Went to the Dr today...

So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
do!

-nate

"Nate" <natevfx@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a7da98df-029a-411c-ae5f-53c5749e8778@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> do!

Keep up the good work!

Nate wrote in message ...
>So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of
the
>posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>do!
>
>-nate

Yes, I think so too. Keep up with what you're doing. :-)

Cheri

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:02:29 -0700 (PDT), Nate
<natevfx@gmail.com> wrote:

>So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>do!
>
>-nate

Yep! Heading in the right direction.

What other numbers did he give you? Lipids, BP etc.

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com
Latest:Is Testing Worthwhile?
and Cambodia
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/2008/03/cambodia.html

Nate wrote:
> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> do!
>
> -nate
>
three weeks??

sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.

More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:11:08 -0400, ted rosenberg
<tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:

>Nate wrote:
>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>> do!
>>
>> -nate
>>
>three weeks??
>
>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>
>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong

Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
experience.


Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com
Latest:Is Testing Worthwhile?
and Cambodia
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/2008/03/cambodia.html

"Alan S" <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:tnei1411o7hqouu5j0nbr1br5a164chb4n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:11:08 -0400, ted rosenberg
> <tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:
>
>>Nate wrote:
>>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>>> do!
>>>
>>> -nate
>>>
>>three weeks??
>>
>>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>>
>>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong
>
> Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
> weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
> type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
> experience.

The first Endo. I went to (granted, not a good one) did a fructosamine test
on me after 3 weeks. He said it was too soon to do the A1c.

On Thu, 01 May 2008 13:38:52 +1000, Alan S posted:

>On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:11:08 -0400, ted rosenberg
><tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:
>
>>Nate wrote:
>>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>>> do!
>>>
>>> -nate
>>>
>>three weeks??
>>
>>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>>
>>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong
>
>Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
>weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
>type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
>experience.

I was chatting with a friend today, and he mentioned that he has an
A1C done once per month, as a requirement of his company. He's a
long-haul trucker, and apparently they are quite adamant that anyone
with diabetes gets monitored closely.

The other thing is that even if the A1C were a true 3-month average,
monthly testing would still show a trend.

--
Larry, T2, Saskatchewan, Canada.
DX 24 Aug 07. D&E
Metformin 2000mg, Ramipril, Simvastatin
Dx A1c 8.1 : Latest 5.1 (4 Mar 08)

Agreed i was running 8o's near a month and week before my test i was sick
and my aic was 6..clearly my results dont match the testing i was doing
often at home.

KROM

"Alan S" <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:tnei1411o7hqouu5j0nbr1br5a164chb4n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:11:08 -0400, ted rosenberg
> <tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:
>
>>Nate wrote:
>>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>>> do!
>>>
>>> -nate
>>>
>>three weeks??
>>
>>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>>
>>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong
>
> Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
> weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
> type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
> experience.
>
>
> Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
> d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg
> Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
> --
> http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com
> Latest:Is Testing Worthwhile?
> and Cambodia
> http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/2008/03/cambodia.html

My ex had a first A1c of 12. something. One month later he was in normal
range. It was radical diet for him but not radical generally. I had him on
the little and often meals but carb was never lower than 15gr per meal or
snack. Compared to what he usually ate it was a huge change.

6.9 - 6.3 in 3 weeks isn't very dramatic but certainly going down which is a
good thing for the OP. Still a good job on their part.


"ted rosenberg" <tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote in message
news:fvbccc$osq$1@aioe.org...
> Nate wrote:
>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>> do!
>>
>> -nate
>>
> three weeks??
>
> sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>
> More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:02:29 -0700 (PDT), Nate <natevfx@gmail.com>
wrote:

>So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>do!

Nice slope, Nate - keep it up!

Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 100ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.6% BMI 25

Nate <natevfx@gmail.com> wrote:
> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> do!

Excellent progress, Nate! Keep up the good work. You'll be a 5%er before
you know it! ;-)

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!
I've known US vets who served as far back as the Spanish American War. They
are all my heroes! Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not
forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~

On Apr 30, 11:11*pm, ted rosenberg <tedrosenb...@iname.com> wrote:
> Nate wrote:
> > So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> > posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> > new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> > 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> > later) *and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> > do! *
>
> > -nate
>
> three weeks??
>
> sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>
> More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong

Even more likely, you don't know what you're talking about. A1c is
most heavily weighted to the last 2-3 weeks, so a drop of .6 in 3
weeks, especially when working to lower it, is entirely feasible. I
dropped mine from 7.2 at Dx to 5.4 in 2 months.

