[John.in.France]

Ok - I admit it, I still view myself as a new boy in the life of a diabetic.

Exactly one year ago, I got my first HbA1c - 8.2%.

As part of my relaxation therapy I spent the next nine months playing with the various formulae for matching the ninety day average fasting blood sugar with the HbA1c.

My next test came out at 6.2% (the calculation said 5.08%) but that was only after eight weeks - so "case not proven" as we'd say in a Scottish Court.

My February test came in.

My calculations said 5.14% (Nathan forumla) - the actual value 5.1% Pretty good, thought I but one swallow doesn't make a summer. So wait 'til May.

The May calculation 5.20% - the actual value 5.2% - Spot on!

So I started to believe I had something vaguely useful. So let's see what today's result gave me.

Over the last month my average has been creeping up towards the 90s - June was 87, July better back at 84 but August so far has been 88. My calculations said 5.23%. And what did I get?

5.0%​

So much for calculations! Or perhaps I should say, "so much for the quality control of test strips!"

I don't expect perfection (OK, so I really do, ..) but I do expect the pattern offered by testing to be useful.

I was completely in agreement with Eric (@thosebackpages) in not liking the pattern of upward creep he and I have been "enjoying".

My wife was threatening to do unkind things to me when I started talking about using my Levemir to nip the creep in the bud. As it turns out she was right to slap me down but what is a well intentioned student of diabetes to do when his only tool sends the wrong signal.

Being fair, the test result is better than I hoped for. I didn't really expect to be pushing out of the 5% club in that direction - so, great but come on big Pharma Companies - how about some quality control.

Moan over!

John

 

[gphx]

Don't be so fast to blame the strips. Personally I'd blame the A1C. Meters test the glucose in blood. A1Cs measure the glycation of hemoglobin. Under average conditions these correspond handily but often they don't. A study published by the ADA for example stated that, in their sample population, 60% of people with bgs high enough on the meter to meet a diabetes diagnosis had normal A1Cs.

Other conditions can have a big impact such as pernicious anemia, which alters the count of hemoglobin available for counting and thus the count. Genes also play a part including racial background. For example Asians seem to have the highest instance of A1C inapplicability.

If your A1C corresponds nicely that's wonderful but my advice would be applause only for your A1C and trust in your meter. In any case let's all celebrate the results of your hard work, however measured.

Here's just one of many studies pointing out perils of A1C reliance:

http://spectrum.diabetesjournals.org/content/14/2/67.full.pdf+html

 

[ThoseBackPages]

This is fantastic to read John. You've worked hard, and it's showing in the numbers.

I go for blood work next month, we'll see what it brings. I've felt a huge "burn out" this summer. On everything, really.

 

[Gizmo]

A while back Mr. Gizmo bought a home A1c test kit. I started a thread about it here.

The information sheet that came with the kit says that 50% of an A1c test reflects your bg for the past 2 months, 25% reflects your bg for the past 3 months, and 25% reflects your bg from before that, but they didn't specify how many months before.

So I'm surprised you came as close as you did. And by the way, great numbers.

 

[John.in.France]

This is fantastic to read John. You've worked hard, and it's showing in the numbers.

I go for blood work next month, we'll see what it brings. I've felt a huge "burn out" this summer. On everything, really.

Thanks Eric,

Wish I could take the credit but it's the OH who manages my diet and it works well. I just need to follow orders.:wink:

As I said, the lab results were better than I expected - hopefully your results will be just as good.

John