@A DiabetesTeam Member
Your doing great. Walking 10 to 15 minutes after a meal can help lower that number, but 130 2 hours after meal is good. You've got this🙌🙌 high fives friend.

Mentioned Users

A Diabete...

@A DiabetesTeam Member everybody spikes - even non-diabetics, it's how you recover that matters

You eat - you spike out at about an hour after your first bite, sooner if it's a fast absorbing carb - then you (should) recover over the next hour (by hour 2 from from first bite)

At hour 2 depending on how you manage/what your target level is then you should be either "under 180" - standard guidelines, which are (designed) to delay complications for about 10 years before they set in, or,

Under 157 - range to give long term protection to Eyes from retinopathy, Kidneys for Kidney Disease and Brain from Vascular Dementia, or,

Under 140 - range that protects against all complications including ASCVD (Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease) which is diabetics number one killer and Peripheral Neuropathy (which 1 out of 2 Diabetics experience during the course of the disease)

Why is the "standard" range simply below 180 when that does not prevent but only delay complications?

Because until about 20 years ago it was only "older" people that developed diabetes and without being grim, you just wouldn't live long enough to worry about something that takes 15 to 20 years to kill you

But now with the average age of diagnosis dropping in the high 40 yr range people have to manage for "decades" if they want to reach life expectancy

The U.K. has finally taken the first step (a couple years back) to dropping the MAX range to 153 because it is well known in the medical community that the "under 180" is just not good enough and will not prevent complications long enough when people are getting diagnosed in their 40's and 50's - and in the case of the UK where the Government (taxpayer) if footing the bill for Universal Health Care they don't want to be paying Billions to treat Diabetics who could have prevented the complications if they simply kept better control of the disease

Mentioned Users

A Diabete...

@A DiabetesTeam Member what has worked for me is setting "short term" diabetic goals

I was initially diagnosed at age 52

I grew up in a large diabetic cluster (parents, uncles/aunts, grandparents etc) and was familiar with longer and shorter terms stages - their experience etc

I knew I had "a couple of years" to figure out and fine tune how "I" planned on managing - diet wise etc

So my "first goal" was a short one - I wanted to achieve a Normal Non-Diabetic A1C by the time I got to age 55

I did that, I was running at 5.4/5.5 until age 55 without meds - goal achieved

So then at age 55, about 27 years to manage if I wanted to make Life Expectancy I set my next 5 year goal to take me to age 60

That was an A1C of "sub-6" until age 60

That would protect me from ALL the Diabetic complications with the nastiest taking about 15 to 20 years to "kill you" 😁 So if I can make it to 60 without providing "fuel" to develop them and they can take 20 years, that would mean I had a shot, even if the "wheels totally fell off the wagon" of dying from old age "before" the Beast could take me out

Well, I made it 60 back in January of this year with most recent A1C of 5.6 - so far so good

So just reset my 5 year goal to take me to 65 and since I was still firmly "sub-6" I just "renewed" that goal - I want to make age 65, Sub-6

But I also decided I don't have to restrict my eating (carbs) quite as much as I had been (about 100 carbs/day +/- 10) in order to achieve that

So I relaxed my daily carbs to "no more than 130" which is 30% more carbs then I have eaten since diagnosis

Well I'll tell you, 30 extra carbs a day equates to 1 Chocolate Donut Every Day if I wanted or 2 small slices of Pizza can be fit in "once a week instead of the rare occasion"

Yes, my averages moved up - but last month, 8 months after "upping my carbs" my A1C came in at 5.8% - beauty - I'm eating less restricted and "enjoying it" AND I can still maintain Sub-6 "at least for now" which means I will still "outlive the Beast"

I proved to myself "I could do it" but now 8 years in I have decided that while Control is still the absolute goal, maybe it's time to really Live with Diabetes instead of Existing with Diabetes and depriving myself of some level of "food enjoyment" simply so I can have a lower number

Which wasn't/isn't even "healthier" than what I was previously achieving

No, I would never develop Diabetic Complications with a 5.4 A1C eating 100 carbs a day

And now I still won't develop Diabetic Complications with an A1C of 5.8 eating 130 carbs a day

So I really have to ask myself why it seemed so important to get that lower number in the first place when clinically it made "zero difference" to my potential outcome???

Control is Control and some of us can be just a little too hard on ourselves

If your FBS is consistently below 126/7.0, your 2hr PPG is consistently below 140/7.8 and your A1C is Sub-6, take the win - you have the Beast on the ropes

Mentioned Users

A Diabete...

Wow maybe im being too hard on myself
.cause honestly trying to get my number down to 110 2 hours after i eat does honestly exaust the crap out of me.. and so maybe i can ease up a little and not worry if im sitting at say 130 or so for a couple of hours .This is truly truly good news .. Im gonna est dome ice cresm.now...lol!!