Hi Janieg
I just noticed you take 100mg R lipoic acid twice daily. Is that considered a safe dose? Is it too high? I am currently taking 100 mg daily and thought of upping it but literature I read is contrary. Thank you

Hi Aussie,

When I first started looking into it, I read somewhere that you can take 600 mg of ALA twice daily to help with neuropathy as long as you have no side effects, including your blood sugar going too low. I can't lay hands on the exact article I read now, but I do remember reading that. I started with 100 mg of R-LA, and when I felt no side effects, I bumped it up. I do believe it has helped me, but am soon going back down to 100 mg to see if I feel any difference. It is rather expensive.

I should also add that I tested low-normal for ALA in a NutrEval test, so that also factored into my decision.

I just did a little Googling and found this write-up on it. This wasn't what I read initially, but what I read was probably a summary of it as I remember it had references to a German study.

http://www.diabetesaction.org/site/P...lementary_5_12

"A small Romanian study of 26 patients found symptomatic improvement with oral ALA (600mg daily) after three months. Ziegler replicated these findings in the 2006 SYDNEY-2 trial, finding that oral doses of 600, 1200, or 1800mg of ALA for five weeks led to significant improvement in neuropathy symptoms, with the best safety profile at 600mg. Notably, side effects were observed and included nausea, vomiting, and vertigo, which increased in a dose-dependent manner between 1200 and 1800mg per day."

Cheers!

Janie

Janieg and others

Just came across this article from the Linus Pauling Institute about using Lipoic Acid to treat PN in diabetes. Thought it relevant to the topic of this thread.

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/dieta...ease-treatment

What's funny is I had a 2 hour blood glucose test which was 90 (pre) - 120 (1hour post) - 90 (2 hours post), all great numbers according to my doc. My A1C is 5.3, again great. Fasting Glucose of 83 and 90 most recently.

But then, i can eat something like what you mentioned and really rise up to areas of 168 ish and hour or two after and see a very slow fall back to just barely below 100. It can sometimes have me hanging up at 100-105 into the next morning. Very odd.

The glucose drink used in the GTT is pure sugar and we often react fine in that test. But it is only 75g of sugar. There are meals that actually can go way above what you get on a GTT. Also things like Dairy will have your blood sugar slowly rise and slowly fall. So you can be sitting at a high reading for a while.

I myself put a lot more stock into results obtained from a needle that takes a lot more blood though. The glucose meters are ok but they are really only good for tracking how levels change and dramatic differences over time. Their accuracy can be off by 10 - 20 depending upon the meter. So, you can make yourself a little crazy over a reading of 105 when you may really be 90. Or a 180 that may be closer to 160.

Hi Patrick,

You are correct that meter readings can be off and to stress over something 105 that may really be a 90 is futile.

I am diabetic and rely heavily upon my meter for insulin dosage. I always do my own reading right before having a lab draw. My most recent one was 1 point different than my meter. It is usually never more than 2 points different. That is how I check the calibration of my meter to know that I am getting accurate results.

As a diabetic, I also know when a reading from my meter should be of suspect. If a wake up and have a fasting blood sugar of 166, I know I need to re-check. Did I test too soon and the alcohol was not dry? Did I have soap residue on my finger?

Whenever I get a reading that is not what I expect, I always test again within a few minutes to verify. The day I got the fasting 166, subsequent test showed 168. It WAS a correct reading. My fasting levels returned to "MY" normal the next day. It was just an odd day in the life of this diabetic. I will get an abnormally HIGH FASTING level about once a month. Don't know why but I do verify that it is a valid number and not a meter mistake or some other external source that caused an erroneous reading.

To your point, I used my glucose meter in conjunction with my GTT. I went out into the car and did it right after each blood draw and the readings were absolutely dead on when i got my lab results back. I use a TruTrack.

My 1 hour level is 181. Two hours is 71.

My new primary care physician wanted to to know whether I had ever been declared pre-diabetic by a doctor, or whether I had just declared myself one.

Yeah, just me.



Numbers Matter: 1-Hour Post Prandial Glucose Possible Predictor of Prediabetes Risk

"Previous studies have suggested that the 1-hour glucose level above 155 mg/dL is a better predictor of progression to diabetes than the 2-hour level. The researchers conclude that present findings, in conjunction with the other observations, suggest that individuals at high risk for developing diabetes could be identified earlier by measuring the 1-hour postload glucose level."


_________________________________

Hi janieg

If your new PCP had bothered to ask the question properly instead of just insinuating that self-diagnosis isn't useful then your answer may have been: 'yeah just me - after researching, observing and testing'. I hope as he/she gets to know you better they might learn to accept that some patients know how to manage their own health.

Thanks for the link to the article - I wonder what implication it may have for medical systems that currently rely only on the HBA1c test as an indicator for diabetes.

I had a new patient appointment with my new PCP (referred to by a friend), and she barely batted an eye at my SFN. Saw all the tests the neurologist had run, and didn't ask me a single question.

I'm supposed to have an annual physical with her in August, and am thinking about looking elsewhere. But where? Sigh.

Hi Janie. Did you use a 75-gram glucose drink for your 1 hour test or did you just eat a normal breakfast? I had a 2 hour post fast test after eating breakfast and I'm wondering about the reliability of the test as my breakfast didn't contain much sugar (including food that converts to sugar.) I'm sorry if this is a dumb question. . And for your information I think just you are terrific.