I guess you can spew obscenities at me now as seems to be your style.

John C.

You're definitely headed in the right direction, Nate. :-) Good job!
--
Best regards,
Michelle C., T2
diet & exercise
BMI 21.5

"Nate" <natevfx@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a7da98df-029a-411c-ae5f-53c5749e8778@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> do!
>
> -nate

Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:11:08 -0400, ted rosenberg
> <tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:

>>Nate wrote:
>>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>>> do!
>>>
>>> -nate
>>>
>>three weeks??
>>
>>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
>>
>>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong

> Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
> weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
> type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
> experience.

Not to mention that the interval in question is nearly twice three
weeks, and even if it was only three weeks, and even if A1C really was
a pure three month average, the figures supplied still wouldn't be
surprising.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

convicted friend Chris Malcolm wrote:
> convicted neighbor Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> > convicted neighbor ted rosenberg <tedrosenberg@iname.com> wrote:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts

> >>Nate wrote:
>
> >>> So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
> >>> posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
> >>> new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
> >>> 6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
> >>> later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
> >>> do!
> >>>
> >>> -nate
> >>>
> >>three weeks??
> >>
> >>sounds unlikely, unless you have gone on a radical diet.
> >>
> >>More likely, one of the sets of labs is wrong
>
> > Ted, it has become increasingly clear that A1c is heavily
> > weighted to the past few weeks, not months. At least, for
> > type 2. I say that based not just on reading but on my own
> > experience.
>
> Not to mention that the interval in question is nearly twice three
> weeks, and even if it was only three weeks, and even if A1C really was
> a pure three month average, the figures supplied still wouldn't be
> surprising.

In our collective clinical experience, this is relatively commonplace
for folks who smartly eat less, down to the right amount:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/BeSmart

Here is a simple parable provided in hopes of promoting greater
understanding:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/Parable

Life in industrialized nations is life in blessed feedlots.

<><

http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Counsels

So I went back today to get the rest of my lab report...

Chol = 142
Trig = 62
HDL = 38 -- a Little Low
LDL = 92
Chol/HDL Ratio = 3.7

I did have a bit of a high fasting Glucose at 105, but it was taken
from plasma and I think I have read that plasma tends to be higher.
Any thoughts?

I know that when I check it myself it’s normally in the 80 - 90 range
in the mornings. 79 yesterday

Oh and they checked my kidneys too. My Microalbumin was 2.5 and the
ratio to Creatinine (77.2) was 3.2

Is there anything else I should be watching out for in my labs?

While I was in today I took another lab to check my C-pep and my
insulin. hehe I hope I am not going overboard on this.

Thanks again everyone for your encouragement and advice.

-nate

CROSSPOSTS REMOVED

On Fri, 2 May 2008 08:46:21 -0700 (PDT), Nate <natevfx@gmail.com>
wrote:

>So I went back today to get the rest of my lab report...
>
>Chol = 142
>Trig = 62
>HDL = 38 -- a Little Low
>LDL = 92
>Chol/HDL Ratio = 3.7

Looks pretty good so far and likely to improve, trigs/HDL is good

>I did have a bit of a high fasting Glucose at 105, but it was taken
>from plasma and I think I have read that plasma tends to be higher.
>Any thoughts?
>
>I know that when I check it myself it’s normally in the 80 - 90 range
>in the mornings. 79 yesterday
>
>Oh and they checked my kidneys too. My Microalbumin was 2.5 and the
>ratio to Creatinine (77.2) was 3.2
>
>Is there anything else I should be watching out for in my labs?
>
>While I was in today I took another lab to check my C-pep and my
>insulin. hehe I hope I am not going overboard on this.
>
>Thanks again everyone for your encouragement and advice.

Thanks for proving that it works!

