and be done with it!

 

[grainger]

I was talking with my DSN about the number to be aiming for at my last A1c result (9.2), she told me to target 7.5! When I questioned it and suggested that maybe 6.5 or even lower would be a better target she said getting less than 6.5 is very difficult without loads of hypo's! My app is currently predicting an A1c of 6.0 (last time it predicted 9.1 so I have some confidence in the prediction) and I've only recorded two 3.8's. If the 6.0 comes in I won't consider two 3.8's too many hypo's, getting into the 5's however will be more tough but I like a challenge

Just a quick query - how many hypo's is considered too many? Only wondering as I've had a bad couple of days with more hypo's than normal - mainly put down to packing house and therefore more exercise without realising I think!
Also - what app predicts A1C?! I feel I'm missing out 😱

 

[robofski]

Just a quick query - how many hypo's is considered too many? Only wondering as I've had a bad couple of days with more hypo's than normal - mainly put down to packing house and therefore more exercise without realising I think!
Also - what app predicts A1C?! I feel I'm missing out 😱

I don't know what the definition of too many hypo's is, but I'd be happy to have 2 readings at 3.8 every 6 months!

As for the app, I use OnTrack for Android, really like the app, it produces nice graphs 🙂

PS Hope the house move goes well!

 

[grainger]

PS Hope the house move goes well!

Thanks 🙂 hubby and I have decided lots of red wine will help us through the next few weeks! 🙂

 

[nathannathaniel]

Really, what is a "Hypo incident," anyway? My doctor today asked "Any hypoglycemic events?" and I said, "No."

About 6 or 8 times a week I realize (from the way I feel) that my BG must be getting low, so I test immediately, and then eat accordingly. Usually when I test (and I am feeling some symptoms), I find that my BG is between 4.0 and 4.5. Since these levels are not dangerously low, in my opinion, I do not consider them to be "events." After all, I am recognizing them, solving them before they cause an issue, and they are not very low!)

Opinions?

 

[Clarkey]

Also, 3.5 or less is officially a hypo, 3.8 would not be classed as a hypo. That's what I learned on my DAFNE course. My personal target for HbA1c is 6.0.

 

[nathannathaniel]

That's my personal goal too, and I hoped to see it today. I'm bummed out by my 6.6.

 

[robofski]

Also, 3.5 or less is officially a hypo, 3.8 would not be classed as a hypo. That's what I learned on my DAFNE course. My personal target for HbA1c is 6.0.

I was under the impression <4.0 was a hypo, bonus if it's 3.5, no hypos for me in the last 6 months!

 

[Clarkey]

Yup, my DAFNE course workbook says: "The term hypoglycaemia (hypo) is used to describe the situation when your blood glucose level drops too low, ie below 3.5 mmol/l whether you have symptoms or not."

So for me this past week i've only had one hypo of 2.9, woops.

The reason that "symptoms" shouldn't be classed as having a hypo is because if someone is constantly high, lets say always around 15mmol/l for months or longer and then suddenly drops to around 7mmol/l they may feel the symptoms that others would normally feel below 4mmol/l, because to their body it's dropped too low.

 

[Northerner]

I consider a 3.5-4.0 as a 'low', below 3.5 as a hypo. We're advised that below 4 is a hypo if we are on insulin or other hypoglycaemic medication so we have a greater margin for error. 🙂

 

[grainger]

I was also under the impression that hypo was under 4.
Does this mean that if I feel hypo symptoms at say 3.8 I could just treat with a small amount of carbs or should I still treat as a hypo with glucose?

 

[nathannathaniel]

I don't know, but I find that a small amount of carbs sometimes doesn't work if I'm too low. For example, if I measure a 3.8, and eat an apple, my BG will sometimes continue to fall lower for up to 30 minutes before it goes up again... and even then it may not go higher than 5.5 or so.

If I eat 3 lifesaver candies (instead of the apple) I usually see BG results in 5 or 6 minutes. My solution is to eat the apple, but also eat a candy for the instant effects.

I suspect that each of us is different, however, and we need to experiment to see what works for us.

 

[Clarkey]

Well I think it's what you feel comfortable with.

For me personally I feel anything below 4 mmol/l is too low and really classed as a hypo. But that's because I don't want to see any of my readings below 4 even if it's 3.9.

But if my specialist asks me if i've had any hypos then I will only say yes if it's been below 3.5 because that's what they've trained me on.