Sorry to digress from the OP’s question…[quote=“Jeannie_Wagner, post:17, topic:49236, full:true”] I have been a type 2 for almost 9 years and just now I am being tested for LADA. My GAD came back normal but my c-peptide was 1.1 and I already have diabetic complications…
[/quote]
I am curious. My first c-peptide was taken non-fasting and came back 1.1 at a lab where fasting reference range was 0.7 to 2.2. As a result, of that and my negative GAG65-antibody test, my doc concluded definitely Type 2. Subsequent fasting c-peptide tests were taken that came out below normal, but not zero (0.7 and 0.6 at a lab where normal was 1.1 - 4.4). At all those tests my glucose level was in the normal range. I was not overweight at diagnosis and was asymptomatic.
A marker, yes. Conclusive, no. Obesity is a marker for type 2 diabetes— it is also not a conclusive marker, is it? Certainly not-- just for the sake of an example for the difference between something being indicative of, and conclusive.
So, another question concerning c-peptide… I have had that taken twice as well. The first time while still pregnant and nonfasting. I literally was eating while walking into the lab. It was 3.5. The scale for normal for the lab used is 1.1-4.4 fasting. Then when no longer pregnant 4 weeks later it was 1.0 at the same lab and I was fasting. So is that actually low? What do these results really show?
The c-peptide lab is really pretty tricky… I’m not sure what to make of your lab values— they seem relatively normal and non remarkable, but a normal c-Peptide value is dependent on a simultaneous normal glucose value… So if your glucose levels are sky high, then those values seem low. If your glucose levels were normal, they seem normal. That’s my .02 worth-- what did your doctor think?
I think from a practical sense, because you have diabetes, the only important thing to take away from those labs is that your body is still producing its own insulin…
I’m not sure what my sugar levels were for those tests. I assume high with the first because I hadn’t started insulin yet and normal with the second since I was already on insulin. Literally all my doctor had to say about it was that’s good, it will help with the insurance company for getting a pump. I know my mom still produced some insulin for 15 years after diagnosis of type 1.
I don’t remember using the word “conclusive”. I seem to remember saying “almost certain”. I don’t care to rush to the defense of something I didn’t say.
Well, actually, that turns out not to be the case. Obesity is something that sometimes occurs along with T2, but not always–far from it–and it also occurs in zillions of other cases for zillions of other reasons. That’s not true of islet-specific antibodies, according to the peer-reviewed studies I’ve been able to track down.
X is a marker for Y if there exists a clearly demonstrated cause/effect relationship such that the presence of X signifies an extremely high probability that Y is present also. That description fits islet-specific antibodies. It does not fit the millions and millions of obese non-diabetic people.
Wow, seriously Sam, you think that, “because Sam says so” is the same as the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of DM, the WHO, TrialNet researchers, Dr. Anne Peters in The Type 1 Diabetes Sourcebook (a book for doctors, written by diabetes experts, and no I don’t read it on the Internet, I have the book). You were the one that said there are so-called “experts” who disagree on the significance of autoantibodies associated with diabetes–but you are unable to name one expert or cite one source.
Many experts on the subject disagree, and I have read those statements from a number of them… I just don’t have a list of references prepared, nor do I have any interest in doing the research to pretend that this is some sort of academic debate… I’m not disagreeing with the experts— I’m disagreeing with you.
You can disagree with me all you want, Sam, I really don’t care and it doesn’t change the facts. I am not stating my opinion, I am referencing credible sources. Maybe you should substantiate your statements. Again, “because Sam says so” doesn’t make it true.
