High Fasting Glucose Level

[Nords]

I have to say that your "diagnosis" surprises me, too, since you don't fit "the profile."

Neither did I, at the time of diagnosis. In my case, it was traced back to a government program to give all young men of a certain age a free trip to a marvelous part of the world ...

Took the words right out of my mouth.

A neighbor popped up Type 2 on testing about six months ago at age 60. He'd already been having symptoms of weight loss and so forth that rang a bell with his doctor a lot louder than it did with him. Once he'd responded to insulin and the immediate crisis was past, though, he recalled all those times he'd water-skiied* in Cam Ranh Bay and learned that it was probably an Agent Orange watershed.

The VA took one look at his DD-214 and his test results and put him straight on disability benefits. No fuss, hardly any bureaucratic admin.

* No, I mean real recreational water skiing on slalom skis behind a power boat. AFAIK that's not a military euphemism for some martial activity.

 

[TromboneAl]

I am planning to see my doctor about this, and would prefer to do that immediately, but I think I need play this right with regard to health insurance.

I'm guessing that if I were to be diagnosed as pre-diabetic, I might not be able to change health insurance plans, correct? So, if I want to change, I'd better do it before I see the doctor.

Here's the important question: If I am pre-diabetic, can I expect my medical expenses to increase significantly? If so, what would increase: doctor visits, medication, or both?

 

[5j404]

Yep medical expenses went up at our house, more Dr. visits, more prescriptions-
Pre led to diabetes within a year , although DH is at healthy weight and has healthy eating, exercise habits, the family genetics caught up with him. The Dawn Phenomenon does him in every morning. Although he doesn't have to take meds for the diabetes He now takes 2 for heart related prevention. Remember before any formal diagnosis make sure you have any additional life insurance or longterm care insurance in place you might want.

 

[fisherman]

The following is more a question than a statement. If you change Health Ins companies and then almost immediatley have a diagnosis would you not be afraid that the would try to resind the policy leaving you with no Ins? Since you have been with the current company for a period of time it might be better to just stay and go to the doctor. The new company application also probably will ask if you have had any abnormal blood work test in the last few years and you have the results of that to consider.

 

[happy2bretired]

TromboneAl.... I know this doesn't make any sense but most everything I say usually doesn't. How about cutting back on that meat you've been eating? (you probably have already) A few months ago I also tried eating more meat after reading Good Calories, Bad Calories and my pancreatitis came back again. I know the pancreas is better known for insulin and diabetes but it also is connected with fat digestion. I just know that I really messed myself up trying to eat more meat after reading that stupid book.

 

[TromboneAl]

After more analysis, it looks like I'll probably stick with my current HSA plan (note than any changes would have been within Anthem Blue Cross). It has the generic and brand drug coverage, and seems a reasonable compromise between cost and benefits.

Happy2BRetired, you may be right, although I still have confidence in the Good Calories, Bad Calories book. If meat is as bad as most say, I should have gained weight and had significantly worse cholesterol numbers. Neither of those things happened. But it's complicated, I know...

I'm quite sure that this blood glucose problem was around before I started eating more meat.

 

[rescueme]

As related to the question of financial impact (e.g. doctor/drugs/etc.) on a diabetic (either T1 or T2) I'll just tell you the financial impact, based upon my condition as a T2.

I was diagnosed in 2001, at the age of 53 - now 62.

I see my PCP for managing my T2. I'm lucky to have her in the role, since her late mother lived with her till her passing and also had T2, which my doctor managed.

I see my PCP every six months, including having a blood panel/urine tests done (includes A1C and to ensure no kidney problems).

Since diabetics are prone to possible heart problems, I also go to a heart care group every six months to manage my cholesterol numbers (all three).

The price for the four appointments? Just my deductable ($15 for the PCP; $25 for the heart specialist).

I pay a deductable for my test strips, but since I don't have much variation in numbers, I only check once a week. When I was first diagnosed, I checked four times a day - but as things settled down (and I learned more), I wasn’t as anxious. Annual co-pay for strips is only around $50.

I don't take meds for the T2 (currently managed via diet/exercise) but I do take two prescriptions for hearth health (co-pay works out to $61/month).

I would say that my situation is not much of an impact financially, at all. However, there are folks that spend much more due to being "brittle diabetics" (I'll let you look up the term).

Once you get over the initial emotional part of it and realize that you can manage this on your own (with a little help from your family not to sabotage your efforts) along with your PCP and other medical support, you will find that it is not a problem at all. At least in my case, I'm certainly better physically and I certainly am more aware of what I eat.

