Normal glycemia for a non-diabetic

Hello,

Can you tell me if 95 fasting for a person without diabetes is normal?(I have done several analyzes and you will: P)

And I think those values ​​are normal, up to 110 on an empty stomach is considered a normal value and a post less than 140 too ... if we add the margin of eating of the gluco, I think there is no worry.

This last decade begins to talk about intermediate glycemias or prediabetic states (Anque I do not like intermediate states, since they do not necessarily have to end in diabetes if we make a healthy life).Intermediate glycemia include altered basal glucose (GBA) and glucose altered tolerance (Tag, closely related to insulin resistance).Here you have an image with the diagnostic criteria and now I tell you something else.

Well, we were saying that these situations denote some insulin resistance (I give a numerical example for better compression ... it is as if the pancreas "inject" 20 insulin units into the bloodstream and the fura effect as if they had been less,15, 10 or 4).If there is insulin resistance, the pancreas works forced, squeezing itself until it runs out (hence the prediabetic state, although I insist that I do not like terminology).This can be avoided with measures that reduce insulin resistance.

Diet and exercise have proven to be more effective than pharmacological measures (being strict in this aspect we only have metformin, since glitazons have recently retired duebe a good combination to protect pancreatic cells).This attribute (reduce insulin resistance) has been attributed to drugs of another class (antihypertensive, lipid) but we really have metformin.In any case, it is important to know that the diet is fundamental and especially the most effective measure even compared to drugs is sport (I take advantage of again to say how on other occasions that when talking about sport as a therapeutic tool it must be taught by professionalswell formed in this regard).

If any of you are in this situation, I cannot fail to insist that with a healthy life it does not have to develop diabetes and regarding the decision to initiate pharmacological treatment, it must be taken by a specialist doctor in the area (family doctor,endocrine, internal medicine).

The glycemia that you tell us in the post are normal.

Well, it has become pretty but what matters is that it has been understandable and that it is understood (you do not know what it costs when you spend so much time saying rare words).

All the best

Pedro has been clear: D

I insist that prediabetes does not exist.
I think doctors, in general, should be tremendous on this issue.Diabetes has reached amazing levels: 14% of the population, first in the ranking of all kinds of complications, 5th cause of mortality (more than double dead by diabetes than due to traffic accidents) etc.
Everything that is to put hot cloths and blur a disease is to sow seeds for the future diabetes.

Diabetes, or do not have (like pregnancy :))) ... Those intermediate, diffuse stages, I did not help at all for patients to become aware of having a disease, and if they are consciousof suffering a disease will hardly follow a treatment.

Of course, not everything is a medical issue ... If in education it continues to pass the health care, we will continue to have the population completely misinformed in healthy habits and behaviors for health care.

Well, they are nomenclatures and the bad thing is that the nomenclature corresponds to a consensual criterion that is somewhat random.The problem is the damage that you can do labeling people.Regarding disease awareness I like to be aware of having to take care or awareness of having to improve health, I do not like people to feel sick ... and I explain, you know that I am a defender of caring for the mood andFeeling sick is not the best, on the other hand, having diabetes is not completely synonymous with being sick, since a diabetic with good control and good care (there is the challenge) can be even healthier than a non -diabetic than for several circumstances severalDo not take care of it.

In any case, this is a very personal opinion and I know that it will not be shared throughout the munt.That does not mean that at certain times warn people of the consequences of not taking care of themselves.Nor do I like prohibitions (human freedom is first and I am nobody to prohibit, I only recommend lifestyles).

All the best

I would like to ask something about the controversial "prediabetes": the people who are in this situation, if they are not taken care of, could they develop DM1 or would always be DM2 that followed a poorly careful prediabetes?

I agree with Owash that "prediabetes" does not exist.
There are diabetes, in its different phases and modalities.
An incipient diabetes is a diabetes.In fact, we would be all non -diabetic, since "pre" means "before", and any non -diabetic can become.
These are terms that only lead to the beginner diabetic to the error of thinking that, if taken care of, it may not be diabetic, which is false.
A type 2 diabetic that can still be controlled only with exercise and diet, is a diabetic equally.Similarly, a hypertensive that only suppressing salt and controlling diet and exercise does not need medication remains a hypertensive.

The rest are hot cloths and euphemisms.

Ok, but that incipient state of diabetes, if it is not taken care of, leads to DM1 or DM2?

Generally, the debut of type 1 is abrupt, so it is not usually the case of gradual beginnings.
When talking about "prediabetes" they usually refer to type 2 that still do not need medication.

Health

Ok, that is the idea that I had, what happens is that the following happened to me: about five years ago in the analyzes an altered glycemia came out and they told me that I had "prediabetes."From that moment on every year I did the test of taking pure glucose and that they do analysis every little time to see the curve, and the result was always good.The problem came last year, which was when I debuted.I told the doctor what had happened to me and taught her my analysis and did that of the peptide C and others that is necessary to know what type of DM she had and according to her, I have DM1.It has always seemed strange to me to move from "prediabetes" or diabetes incipient to a DM1, do you know more cases?

