diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when you do not have to give it barracks or a single day
Of course you have to control sugar, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
Normaglycemia are 60-110mg/dl values, that is, glycosylated hemoglobin between 4 and 5.5 for 90 days on average with very low standard deviation and tiny variability in addition to a time in a 100%range.
I repeat the same thing, take care and realistic, it seems to me for all your answers that you just want to believe and value those who tell you what you want to hear.
Joaquillo said: exact, it is what explains, the glycemic variability does not give you glycosilada, so someone with 7.2 could have it with less variability than someone with 6.9 ...Well and everything else I already said.
But it is that in both cases it is diabetes, and with 6 also
diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that everyone thinks what you want.
diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos noI was going to happen to me, the barracks do not have to give it a single day.
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that each one thinks what he wants.
6 It is not díbetes, diabetes is from 6.4 (from 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes), and 5 less, or 5.8, putting treatment with pills with 5.8?Is that you want to do business with medication?With 5.8 you don't need to force your organs with pills. Of course that table is exaggerated. I refer to all the above I said and obvious.
My doctor has said with my data, you cannot affirm one hundred percent that I am diabetic and I have sent me diet and exercise and take another test within three months and that is what I will do. That table saying that 5 is high is an absurd exaggeration and as I said you should not look only the glycosilada and more if it is not too high, and I have not had two fasting tests with more than 126 but only one, the other two 114 and108, apart from having triglycerides and cholesterol very well, and explain the indexes that relate them to glucose. To deny reality is that you say that 7.2 are glucose of more than 180 when they are around 160, which even doubts you are a doctor, and denying reality is a table that says that 5 glycosylated is high and diabetic. I believe mine may be prediabetes or simply altered basal blood glucose. You cannot affirm that with 7.2 they reach Picos de 200 how you have said, because glycosiladYou were first much worse than the other two because you were more sedentary or worse diet etc If I have infasting 108 and 114 is currently the most likely an altered basal blood glucose or prediabetes, it is not a diabetes to medicate for the moment. If within three months with diet and exercise I give glycosylated 4 or 4.5 you are also going to tell me that I am diabetic but is it that I have controlled it?In the end. According to my doctor if I give that in three months I am not diabetic and I simply had the basal glucose altered with perhaps prediabetes
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
ruthbia said: Normoglycemia are values of 60-110mg/dl, that is, glycosylated hemoglobin between 4 and 5.5 for 90 days on average with very low standard deviation and tiny variability in addition to a100%range.
I repeat the same thing, take care and realistic, it seems to me for all your answers that you just want to believe and value those who tell you what you want to hear.
Thanks, I'll take care of myself. No, whom I believe is my doctor about my diagnosis Here, however, I get useful information about food etc., but who has to diagnose or not diabetes is my doctor.
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
I believe that you have been wrong about the forum, I would go to that of "Forocoches" there are there doctors in all subjects and return in here within three months and tell us if that, right?
Joaquillo said: Joaquillo said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, to the azure you do not have to give it barracks or a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that each one thinks what he wants.
6 It is not díbetes, diabetes is from 6.4 (from 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes), and 5 less, or 5.8, putting treatment with pills with 5.8?Is that you want to do business with medication?With 5.8 you don't need to force your organs with pills. Of course that table is exaggerated. I refer to all the above I said and obvious.
My doctor has said with my data, you cannot affirm one hundred percent that I am diabetic and I have sent me diet and exercise and take another test within three months and that is what I will do. That table saying that 5 is high is an absurd exaggeration and as I said you should not look only the glycosilada and more if it is not too high, and I have not had two fasting tests with more than 126 but only one, the other two 114 and108, apart from having triglycerides and cholesterol very well, and explain the indexes that relate them to glucose. To deny reality is that you say that 7.2 are glucose of more than 180 when they are around 160, which even doubts you are a doctor, and denying reality is a table that says that 5 glycosylated is high and diabetic. I think mine may be diabetes or simply altered basal blood glucose. You cannot affirm that with 7.2 they reach Picos de 200 how you have said, because glycosiladYou were first much worse than the other two because you were moresedentary or worse diet etc If I have 108 and 114 fasting, the most likely is an altered basal blood glucose or prediabetes, it is not a diabetes to medicate at the moment. If within three months with diet and exercise I give glycosylated 4 or 4.5 you are also going to tell me that I am diabetic but is it that I have controlled it?In the end. According to my doctor if I give that within three months I am not diabetic and I simply had the basal glucose altered with perhaps prediabetes
What diabetes is that from 6.4? I don't know where you have taken that.I think I flip, but hey, I don't tell you anymore, there you.My intervention is over.You deceive you and a lot.Q well, for my part I don't tell you anything else.
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that each one thinks what he wants.
6 It is not díbetes, diabetes is from 6.4 (from 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes), and 5 less, or 5.8, putting treatment with pills with 5.8?Is that you want to do business with medication?With 5.8 you don't need to force your organs with pills. Of course that table is exaggerated. I refer to all the above I said and obvious.