Nate wrote:
> So I went back today to get the rest of my lab report...
>
> Chol = 142
> Trig = 62
> HDL = 38 -- a Little Low
> LDL = 92
> Chol/HDL Ratio = 3.7
>
> I did have a bit of a high fasting Glucose at 105, but it was taken
> from plasma and I think I have read that plasma tends to be higher.
> Any thoughts?
>
> I know that when I check it myself it’s normally in the 80 - 90 range
> in the mornings. 79 yesterday
>
> Oh and they checked my kidneys too. My Microalbumin was 2.5 and the
> ratio to Creatinine (77.2) was 3.2
>
> Is there anything else I should be watching out for in my labs?
>
> While I was in today I took another lab to check my C-pep and my
> insulin. hehe I hope I am not going overboard on this.
>
> Thanks again everyone for your encouragement and advice.
>
> -nate

Nate, most meters today are 'plasma calibrated', that means the readings
are your whole blood readings plus an adjustment of ? 15% to
'approximate' a plasma reading

what meter do you use? what does the manual say about it's calibration?

--
kate
type 1 since 1987
www.diabetic-talk.org

Nate wrote:
>
> So I went back today to get the rest of my lab report...
>
> Chol = 142
> Trig = 62
> HDL = 38 -- a Little Low

Needs to be optimally more than 50 mg/dL

> LDL = 92
> Chol/HDL Ratio = 3.7
>
> I did have a bit of a high fasting Glucose at 105, but it was taken
> from plasma and I think I have read that plasma tends to be higher.
> Any thoughts?

It is the serum reading that is the reference.

> I know that when I check it myself it�s normally in the 80 - 90 range
> in the mornings. 79 yesterday

That is optimal but it would be wise to check your meter with the
reference solutions from the manufacturer or against another meter
because yours may be consistently off by 20-30 mg/dL.

> Oh and they checked my kidneys too. My Microalbumin was 2.5 and the
> ratio to Creatinine (77.2) was 3.2

This is an indicator of endothelial dysfunction.

> Is there anything else I should be watching out for in my labs?

AST and ALT can be elevated by NAFLD, which commonly is associated
with type-2 diabetic folks.

> While I was in today I took another lab to check my C-pep and my
> insulin. hehe I hope I am not going overboard on this.
>
> Thanks again everyone for your encouragement and advice.

Laus Deo

http://HeartMDPhD.com/LausDeo

<><

http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/Counsels

"Nate" <natevfx@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87695f41-b0ad-4c65-92d5-79d9d59a1bc2@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
So I went back today to get the rest of my lab report...

Chol = 142
Trig = 62
HDL = 38 -- a Little Low
LDL = 92
Chol/HDL Ratio = 3.7

I did have a bit of a high fasting Glucose at 105, but it was taken
from plasma and I think I have read that plasma tends to be higher.
Any thoughts?

I know that when I check it myself it’s normally in the 80 - 90 range
in the mornings. 79 yesterday

Oh and they checked my kidneys too. My Microalbumin was 2.5 and the
ratio to Creatinine (77.2) was 3.2

Is there anything else I should be watching out for in my labs?

While I was in today I took another lab to check my C-pep and my
insulin. hehe I hope I am not going overboard on this.

Thanks again everyone for your encouragement and advice.

-nate
--
You might want to remove the non-diabetes newsgroups from
the list of newsgroups you are crossposting to, with perhaps
one exception if you are posting through one of the other
newsgroups. Many of the diabetics here are trying to set up
a killfile that deletes all messages crossposted to at least
one of those newsgroups, especially the cardiology newsgroup,
due to the number of kooks that crosspost to such a list of
newsgroups.

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:02:29 -0700 (PDT), Nate <natevfx@gmail.com>
wrote:

>So hello again everyone. I have been learing a lot reading some of the
>posts on here. So I went to the Dr today. He is new so he had me take
>new labs. On the 6th of march I took my very first lab and my A1C was
>6.9 and the labs from today I took on the 12th (so about 4 to 5 weeks
>later) and my A1C was 6.3, thats pretty good don't you think? I
>do!
>
>-nate

G'day G'day Nate,

Well done for five weeks. Keep it up and you'll be in the 5% club in
another month or so. Your triglyceride to HDL ratio looked good
although your HDL was low. The low triglycerides suggests that the
carbs in your diet isn't excessive. The low HDL could be from a
number of reasons. Smoking will lower HDL. Lack of exercise will do
it. Rowers used to find their HDL went down every year in the off
season when they weren't training. HDL is a temporary sort of thing.
Some T2 diabetics struggle with it. Some don't. There is a large
genetic component involved with it apparently. Omega-6 fats will
lower all cholesterol including unfortunately HDL. Drinking some red
wine will increase HDL though all in all it has little benefit except
for those over fifty.

Best wishes,
--
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin