Normal Levels?

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

dc99
Regular Member


Date Joined Oct 2007
Total Posts : 23
   Posted 1/15/2008 3:53 AM (GMT -7)   
Dear All
 
Please let me know th normal blood sugar level. I just did a rapid blood sugar test 2.5 hrs after eating 1 sanwich and 1 cup tea with 1 tea sp sugar. The level was 119. Please let me know if this is considered as diabetes. i have thirsty frequently.
 
Thanks for your response.

judy3
Veteran Member


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 667
   Posted 1/15/2008 8:12 AM (GMT -7)   
This is high 2.5 hours after eating, you should have this after one hour, try again and see your results after 1 hour, it should be below 140 after 1 hour, also test your sugar first thing in the morning should be below 100

Montana1
New Member


Date Joined Dec 2007
Total Posts : 15
   Posted 1/16/2008 1:55 PM (GMT -7)   
Well, Darn, what to believe? I've always heard that normal 2-4 hours after eating was 140 and under. I even have tested this. My non-diabetic husband has gone up to 143 yes, 143, 2 hours after a pizza and cake meal. (A faulty meter?) But at the same time I've read that truly normal people always return to the 80's after such a meal. This topic always makes my head spin.
eyes
Montana

ptddsdo
New Member


Date Joined Jul 2007
Total Posts : 7
   Posted 1/16/2008 6:53 PM (GMT -7)   
I also am confused sometimes.  If I go to the Dr. and my fasting  chem 20 lab test says 102 but the reference is 74 to 106 am I prediabetic?  According to my print out 102 is not listed as abnormal since it is in the normal reference range.  I thought over 100 was prediabetic.

LanieG
Forum Moderator


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5406
   Posted 1/16/2008 8:17 PM (GMT -7)   
The key here is:  what is normal?  You'll find different parameters from different sources all over the place, booklets from the doctor's office, the ADA, magazines, online sites, your mother-in-law and people here on the forum, you name it.  I've also read in several places that fasting 100 to 126 is "pre-diabetic" and over 126 is diabetic.  If that person has blood sugar results like that on two different occasions, the doctor would probably order a glucose tolerance test.  A morning fasting test will only tell you the blood sugar that morning and whatever you ate for dinner the night before will affect it.  On the other hand if someone keeps having blood sugar tests that are higher than "normal" (like above 100) all the time, I think that person should take steps to try to keep the blood sugar in line:  lose weight if necessary, change eating habits, get into a regular exercise regime and follow up with talks with the doctor for maybe the glucose tolerance test.  Montana, it does make my head spin, too.  And supposedly, a normal person's blood sugar would not move too much from the 80's even after a meal.  Perhaps a meal high in carbs would send it higher but they would recover to normal readings faster than we would.  I will say this though, for several years, my own fasting blood tests at my yearly physicals were creeping up, borderline diabetic, not quite full-fledged "diabetic", but it was only a year ago that the doctor started me on the glucose monitor.  I wish I had started testing years ago so I could have been more aware of my blood sugar, etc.  I was fooling myself thinking I was only "pre"  diabetic.  Since I wasn't "diabetic", I didn't do much about learning how to control it.  I was in denial.  So, ptddsdo, if your fasting results are around 102, I would suggest doing everything you can to keep it from creeping up.  Keep in touch with us.

Lanie
forum moderator - diabetes
diabetes controlled so far by low/no carb diet and exercise; no meds


sjkly
Veteran Member


Date Joined Dec 2007
Total Posts : 2113
   Posted 1/17/2008 1:30 PM (GMT -7)   
The AMA just changed their reference levels so what may not have been diabetic a month ago may be diabetic now.

ptddsdo
New Member


Date Joined Jul 2007
Total Posts : 7
   Posted 1/17/2008 6:52 PM (GMT -7)   
Thanks for your response Lanie.  The lab tech said since the reference was from 74 to 106 that my 102 did not make me prediabetic but does her training give her the ability to make this diagnosis.  I thought any reading over 100 was prediabetic.  I already exercise, have lost weight and do Dr Bernstein's diet (mostly :-) ).   So if I am prediabetic maybe I should lose more weight but I am only about 9 lbs. overweight.