My doctor has said with my data, you cannot affirm one hundred percent that I am diabetic and I have sent me diet and exercise and take another test within three months and that is what I will do. That table saying that 5 is high is an absurd exaggeration and as I said you should not look only the glycosilada and more if it is not too high, and I have not had two fasting tests with more than 126 but only one, the other two 114 and108, apart from having triglycerides and cholesterol very well, and explain the indexes that relate them to glucose. To deny reality is that you say that 7.2 are glucose of more than 180 when they are around 160, which even doubts you are a doctor, and denying reality is a table that says that 5 glycosylated is high and diabetic. I think mine may be diabetes or simply altered basal blood glucose. You cannot affirm that with 7.2 they reach Picos de 200 how you have said, because glycosiladYou were first much worse thanThe other two because you were more sedentary or worse diet etc If I have 108 and 114 fasting, the most likely is an altered basal blood glucose or prediabetes, it is not a diabetes to medicate at the moment. If within three months with diet and exercise I give glycosylated 4 or 4.5 you are also going to tell me that I am diabetic but is it that I have controlled it?In the end. According to my doctor if I give that within three months I am not diabetic and I simply had the basal glucose altered with perhaps prediabetes
What diabetes is that from 6.4? I don't know where you have taken that.I think I flip, but hey, I don't tell you anymore, there you.My intervention is over.You deceive you and a lot.Q do well, I don't tell you anything else.
The criteria of the ADA are very lax, more and more endocrine are questioned 6.3 is too much to give it as normal
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
diabetic said: I think you have been forum, I would go to the "Forocoches" there are there doctors in all subjects and return here within three months and tell us if we are alreadyThat, right?
I don't like cars, I don't even have cars. I also believe that you have been wrong for forum and you should go to a spelling forum, it is written - there is - no - there is there - there -
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: diabetic said: I thought the same as you, that with those glycos nothing was going to happen to me, when nothing was going to happen to me.Not a single day
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that each one thinks what he wants.
6 It is not díbetes, diabetes is from 6.4 (from 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes), and 5 less, or 5.8, putting treatment with pills with 5.8?Is that you want to do business with medication?With 5.8 you don't need to force your organs with pills. Of course that table is exaggerated. I refer to all the above I said and obvious.
My doctor has said with my data, you cannot affirm one hundred percent that I am diabetic and I have sent me diet and exercise and take another test within three months and that is what I will do. That table saying that 5 is high is an absurd exaggeration and as I said you should not look only the glycosilada and more if it is not too high, and I have not had two fasting tests with more than 126 but only one, the other two 114 and108, apart from having triglycerides and cholesterol very well, and explain the indexes that relate them to glucose. To deny reality is that you say that 7.2 are glucose of more than 180 when they are around 160, which even doubts you are a doctor, and denying reality is a table that says that 5 glycosylated is high and diabetic. I think mine may be diabetes or simply altered basal blood glucose. You cannot affirm that with 7.2 they reach Picos de 200 how you have said, because glycosiladYou were first much worse thanThe other two because you were more sedentary or worse diet etc If I have 108 and 114 fasting, the most likely is an altered basal blood glucose or prediabetes, it is not a diabetes to medicate at the moment. If within three months with diet and exercise I give glycosylated 4 or 4.5 you are also going to tell me that I am diabetic but is it that I have controlled it?In the end. According to my doctor if I give that within three months I am not diabetic and I simply had the basal glucose altered with perhaps prediabetes
What diabetes is that from 6.4? I don't know where you have taken that.I think I flip, but hey, I don't tell you anymore, there you.My intervention is over.You deceive you and a lot.Q do well, I don't tell you anything else.
From 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes, not diabetes, that is the mostly accepted information and taken from health pages, greetings and thanks
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
From 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes <img alt = "" class = "IMG-Fluid MB-3" SRC = "https: //www.diabetesforo.com/Uploads/Editor/7t/IX535PCN9ipg.jpg "Style =" Max-Width: 300px;
Of course, the sugar must be controlled, but according to that table, 80 percent of the Spaniards have high sugar if they say that 5 is already high
This table is perhaps too strict, but I tell you that people without diabetes or insulin resistance (which many people have resistance and do not know), has a gly of 4.7-4.9 maximum.You do it to a non -obese non -diabetic child and without resistance and it is what it has. All obese or practically all have some insulin resistance, which would not count as "normal" population in terms of hydrocarbon metabolism. But come on, that 6 is already considered and think that 7.2 It is not, it is to deny reality, because it gives you that, you can have 60 but at other times 200 and that glycemics variability is not normal either.Of course with 6.1 I already put treatment, and I have a diabetic endocrine type lada that started with 5.8 such treatment. I don't want to pronounce myself more about this, that each one thinks what he wants.