However, I will say that after almost 10 years, I would still kill for a slice of Pizza Hut's Supreme (no, not one slice since I was diagnosed)...

 

[oldtrig]

TromboneAl
I am betting that probably half the US population over 60 is pre-diabetic. My wife ( normal weight, age 61) had a fasting number of 116. The doctor did not seem concerned. Her other blood work numbers were good. She tested with my meter about a month later and she was 93. Cut some of those carbs and walk everyday. I walk after I eat at night. I would also recommend this.
Buy a meter then buy strips on ebay and keep a check yourself.

 

[FIRE'd@51]

My former sub commander/internist once told me that the "Dawn Effect" was the name of the phenomenon that all girls named Dawn had big breasts, or words to that effect.

Well, that would certainly be some type of "sugar high".

 

[FIRE'd@51]

I bought myself a Walmart meter and have checked my own readings many times. I have yet to have a reading over 100, even 1 hour after eating. My A1C number was 6.

If your instantaneous measurements are always under 100, wouldn't you have to be spiking pretty high at other times in order to have an HbA1c of 6, which is equal to an average blood glucose of 136?

 

[TromboneAl]

I'm past the early denial stage, and have read most of two books, but I'm getting tired of the "exercise and lose weight advice" that they all give, because this is what I look like

and my 6 days/week exercise includes 4-5 hour bike rides, weight-lifting, etc. I've missed maybe 4 days in the last two years.

Since the blood test last Saturday I've lost 3 pounds on the Stress and Fear diet plan.

I'll be using my glucose meter tomorrow, and hopefully will see the doc next week. If it weren't for the election results in Massachusetts, I'd probably already have seen him.

I'm holding out a little hope that this is related to hyperthyroidism, (which can cause higher BG) which I've suspected I have.
​

 

[FIRE'd@51]

T-Al,

You may be stressing out unnecessarily over a single "elevated" reading, assuming it was even correct. It is my understanding that many things can cause a temporary elevation of blood sugar, including something as simple as a common cold.

 

[fisherman]

Heres hoping subsequent test are better! I think we have similar fears about Ins.

I use to not go as often as I should for the same reasons. Then I found my states high risk pool and the cost to join is not bad at all and they have to take you the pamphlet says, no medical underwriting. With that as a back stop or if necessary a new home for six months and one day in Mass. I feel free to use my private Ins as long as I have it.

My understanding is you can always change plans within an Ins. company as long as the benefit level drops. This is how the company we use explains it.

Best wishes for better test results.

 

[SarahW]

If your instantaneous measurements are always under 100, wouldn't you have to be spiking pretty high at other times in order to have an HbA1c of 6, which is equal to an average blood glucose of 136?

Beats me. I'm pretty much like Al...still trying to figure out what the heck most of this means. All I can say is that the doctor's office told me my last results were all in the "normal" range, so I'm not going to argue with them. As I said earlier, I have started a serious exercise program and I have cut back on carbs in my diet, so perhaps those changes have made a difference in a relatively short time.

 

[SarahW]

T-Al,

You may be stressing out unnecessarily over a single "elevated" reading, assuming it was even correct. It is my understanding that many things can cause a temporary elevation of blood sugar, including something as simple as a common cold.

What he said. Try not to worry, Al.

 

[TromboneAl]

Thanks guys, looks like you may be right. All my measurements with my glucose meter have been totally normal: 93 before dinner (chili, beer, cottage cheese, cauliflower), 113 1 hr later, 111 2 hrs later, 101 3.25 hrs later, and 90 this morning (12 hrs of fast). If I can trust the meter, that's a big relief.

I still plan to go see the PCP next week.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Thanks guys, looks like you may be right. All my measurements with my glucose meter have been totally normal: 93 before dinner (chili, beer, cottage cheese, cauliflower), 113 1 hr later, 111 2 hrs later, 101 3.25 hrs later, and 90 this morning (12 hrs of fast). If I can trust the meter, that's a big relief..

As for that 101 3.5 hrs later, I'd rather have seen a 99, myself.

