What do people actually class as being Hypoglycaemic? Or more importantly what are people referring to as dangerous lows versus lows you are happy to have, and how many lows do people consider to be too many?
I’m not on a CGM but my diabetes team says that I shouldn’t be having any more than 2-3 lows a week. Which would be taken from maybe testing 6-8 times a day.
Do people look at total percentages or just total lows? If I have a bad week for lows I may have 8-10 BGL that fall under 4, possibly one that falls under 3. Given I test around 10-12 times a day, that means even in a bad week I have only 10% of my readings in the hypoglycaemic range, none of which are not easily identified and dealt with by myself. To me that wouldn’t seem to bad, obviously I some to have no lows but diabetes doesn’t often work like that…
I personally treat anything below 4.0 mmol/ml but I really consider my lows to be more ‘serious’ only when they drop below 3.0 mmol/ml.
Not that there is any definitive answer to these questions, but I read at least one study claiming that both elevated blood glucose levels and hyperinsulinemia may cause Alzheimers. Apparently (according to those researchers), the brain had its own mechanism for transporting nutrition across the blood-brain barrier, but the presence of an abundance of glucose or an abundance of insulin can force hyperglycation in the brain, resulting in the amyloid plaques that cause Alzheimers. I read the study a while back, so I am probably be getting the specifics wrong (so don’t yell at me! ), but as @Sue27 said, no evidence that hypoglycemia causes the condition was found (though, I think there may be some link to at least temporary dementia as a result of low BG).
That’s the range I typically use for reference, although I think in metric (mg/dL): under 70 is “low,” under 60 is “something is wrong here.” Fortunately, as a non-insulin dependent diabetic for the moment, I’m very, very rarely under 60 mg/dL (only happened once so far since diagnosis). That one time was very frightening, and I’m fortunate that a coworker had a candy bar on them. I didn’t, because I didn’t realize that I could have lows that low without being on exogenous insulin.
*edit: And, as an aside, how is that we Yanks have been using mg/dL as a measure? I would think it would be something truly awful like “tablespoons of suger per gallon of blood” or something ridiculous. Then again, I have no idea what on earth mmols are, and I’m a scientist. Go figure.
Differences like that are mainly historical. Different scales become popular in different places at different times. Getting everyone to use the same one has obvious advantages, but it’s not always easy to change something that ingrained. Aside from that, the scale doesn’t really matter so long as the people who use it are familiar with the readings and know what they mean. (Although, a scheme can be so arcane that it’s even able to confuse its users—like the old British currency. )
That “failed attempt” worked for my generation at least Many of my pals (in our 40s) prefer metric over imperial, and many of us (at least from my school) became scientists, so that makes sense! It’s just so logical when all measurements are in base_10 and everything lines up nice and easy.
That being said, I know what running or biking or driving a mile looks and feels like, but I’ve never figured out kilometers. Conversely, I have an easier time with CM and Meters than inches and feet, visually at least.
[quote=“David49, post:27, topic:56082, full:true”]
That “failed attempt” worked for my generation at least Many of my pals (in our 40s) prefer metric over imperial, and many of us (at least from my school) became scientists, so that makes sense! It’s just so logical when all measurements are in base_10 and everything lines up nice and easy.[/quote]Oh me too (54), with an engineering background. I agree with everything you say above.
Yet, for most people it was a non-starter. As goofy as oz, lb, foot, mi, etc. are, and the conversions between them, it’s just too hard for most people who spent their lives knowing about how much an ounce is, and that 16 of them are in a lb, to change the “sense” of such things. Hence, it failed, despite the fact it was easier!
Weight and volume are the ones that really have me confused. I’ve had an entire life of ounces and ounces and pints and pounds and still can’t make sense of it compared to grams, kilos, and liters. Ah well, what can you do?
That’s a good question haha Not that it’s overly difficult to make the conversions, but the vast majority of popular literature on Diabetes management seems to come out of the US. I’ve become an expert at converting Mg/dl to mmol/ml and vice versa. I still struggle abit when people talk about food in ounces though
And we’re pretty pissed about it over here on this side of the pond. What the hey, Eurodudes? You push this metric stuff on us, we give in at least in health care and adopt grams, liters (litre for those of you in the UK ), with all the sensible base-10 modifiers, and what do you do?
What do you do? To us poor diabetics? Huh? HUH?
You toss in this new thing, a “mol”, which as far as we know is a half-blind subterranean critter.
You know, there’s plenty to be said for all our cultural sensitivity we’ve developed over the last few decades, but I have to say too that in terms of the richness of the culture of some of our more trivial entertainment, we’ve also lost a lot.
Things like “Morocco Mole” were fun in many ways. We can’t do anything like that any more.
), but as 
)
Many of my pals (in our 40s) prefer metric over imperial, and many of us (at least from my school) became scientists, so that makes sense! It’s just so logical when all measurements are in base_10 and everything lines up nice and easy.
), with all the sensible base-10 modifiers, and what do you do?