LanieG
Forum Moderator


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5406
   Posted 1/17/2008 7:20 PM (GMT -7)   

Hi ptddsdo, well, as we've said before, you'll find different parameters.  I suppose the lab tech was just reading the reference just as well as anyone would read it.  The reference range at the lab that my doctor's office uses (Quest Diagnostics) says 65 - 99 for the fasting blood sugar.  That range would be "normal" to them.  In any case, I think you are very wise to think of your 102 as a concern now so it doesn't creep upwards over the years.  Learning all this now may help you avoid becoming a full-fledged diabetic with critically high blood sugar (because you probably know the damage that uncontrolled high blood sugar can do to organs over the years).  You're on the right track with the exercise and losing weight - 2 factors that help control blood sugar. yeah   And I would like to add something about these reference ranges:  whether it's 65-99 or 74-106, if our blood sugar is always coming out to over 100, for example, we should be concerned.  I remember one year my fasting came out to around 115, "pre-diabetic" according to whatever range at that time, and I was satisfied that at least I wasn't diabetic, so I didn't have anything to worry about.  My head was in the sand.  eyes   It's better to take control earlier than later.

 


Lanie
forum moderator - diabetes
diabetes controlled so far by low/no carb diet and exercise; no meds


ptddsdo
New Member


Date Joined Jul 2007
Total Posts : 7
   Posted 1/17/2008 7:26 PM (GMT -7)   
After reading the AMA article, "Old and New Definitions of IFG Predict CHD in Women, but Not Men" , I am more confused.  It is interesting in that there are definitely significant differences between females and males.  It appears the 1997 definition is much more predictive of potential problems in females but neither the 1997 nor the 2003 ada definiton was predictive of CHD etc. in males.

LanieG
Forum Moderator


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5406
   Posted 1/17/2008 7:41 PM (GMT -7)   
I skimmed the article but got lost in the figures.  Since heart disease so often is a result of diabetes, this is all the more reason to pay attention to diet and lifestyle now

Lanie
forum moderator - diabetes
diabetes controlled so far by low/no carb diet and exercise; no meds


gelchick
Regular Member


Date Joined Aug 2006
Total Posts : 477
   Posted 1/18/2008 8:27 AM (GMT -7)   
Labs have different reference ranges because their instruments have different tolerances. Even two labs that use the same instrument model may have slightly different ranges based on calibration results.
At my local hospital, A1c ranges between 4.0 and 6.5 are considered to be normal, but the medical center lab ranges are 4.0 - 6.0.The med center has a more expensive, newer, more precise instrument. The same blood sample can give two different results on the same instrument also,  just like on your glucose meter, so there's no point in getting stressed out if your number varies a bit.
 
What I think is significant, is that your number is on the high side of normal. It could be that genetically you tend to be on the high side, but it could also be an indicator that you are becoming insulin resistant. Making changes such as eating lower carb, exercising more, and reducing stress will help you to improve your blood glucose levels and reduce the likelihood of complications down the road.
 
sandy
I just want to live happily ever after-every now and then. Jimmy Buffett

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Wednesday, December 07, 2016 5:27 PM (GMT -7)
There are a total of 2,734,356 posts in 301,205 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 151325 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, artgal234.
363 Guest(s), 12 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
don826, Celeste15, Jasperilla, Teamchris, Gear, Scaredy Cat, Redwing57, Huddie, ChickNorris, time2reclaim, exqualls, artgal234


Follow HealingWell.com on Facebook  Follow HealingWell.com on Twitter  Follow HealingWell.com on Pinterest
Advertisement
Advertisement

©1996-2016 HealingWell.com LLC  All rights reserved.

Advertise | Privacy Policy & Disclaimer