 

[brewer12345]

Related question:

Just got back from a visit to the Dr. because I feel like crap (appears to be a bacterial infection piggybacking on my cold). He mentioned that last year (about a year ago), my regular blood test showed a glucose reading of 102. Since they did not bother to say anything at the time other than a vague reference to lay off the sweets/carbs, I assume this is probably not a big deal? He has me coming in for another annual blood test in 2 weeks, so I suppose we will see then. FWIW, I am 36, in generally good health, 200#, 5'11', reasonably decent diet, generally hit the gym 3 to 4 times a week for cardio and weights plus have fairly active hobbies (hiking, camping, brewing - which is quite physical). No family history of diabetes that I know of, aside from some hugely obese types on my mother's side (but my heavy parents are not diabetic.).

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

The values under consideration in prior posts refer to 10 hour fasting specimens, so the 102 may have been completely normal if you weren't fasting.

This whole issue reflects a well-meaning desire to increase disease detection by adjusting the "normal" range to make it more sensitive. This almost automatically increases the per cent of positive results which are "false positives." Maybe it saves lives, maybe it doesn't. But it sure generates a lot of cost and worry.

It wouldn't surprise me if outcome studies eventually prove that the current recommendations are too stringent. Then disease advocacy groups will protest when they loosen them up (as just happened with the mammogram recommendations).

Tough stuff to get your head around sometimes.

 

[brewer12345]

The values under consideration in prior posts refer to 10 hour fasting specimens, so the 102 may have been completely normal if you weren't fasting.

This was a fasting number.

I think in the case of diabetes the costs of the disease unmanaged are so huge relative to what they could be if early detection and steady management were routinely pursued that I can understand the aggressive stance and a certain amount of false positives. Dunno if this is the case with other conditions, just happen to have read up on diabetes related to an investment (the company that had all those lae night WIlford Brimley cable ads).

Reading between the lines of your response, it sounds like 102 is nothing to get all that alarmed about unless the follow up results (a year later)are not encouranging.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

I think in the case of diabetes the costs of the disease unmanaged are so huge relative to what they could be if early detection and steady management were routinely pursued that I can understand the aggressive stance and a certain amount of false positives.

It depends. My guess is that when the glycohemoglobin/HgbA1C gets better standardized we will identify some who will go on to develop diabetes and complications and some who don't. Already, if you are in the range of 5.7 or so and stay there, complications are not common.

The jury is still out; it's an important question and some times public policy gets ahead of the evidence.

 

[Buckeye]

Do fasting glucose results and fasting insulin results have anything to do with each other?

Current PCP had DH and I take a fasting insulin test as well as the fasting glucose test.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Do fasting glucose results and fasting insulin results have anything to do with each other?

Current PCP had DH and I take a fasting insulin test as well as the fasting glucose test.

It is not customary to measure serum insulin levels for diabetes. While it can help distinguish how much of the problem is low insulin production rather than insulin resistance (within the body's fat cells, for example), the picture is usually a blend of the two (in type 2 - type 1 results from insulin deficiency). So, for example, a normal fasting glucose could be associated with high insulin levels, since the body is producing it in excess in order to overcome insulin resistance, and to maintain normal glucose.

Some doctors tailor their medications depending on the insulin level but the bottom line is glucose control. I am not aware of any evidence that routine insulin measurements lead to better treatment or outcomes.

 

[TromboneAl]

Here's my perspective, based on my recent experience.

Being in a situation where you find that you have diabetes, or that you are quite likely to develop it, is much, much worse than you can imagine unless you've gone through it. Consider never being able to have a piece of chocolate cake, pancakes, or a cookie. Not being able to eat the spaghetti that someone serves you at a dinner party. Imagine having to prick your fingers multiple times per day, or to have to inject yourself with insulin after every meal.

Trust me, it's different when it happens to you. This book can give you a feeling for it:

Amazon.com: The First Year: Type 2 Diabetes: An Essential Guide for the Newly Diagnosed (First Year, The) (9781569242650): Gretchen Becker, Allison B. Goldfine: Books

So, from that perspective, you want to do whatever it takes to avoid this. And avoiding it is easier if you start before your blood glucose levels get high enough to start wearing out your insulin-producing cells. There's a point of no return, and you want to take care of business before you reach that point.

It's true that if you don't have the diabetes genes, you're not going to get the disease no matter what you do. But if you do have those genes, the gun is loaded, and carbs and being overweight will pull the trigger.

I found out that my 66 year old sister has been pre-diabetic for a year (fasting glucose 103). Even if my test was an error, I'm not taking any chances. I'd rather be anorexic than diabetic.

 

[Buckeye]

So, for example, a normal fasting glucose could be associated with high insulin levels, since the body is producing it in excess in order to overcome insulin resistance, and to maintain normal glucose.

Yes, he was checking for insulin resistance now that I think about it.