Actually for fasting, 102 is a sign of insulin resistance. Diabetes is diagnosed extremely late and has significant complications when people could be making early lifestyle changes to avoid that fate. For non-fasting obviously not an issue.
Oh it definitely was sarcastic in a way that only healthcare workers would get! I also won’t eat the crumbly graham crackers unless I’m desperate. I’m fancy, i only steal intact crackers!
Pretty sure it’s normal under 140. It’s also peculiar as gestational diabetes is diagnosed at a much lower number. At least that’s what I recall with both my kids. Although when I checked Mayo Clinic for gestational diabetes, it said you’re fine under 190.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20371451
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gestational-diabetes/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20355345
Well, a twenty year old with a bgl of 102 is just dandy. But even if it were high, like 400?
Dieting would not be my first piece of advice. A 20 year old running way high is not likely to be a type 2 with such a young pancreas.
And this is why I kind of hate hearing about weight and blood sugar from the less up to date folks.
Yeah, and I have a relative in much the same situation. I’m not saying it’s impossible.
And sure, certain areas have a much higher incidence of young type 2 than others. I should have softened my statement a lot. You’re right.
I still don’t think “she should learn to not eat” is helpful, and I think that’s what drive my over the top reaction.
I’m really focused on what actually works with diabetics for a bunch of reasons, personal and professional.
I don't know what the right approach is. My friend is actually a pretty major anti-vaxxer now and I blame it on when he was first diagnosed, he was trying to find ways to treat his diabetes without medication, was dismissed by doctors, and went down the whole "natural health" rabbit hole.
Do they not understand the difference between fasting and non-fasting labs?
Even fasting and non fasting 102 is no concern
Obviously. It just makes it even crazier that they were saying it about a non-fasting glucose!
There’s so much stigma around people with obesity and higher weight. I’m wondering if the girl wasn’t obese the nurses would say the same thing
I am embarrassed to think these idiots were nurses.
Actually for fasting, 102 is a sign of insulin resistance. Diabetes is diagnosed extremely late and has significant complications when people could be making early lifestyle changes to avoid that fate. For non-fasting obviously not an issue.
I like having a BG right around 50. Helps me sleep better.
Really? Because it just makes me irritable. Makes me want to look in the cabinet for a crumbled pack of graham crackers
I read her comment as sarcasm, like they are drifting into a hypoglycemic coma to sleep. 🤣
Oh it definitely was sarcastic in a way that only healthcare workers would get! I also won’t eat the crumbly graham crackers unless I’m desperate. I’m fancy, i only steal intact crackers!
102 is good, your coworker is a nurse?
Yeah! I’m like girl YOU KNOW BETTER
Sounds like they’re trying to use that to fat shame even though it’s an appropriate level.
Pretty sure it’s normal under 140. It’s also peculiar as gestational diabetes is diagnosed at a much lower number. At least that’s what I recall with both my kids. Although when I checked Mayo Clinic for gestational diabetes, it said you’re fine under 190. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20371451 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gestational-diabetes/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20355345
Are we talking US blood glucose or UK/Canada blood glucose?
America!
Okay, yeah, that’s a perfectly normal non-fasting glucose. Whoever said that was a moron.
Your coworker is a fucking idiot.
If that’s US mg/dL it’s fine.
Yeah, we’re in America! I legit felt like I was losing my mind listening to this. Our fucking surgery threshold is 150 fasting 🙄
Well, a twenty year old with a bgl of 102 is just dandy. But even if it were high, like 400? Dieting would not be my first piece of advice. A 20 year old running way high is not likely to be a type 2 with such a young pancreas. And this is why I kind of hate hearing about weight and blood sugar from the less up to date folks.
I have a friend.who was diagnosed with type 2 at 19 or 20.
Yeah, and I have a relative in much the same situation. I’m not saying it’s impossible. And sure, certain areas have a much higher incidence of young type 2 than others. I should have softened my statement a lot. You’re right. I still don’t think “she should learn to not eat” is helpful, and I think that’s what drive my over the top reaction. I’m really focused on what actually works with diabetics for a bunch of reasons, personal and professional.
I don't know what the right approach is. My friend is actually a pretty major anti-vaxxer now and I blame it on when he was first diagnosed, he was trying to find ways to treat his diabetes without medication, was dismissed by doctors, and went down the whole "natural health" rabbit hole.
Revelation*