Thread: What is "normal" blood sugar?

What is considered normal for blood sugar levels, what is considered pre-diabetic, and what is the level for diabetes? I've looked at different internet sites, and have gotten some conflicting numbers. Some say anything over 100 is pre-diabetic, some say over 110, and one says that they feel that anything above 90 is dangerous, and to shoot for below that. So, what numbers should a person be concerned with? If I went to the Dr. and he said my blood tested at 102, should I be concerned or not? If it stays stable between 100 and 110, is that ok, or should I worry?

What is considered normal for fasting, and how much should you see your blood sugar go up after a typical low carb meal?

Those of us who are not diabetic, or at least think we aren't, should probably be better educated, especially those of us who have a hard time losing, and/or have a lot left to lose, or who have problems with sticking to our woe, because all this could be related in insulin resistance, and we could be setting ourselves up for diabetes.

BTW, I hope you don't think these are dumb questions, but I really think that those of us with wonky metabolisms need to get all the education we can concerning this, and who better to ask than those who deal with it on a regular basis?

Oh, and I'm not asking for medical advice, I'm just curious because when I tried to find the answer on the net, I could not find a simple, straight-forward answer, each site had its own take on what is normal.

Nita,
Maybe this will help.

http://www.diabetes.org/about-diabetes.jsp

The American Diabetes Association has long been viewed as the most informative and most *medically correct* source of diabetic info.

It's true that over the years, the numbers have changed at what level your BGL means. 80-120 used to be *normal*; now, as you can see, anything over 125 gets you a diagnosis of diabetes.

I think now that we, as Americans, have reached the obesity epidemic level, that it is more important to be aware and get tested on a regular basis especially if AODM(adult onset diabetes mellitus) runs in your family, or you are overweight, and espeicially a *carrier* of belly fat.


These are not "dumb" questions, Nita. They are questions a lot of us should be searching for the anwsers to.

hth

Still, good question IMO how much blood sugar levels tend to increase after a "normal" lc or even non-lc meal, Nita, and I don't see that answered, either. I've thought about getting a monitor to do some self testing, but the strips are rather expensive to buy just for curiosity's sake. There's probably an individual range as well as variation by meal content, but lemme see if Maggie could give us some input from personal experience.

I started an answer here, but I don't have time this am to give a good answer, because it's sort of complicated.

I'll give it a shot this evening.

Well, what's a "normal" BGL - fasting or after a meal - is really a sort of complicated question. I know what I aim for. No triple digits.

Before I started this way of eating, I was a hair away from a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. That was almost 10 years ago and they've lowered the threshold for what merits the diagnosis since then. My test results, had they been done today, would have hung that label on me for sure. I was fat. I was unhappy. And most of the time I felt like bleep. I chose to address the problem. (I don't choose address every problem or potential problem ... just things that make me feel like bleep on a regular basis.)

At this point, I've been controlling with diet for so long that I don't routinely test after meals. I, early on, adopted a Bernstein type approach - before I'd ever heard of him ... LOL! I had come to my conclusions after reading Atkins. That approach is to keep BGL's within a normal range ALL THE TIME. According to Bernstein, that means aiming for BGL's (fasting and postprandial [after a meal]) that remain in a range of 85 to 90. Now, remember, a postprandial measurement is taken 2 hours after a meal. There may be some modest rise initially, but the aim is to restrict your carb intake to match your metabolism. A meal that shows you to be in your target range at your postprandial test is generally considered to be an ok meal.

Only if I'm trying some new product, do I do a 1/2 hour, 1 and 2 hour (and if the two hour seems high - maybe a 3 hour) BGL after eating. There, I'm interested in not only in the total number at a given time, but also how quickly it goes up and down. This is based on my own personal metabolism and what I've found works for me. I have a pretty impaired "first line" insulin response, due to resistance. Things that unreasonably raise my BGL's on the first or second test - even if I'm back to normal at 2 hours - are things to be used rarely, sparingly and with caution. I do not offer frequent challenges the metabolism I'm stuck with.

Currently (other than "new food" testing) I do test each morning to keep an eye on things. For myself, I like to see my morning number between 78 and 88. That's not always possible. Given a little trauma (surgery, injury, etc.) and a little "dawn effect" I occasionally have to be "content" with anything that stays in the double digits.

For what I consider to be the best appraisal of how I'm doing, I look to my HgbA1c's. This measure of glycated hemoglobin (glucose hooks up with hemoglobin as cells form and this can be measured) gives me a "look back" of a couple of months to get an idea of my average BGL's during that period. I aim for 4.5% and usually hit it. That's equivalent to an average BGL of 85.

To understand what a tightly controlled regimen this is, you need to compare this approach with the ADA recommendations: preprandial readings of between 70 and 120, postprandials less than 180. They also advise aiming for HgbA1c's under 7%. 7% indicates and AVERAGE glucose reading of 180. I think that's criminal. I also think it's reflective of the perception that most people simply will not be willing to deal with their metabolic problems so stringently.

Bottom line, I have aimed at all routine BGL's (fasting and post prandial) to be around 85, +/- a few.

... and, so that no one will be confused, this is NOT medical advice and, most likely, NOT AT ALL what you're likely to hear from your own internist or endocrinologist.

This is only my opinion for me. This is what is normal for me. That's about the only answer I feel qualified to give.

I would only add that, to anyone who feels they may have impaired glucose metabolism and wants to address it, I suggest reading Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution and then, with some good information in your head, have a frank discussion with your health care provider.

You have a right to be an active partner in your health care, and a completely equivalent right not to. You're in charge of you.

Thanks, Maggie. You've given me some food for thought. I need to get out my Bernstein book and do some perusing. But then, I also have Gary Taubes book to read, and Barry Groves book, and Dr. McLeary's Braintrust Program, and the Atkins diabetes book, all books advocating low carb for various ills.

I got so many conflicting ideas from different sites devoted to diabetes, some saying below 100, some below 120, for fasting levels, some indicating 110 plus is prediabetes, some 120 plus, others that anything above 95 is trouble, and normal should be 85 or below. And some sites just cited symptoms, and if you had any of them to consult your doctor. And, of course, the old "limit your saturated fats" advice.

I think we need all the knowledge we can get to improve our health. I want to know what the doctor is talking about if he says my blood sugar is at such and such a level, and if I need to be concerned or not.

Again, thanks for the info. I will not take it as medical gospel, but it will be helpful, I'm sure, sometime or other in the future.

This has been a very enlightening conversation. Maggie, thank you for the thoughtful and informative post. This is most definitely a subject I need to be better informed about--I'm not even sure what my last readings were. When younger I was on the hypoglycemic end of the insulin issue, but haven't had a glucose tolerance test in years--sheesh, the thought makes me queasy. As we learn more and more about the impact of insulin on body systems, I really should know more about what's going on with my own metabolism.

I found a link from Regina Wilshire's blog that answers this question nicely.

What is a Normal Blood Sugar?

I plan to bookmark this and look at the other topics there, also.