Oh my, now the technician’s remarks sound even sillier…there’s nothing about you that’s “out of control.” Good for you.
What? I don’t understand what the sonographer meant…I would have been speechless as well…actually, my facial expression would have told it all :).
Anyway, congrats on your awesome A1C!!!
What the heck is wrong with people. When non diabetics get AIc done the normal reference range is 4-6 . This person doesnt know what she is even saying ! GEEZ!
Congrats on the terrific A1c !!! The sonographer obviously knows nothing about D. Unfortunately, she is not alone.
Lilia,
Congratulations on your baby and the A1c’s. I think with the joy of getting ready for you new baby your were just too nice to ask the Sonographer if she really was that dumb.
Do you think, despite the previous comment re your high blood sugar, her observation that your A1c was 4.9 may mean she was thinking your diabetes is not well controlled because you an A1c of 4.9 is too low? For Type 1s, for which the diagnosis is there for all to read as “Diabetes Mellitus, Uncontrollable” 4.9 would indicate you were having too many lows. Not all diabetes can be controlled; it can be “managed.” There’s a difference. Fabulous A1c and I’m sure you worked very hard to keep it that way.
I would like to believe that’s what she meant but I really don’t think that’s the case. Because we were talking about baby being in the 80th percentile for abdominal size, i.e., too large for comfort. And one of the reasons why babies get too large is uncontrolled high blood sugars.
I was just trying to make sense of that 80th percentile number because in all the other measurements as well as weight, baby is doing just fine, at the 50th-60th percentile which is perfectly normal.
Chronically low blood sugar would lead to baby being underweight/small for gestational age, and that was clearly not the case. So she was trying to make a connection between one highish reading, and my blood sugars.
Yikes! I’m a type 1 who usually has A1C between 6.3-5.8, and I thought those were good. How the heck did you get things down to a 4.9? And shame on your sonographer for obviously not knowing at all what she was talking about ( though I will cut her a little slack in the fact that she probably has to know a LARGE range of diseases that could affect a child).