I think it has been coincidence.
If after the first altered glycemia, every year it gave you normal, simply not diabetic or prediabetic.
Keep in mind that the debut of a type 1 is very fulminant.Since things begin to go wrong to diagnosis, days or weeks go by, never years.

Don't turn him around.If you are type 1 there is no warning so much in advance.

Health

Thank you.You are right: better not go around.

As far as I arrive, it seems that it makes more sense to think that you are lada, (Diabetes 1,5).I say it because of the age you can have, and because if you were D1, your levels would be fired from the beginning, right?

Indeed that "prediabetes" (terminology that does not seem adequate) speaks to us of greater need for care, but does not imply that the person will become short -term diabetic (the deadline will of course be shorter if it is not taken care of).We should not become obsessed with the nomenclatures and with the figure (a limit is set for example in 10 because oh, but obviously 139 and 141 are similar figures).
Regarding diabetes, it is true that type 1 is usually younger people and a more abrupt debut, the mechanism involved in its genesis, although it is not completely known, it seems that it implies autoimmune mechanisms.

The intermediate stages denote insulin resistance, which is the mechanism involved in type2 diabets (the pancreas is subjected to a workers to overcome that resistance and exhausts itself little by little).Therefore normal is the step from an intermediate stage to type 2 diabetes, especially when this intermediate stage is detected in an adult phase.

It is very important that both in these stages and in diabetes itself, there is awareness of the need for care rather than disease awareness (I think care awareness can lead to the motivation to continue healthy, while feeling sick can lead toThrow in the towel, in any case we would be talking about psychology).In summary it is essential to be much stricter with lifestyles in this situations (either prediabetes or diabetes) although we all should be careful with life styles (healthmore diabetic, and the diabetic care to be as healthy as possible and bring a quality of life as similar as possible to non -diabetic).The problem is that the care that these situations require, unfortunately, they frequently exceed the patient and the health services or many factors that we have spoken on other occasions (it is a pity that a "developed" country and with a supposedly leading health system existboth diabetics that are often feeling unattended).

All the best.I hope you understand that apart from medical knowledge, enough personal opinions (for something we are in a forum).I do not hope you all share and respect other views.

I went out with 111 before the sugary water and 116 after the sugary water, and they already sent me pills, nutritionist and exercises because I am prediabetic, call him as they call him, it means that I am already entering the high range, and that I go straight to there, there areThat putting the face to the situation, if one becomes the disregard it reaches the high numbers.

I recommend you start to take care of yourself, if we had an example before drinking sugary water, but unfortunately the score is higher.

I am prediabetic.It has been explained well there.Yes there are documented cases of reversal of prediabetes if we understand as reversal return to a postprandial and normal fasting as long as you keep the diet and exercise, call it control if you want;and very important: suppress the abdominal fat.Abdominal fat is not only fat, it is a gland that secret leptin and resistin (the latter is said that in humans it is not secreted by adipose tissue, but recently it has been seen that it could be so), both involved in the pathophysiology of theDM2 and prediabetes.Eliminating them, winning some lean mass (that is, insulin receptors with increased glucose demand), the pancreatic reserve that you have can be enough to return to normal values.

I say all this because my opinion is that prediabetes does exist.With this I do not mean that it is reversed and that's it.No. The pancreatic damage exists, it is there, because if there is not, the pancreas is capable of compensating resistances, hyperglycemia and everything they throw.I would define it as "state of subtotal pancreatic dysfunction in which the Beta-Pancreatic reserve is reduced but is sufficient for the maintenance of normal glucose values ​​in the context of healthy lifestyle habits."It is different from the DM2, in which it can be controlled in acceptable values ​​(except for a few cases).Hence the values ​​that have been established.

It is better to tell someone who has more than 140 who is prediabetic than sending him home after telling him that "it is not diabetic", although both are true, because if not, surely he does not take measures to remedy him.

The terminology is so subjective ...
I was diagnosed with prediabetes almost 8 years ago.At that moment I changed my diet and began to exercise.Soon it was already type 2. And about 8 months ago they are lada.The pancreas defines, although one does what it has to do ...
Clear !If you do not take care of the consequences of diabetes do not forgive ...

Joejunior, your last paragraph I agree, because if you are not told a patient who is prediabetic, he arrives at his house and 'Longor it is not !!Diabètes do not forgive is a treacherous disease !! do not forget it ..........

They are opinions, colleagues.That we disagree does not mean that we do not agree with the fundamental thing: whatever our opinion, what is certain is that you have to take care of yes or yes.With that enough to understand us.

Greetings.

As my endocrine says "Do not forget this disease because this disease is not going to forget you"