6 It is not díbetes, diabetes is from 6.4 (from 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes), and 5 less, or 5.8, putting treatment with pills with 5.8?Is that you want to do business with medication?With 5.8 you don't need to force your organs with pills. Of course that table is exaggerated. I refer to all the above I said and obvious.
My doctor has said with my data, you cannot affirm one hundred percent that I am diabetic and I have sent me diet and exercise and take another test within three months and that is what I will do. That table saying that 5 is high is an absurd exaggeration and as I said you should not look only the glycosilada and more if it is not too high, and I have not had two fasting tests with more than 126 but only one, the other two 114 and108, apart from having triglycerides and cholesterol very well, and explain the indexes that relate them to glucose. To deny reality is that you say that 7.2 are glucose of more than 180 when they are around 160, which even doubts you are a doctor, and denying reality is a table that says that 5 glycosylated is high and diabetic. I think mine may be diabetes or simply altered basal blood glucose. You cannot say that with 7.2 they reach 200 picos how you have said, because glycosiladbeing that you were first month much worse than the other two because you were more sedentary or worse diet etc If I have 108 and 114 fasting, the most likely is an altered basal blood glucose or prediabetes, it is not a diabetes to medicate at the moment. If within three months with diet and exercise I give glycosylated 4 or 4.5 you are also going to tell me that I am diabetic but is it that I have controlled it?In the end. According to my doctor if I give that within three months I am not diabetic and I simply had the basal glucose altered with perhaps prediabetes
What diabetes is that from 6.4? I don't know where you have taken that.I think I flip, but hey, I don't tell you anymore, there you.My intervention is over.You deceive you and a lot.Q do well, I don't tell you anything else.
From 5.5 to 6.4 is prediabetes, not diabetes, that is the mostly accepted information and taken from health pages, greetings and thanks
I already tell you that that is
Joaquillo said: from 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes
I already tell you that that is old, since there are sensors there is much more information about it.And anyway you have 7.2. Even taking that as valid, of 6.4 7.2 there is a lot of difference.
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
Joaquillo said: from 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes
A well -controlled diabetic must be less than 7 from gly, if possible as close to 6, so a non -diabetic imagine
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
I leave this link of the OCU, which does not advise medication in case of prediabetes (as my doctor, only diet and exercise) has done), prediabetes does not become a disease and can be eliminated, if you do not make diet and exercise you can end diabetesType 2, the link explains well, the OCU is against overmedication, pills must be prescribed if it is diabetes, if it seems to be prediabetes no, diabetes cannot be cured, prediabetes if you can remedy it and never have diabetes. The right thing in my case is because it is diet and exercise and do my three -month devot tests and if 5 for example glycosylated, I will not even have prediabetes, obviously if I do not change diet or exercise, prediabetes can lead me to have diabetes. I only give opinion what I have informed, it is not necessary to bother it if it is disagreed, but in my case it is most likely to be prediabetes and will be confirmed or not within three months. A doctor who prescribes pills to someone with prediabetes I think is not a good idea, read this.
Joaquillo said: from 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes
A well -controlled diabetic must be less than 7 gly, if possible as close to 6, so a non -diabetic imagine
>
Having given 114 and 108 of two fasting glucose (within prediabetes) and glycosiladConsider disease but risk of getting sick with diabetes if it does not change diet and exercises, as my doctor told me
Joaquillo said: Joaquillo said: from 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes
A well -controlled diabetic must be less than 7 gly, if possible as close to 6, so a non -diabetic imagine
>
Having given 114 and 108 of two fasting glucose (within prediabetes) and glycosiladConsider disease but risk of getting sick with diabetes if it does not change diet and exercises, as my doctor told me
Well, that's it.Tell us in 3 months which glyc you get and what they tell you and maybe we get a surprise.
DM 2 con páncreas agotado desde diciembre 2020. 51 años entonces. HG diciembre 2020: 15.9. Última HG: julio 2024 5.8 Abasaglar 9 unidades. Metformina, 1000/0/1000. Humalog junior: 2 unid en desayuno y luego en función de lo que coma.
Joaquillo said: Joaquillo said: Joaquillo said: Joaquillo said: From 5.7 to 6.4 is prediabetes. And by the way glycosilada can have a margin of error of 0.5. Fasting glucose up to 126 is prediabetes, and Say 108 and 114. It is not conclusive, I lean that I have prediabetes
A well -controlled diabetic must be less than 7 gly, if possible as close to 6, so a non -diabetic imagine
>
Having given 114 and 108 of two fasting glucose (within prediabetes) and glycosiladConsider disease but risk of getting sick with diabetes if it does not change diet and exercises, as my doctor told me
Well, that's it.Tell us in 3 months what glyc you get and what they tell you and maybe we get a surprise.
No signature configured, update it from user's profile.
Freedom of expression !!
It is easy when I am not interested in something, I do not read it !! @joaquillo I don't know why you ask for help, when you know all about diabetes.Take care of yourself
Look at this @ruthbia response, there is no reason to close threads, I answer and forget it, great @ruthbia, I loved your answer !!
