Why is pre-diabetes reversible but type 2 not?
Isn't type 2 just an escalation of pre? What distinguishes the figures of 100-126 fasting glucose to 126+ to determine reversibility?
Lastly, fasting glucose in the morning is supposed to be your lowest, but I often hear of type 2 diabetics having 80-120 blood dugar at times--- like 3-4 hours after a meal, etc. Is this not supposed to be the case? Does type 2 mean your blood sugar is perpetually higher than 120?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by thiger78 on -
Hi James
Absolutely not. It is true that your FBS should be the lowest as you stated. Ideally less than 100. You should also check your sugar 2 hours post prandial (after eating a meal), until you are confident that your blood sugar is well controlled. Your 2h post prandial should be less than 140.
-
Permalink Reply by jims on
-
joke time again.
well keep up the crap.
onlly about 30 per cent of population seem able to survive glucose super load. the rest are doomed to rot out.
other than genetic issues that result in the set point control wandering higher and greater levels of liver glucose release; the rest is a battle of science upgrades on food supply versus the old hunter gatherer gene/digestion track optimizations thousands of years ago to improve survival against staravation. Today energy balance control now a critical factor.
keep laughing folks. real joke time.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan S on -
Jims, I'm not laughing. Nor am I understanding.
Nothing personal, write whatever you wish. But I must admit I have difficulty reading most of your posts past the first paragraph and usually give up after that. I have lost track of the message you are trying to send us; I'm not actually sure that I want to find it again.
Possibly you could make them shorter and clearer in simple english?
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter
-
-
Folks, I see where the disconnect here is:
1. Stopping the rot out of body really requires getting average BG under 155 and better.
2. Pill pushers simply push pills supposedly to do this.
3. Unforunately ignoring insulin resistance, its reasons for and just shoving more insulin - shots, pills -glyburide/starlix and avandia/actos are a total
disaster. One needs to solve insulin resistance first and quit the crap.. in my books insulin resistance is body push back that IT DOES NOT WANT ANY MORE GLUCOSE SHOVED into body skeletal/fat cells.4. Solve the saturation issues and get body cells backed off so they have room to store more glucose on body insulin command enables pancreas to work and really get Blood BG back down.
5. Insulin does not burn off excess and or daily loads of glucose - Only Hearty exercise can. Contrary to the b******* press.
Shoving more and more insulin and actos against insulin resistance is a abject failure, stupid and ridiculous. Guaranteed early rot out to graveyard.
De-saturate body cells of glucose will enable body to go back to work.
Bariatric durgery, staravation diets etc are all showing unexplained curious results while the onointed ones hang on to their orthodoxy like certain religious orders do. The religious orders have that right to some extent; diabetes cure promoters do not and should be providing information that really helps type 2's and not just raking in billions of dollars.
-
Permalink Reply by acidrock23 on -
Why wouldn't one "aim" at an average bg in the normal range? I'm way late and on the "wrong" team here but am always interested in the relationships between food and chemistry and I always think that it's a disservice to T2 to aim for a target of 155 which is so much higher than "normal" or even "close to normal" BG? I'm pretty sure I've seen people hit lower targets using a variety of strategies.
-
-
Acidrock23:
If I did not have problems with my liver overloading my body on the liver sump service when the BG drops sub 70, I too would driver for wvwn lower numbers. My Doctor has requested I note drive sub 100. When my liver is tripped, the BG shoots to 511 and slips back to 278/311 as th crap is diluted being pumped around my system.
My average BG was in fact shooting to 300 plus and an a1c of 13.3.
My bg when it gets to 110 really moves fast lower, so it is convenient to arrest fall early.
i would love to use full low glycemic approach and lower BG numbers and use full liver fifoing.
As I cant, I don't.
-
-
Another view from the east is suggesting that we may be on a less rewarding path solving T2 diabetes as they consider this disease to be a liver disease.
My numbers and health improvements over last 4 years seem to track their comments.
high glucose and insulin efficiency is an overworked - no working solution answer that the large increase of T2 patients around world is suggesting current approach is not solving.
My take is that glucose saturation causing insulin resistance and solving liver leakage is eqally a main part of that problem.
The web site was; http://integrativetherapyresearch.org/
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Advertisement
REsources
Groups
From the Diabetes Hands Foundation blog...
How do you measure the work of volunteers?
329,040 minutes, 329,040 moments so dear. 329,040 minutes — How do you measure, measure volunteers? In smileys, in tears shed, in counsel, in cups of coffee. In units, in carb counts, in laughter, in strife. In 329,040 minutes – how …Continue Reading
DHF Expands Board of Advisors
Diabetes Hands Foundation has always relied on partners and advisors to increase its understanding of the diabetes space, in order to better serve people touched by diabetes. Today this is as true as ever, as we proudly announce the expansion …Continue Reading
TuDiabetes Team
DHF STAFF
 Manny Hernandez(Co-Founder, Editor, has LADA)
|
DHF VOLUNTEERS
Lead Administrator
 Bradford (has type 1) |
Administrators
 Lorraine (mother of type 1) |
 Marie B (has type 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIKE us on Facebook
Spread the word
This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.
© 2013 A community of people touched by diabetes, run by the Diabetes Hands Foundation.
