View Single Post
Old 07-09-2010, 01:53 AM
dany dany is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maryland, South/Western Shore Chesapeake Bay, "God's Country"
Posts: 39
10 yr Member
dany dany is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maryland, South/Western Shore Chesapeake Bay, "God's Country"
Posts: 39
10 yr Member
Default

I love this test! This is the test that found the cause of my PN...but it showed up within the 2 hours, that was where all my "sugar action" was. And your results here don't tell us anything but that the patient is negative for diabetes, they have come down below 140 in 2 hours. And the test could have been read for 2 other ranges (at least when mine was done in 2002), Pre-Diabetes and Impaired Glucose Tolerance. (I have read of other names being used and the ranges being slightly different now, so depends on what and when you read.) Did you have your blood drawn at more times before the 2 hour time? If so, you could get those numbers and they could be quite helpful for you.

That's what happened to me too, the results given to my Dr. were "negative for diabetes". It was later that my neuro looked at all my numbers on the test and he knew how to read it and told me I had IGT. My father's family had some diabetics and others now like me are being seen to have sensory PN from only a "slight" sugar problem like this, over a long enough time period, translates into nerve damage just the same. My glucose may not have been too high much of the day but was after each meal and for years, who knows how many. I have to credit my terrible nerve pain for alerting me to my diabetic problem!

My numbers were: beginning: 90, then drank 75gms sweet drink, 1st 1/2 hr: 175, 1 hr: 234, 2 hrs: 135. I was IGT because I went over 200 but came back under 140 (normal) at 2 hrs. For Pre-Diabetic, go over 200 and come back to 140-199 at 2 hrs. For Diabetic, go over 200 and stay over 200 at 2 hrs. For normal, don't go over 200 and be under 140 at 2 hrs.
dany is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
"Thanks for this!" says:
kpRN (07-09-2010)