Statistically, the relationship between A1c and average blood glucose is just a scale factor. Therefore, you could take any study you like and simply replace A1c with a scaled average blood glucose. No difference. The only reason the HbA1c approach was invented in the first place, and has been used since, is that there has been no practical way to directly measure average blood glucose over a period of time. CGM provides that direct measurement. Given individual deviations from the A1c-to-average scale factor, CGM provides a better assessment of average blood glucose than A1c, for any individual. I think A1c will continue to have great value as a diagnostic tool, as an assessment tool in the absence of CGM, and to facilitate communication between patients and medical providers. My dentist recently asked me what my A1c was, he did not ask me about my average BG, TIR or SD or AUC 
Maybe Iām wrong, but though it may be a scale factor, the scale factor is not applied equally to every person, which means that you cannot simply extrapolate from one set of trials using A1c and perfectly map rates of complications to an equivalent average BG. The people with an A1c of 7 and the people with an average BG of 154 are different subsets of people, though of course thereās substantial overlap.
In addition to this, itās not totally far-fetched to believe the rate of turnover of RBCs could be correlated with the level of damage associated with hyperglycemia in a way that is somewhat independent of average BG. You could envision a scenario where the rate of cellular turnover is either positively or negatively correlated with cellular damage overall. (In one, the more damaged the cells, the more likely they die quickly, while in another scenario, the bodyās natural repair mechanisms could be related to how quickly cells are replenished.)
As evidenced by the variety of repliesā¦ Iāll just repeat my original ānobody really knowsā
We know lower A1C is associated with lower complication rates. We reasonably assume, without much evidence at this point, that lower variability is also associated with lower complication rates-- but we really donāt know that. We hope that and we all, including me, strive for that with that hope in mind. I hope weāre right.
Let me post my sons 5% A1Cā¦
ā¦wait, I canāt because weāre still trying to get under 7%! ā¦maybe some day. 
I have faith in the fact that you will see an A1c under 7 sooner than you think.
I had a similar Clarity report, MariaM2, but my A1C came in at 6.1. For me, the Clarity reports run much lower than my actual A1C. My endo laughs when Iām not happy at 6.1.
Huh, mine has matched perfectly with the clarity report the last two timesā¦ I wear it 99% of the time while pregnant. There is definitely error in both
Youāre not alone. A fixed A1c does not narrowly correspond to a specific blood glucose average. According to one study, for example, an A1c of 6.0% corresponds to an average BG ranging from 100 mg/dL to 152 mg/dL.
Yep, when I used an Ultra Mini meter the difference was huge! So I literally vetted meters and chose one that gave me numbers closer to my A1c. For me that was Contour Next USB. In simultaneous readings my blood glucose was much higher than the Ultra Mini, higher than the FreeStyle LIte, but a little lower than the Verio IQ. But it matches my lab A1c value.
Jim26 This is the same strategy I use! Coffee/water/herbal tea with coconut oil, etc. only until lunch. Lunch, since mostly eaten at work is really low carb (protein/fat/LC vegetables) and then I workout before dinner, so that is the time of day Iām a little more relaxed.
I like to do this on weekends. I found it originally as a ābulletproof coffee.ā I put hot strong coffee in with coconut oil and butter and hit it with an immersion blender and it creams right up and is tasty.
I know, Brian_BSC you were the one who told me about it!
I quite enjoy BP coffee. I even use their brand of coffee now, since they carry it at a store near where I live.
I used to have an A1c of 6, 6.5, using a pump and a lot of sacrifice. And my standard deviation was >30. For me the SD tells the variability story.
I switched to afrezza on may 2015, and following my endos reco, switched from pump to injected basal. It has been a great journey so far. I can eat what u want when I want to. I donāt really count carbs anymore as with afrezza its easy for me to do real time sugar surfing And with all this freedom I still improved my a1c to around 5.6. Very happy!
My most recent blood work came inā¦ 5.1% A1C! This is a screen shot of the three months that contributed to this result.
That looks awesome @Pipli especially as you posted recently that you were pregnant and dealing with wild BG swings.
What are the things that helped the most to get to those numbers? (Diet, etc.?) Like Jen who started this thread, I am trying to get my averages down, so need to steal good practices from others.
Thanks! In January, I got the Dexcom and started wearing it non-stop (I had a competitorās CGM previously that I never wore). Simply knowing what my bg was doing at all times brought my A1C from an 8.2 to a 6.6 in 3 months. Then, over the summer when we decided that we wanted to get pregnant, I started a LCHF diet. This has had a massive impact on my ability to control spikes. I have not added exercise in, which would be the next stepā¦itās just not something I look forward to (mostly, Iām just lazy and tired after work and fortunately Iām not overweight, none of which are great excuses).
Congratulations on that improvement! I love the CGM technology.