[BRN_RI_FL]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And when your grandkid finds a quarter under their pillow, it was left by the tooth fairy.

Aside from bizarre diets, let's add a little common sense and historical perspective to this discussion.

For decades, the definition of diabetes was 2 or more fasting blood sugars greater than 140 at a time of normal health. Then, some biochemist found a way to measure HbgA1C, a test designed to MONITOR the control of existing diabetics, not to DIAGNOSE anything, and good control was defined as 7.0% or less.

Now for the biggie----the endocrinologists got together, took a vote, and changed the definition to a fasting blood sugar of 128 or greater. Presto, chango, overnight there were about 6 million new diabetics in this country. Six million more patients to see , guess who?, --endocrinologists. Six million more to buy pills, see dieticians, join gyms, join weight watchers, buy glucometers and attend support groups. They also introduced "pre-diabetes" as a FBS of >100 and added borderline high HbgA1C values to the definition. I'd be willing to bet this has created a $150 billion/year economy all centered around borderline blood sugar readings (After all, we spend $80 billion/year on our dogs alone)

All well and fine if this had an eventual indisputable effect on diabetic complications including peripheral vascular disease, coronary artery disease, nephropathy, neuropathy and retinopathy, etc. However, there has not been a definitive study showing a long term beneficial effect for those with FBS between 100 and 128 that achieve lower numbers and have not become overtly diabetic. Also, no one has looked at the other end of the spectrum. By creating a population of tightly controlled "pre-diabetics", how many run borderline hypoglycemia leading to syncopal events and head trauma and hip fractures? No one knows.

So, I think common sense should prevail. Eat a healthy diet. Exercise regularly. Maintain ideal body weight. Take a pill if you need to. But don't run your entire life centered on a number from a blood test that may or may not mean something for you 10 or 20 years down the line.

PS. I am not anti-diet, I advocate it strongly, even if it is "plant based" or whatever. My FBS was 126 and HbgA1C 8.7%, whatever that really means. All I did was cut out Coca Cola and FBS dropped to 72 and HbgA1C to 4.9%---so yes, diet can make a tremendous difference---but it is not a "cure", since the underlying problem is genetic in nature.

Great post golfing eagles! You make a lot of sense.

A nutritionist I met with mentioned about that 7.0 reading that was lowered. I wasn’t initially impressed with her but I may be changing my opinion. Her thoughts were that no diet works unless you stick to it. And if you make it overly strict, there is a good chance you won’t stick to it. She said to eat pretty much anything but in smaller portions. Her big thing was exercise. If you feel like you have over-eaten, go for a walk or a run. As I mentioned previously, pizza meant 5 or 6 slices. Up north there is a place called Wright’s Farm where they serve “all you can eat” chicken dinners. We’d go there a couple times a month and I would eat until stuffed.

With changes, I’m now 75% towards my goal of 20 pounds weight loss in 4 weeks. I think that weight loss, exercise and cutting back on my food portions especially potatos, bread and rice will lower my A1C. Even if I didn’t have an elevated A1C, these changes would be good for me.

Thanks for all the great advice, everyone!