Re: Home a1C testing-Good or bAD?

On 1 Mar 2006 10:07:41 -0800, shoppa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Jenny wrote:
The package information says the results will be within 1% so a 6% on
this test could be a 5% or a 7%.

It wasn't all that long ago that lab tests didn't promise better
accuracy than this. I remember some doctors saying that you couldn't
compare numbers at all if they came from different labs.

My impression (from my personal numbers and talking to doctors) is that
current lab tests are like +/-0.5% accuracy. If I feel I've had good
control over the past month or two my A1C comes back from the lab at
6.0%, and if I feel that I've had poor control it comes back at 5.5% !
Of course I'm usually thinking of a bad couple of days and the test is
averaging over a month or more.

It's funny to read that other thread where someone thinks that 60 to
180 is a dangerously wide swing!

Tim.

You need to read a little better.

180 is above the limit where the secondary problems (damage to eyes,
etc.) are happening - and the example I gave in that other thread
postulated spending 12 hours out of every 24 at that level. That =is=
a dangerous situation. The damage may not show up for years, but it
is still dangerous. And 60 is quite low enough for some (not all)
people to have problems concentrating and be a danger while driving
and so on.

If you shoot above 180 and come back down relatively soon, the amount
of damage you do each time is relatively low. Diabetes is not
generally an "instant damage" thing. Diabetes complications are
generally "accumulated damage" things. Spending 30 minutes about 180
for post-meal spikes is not the same risk as spending 12 hours a day
at 180.

Going down to 60 is a more variable thing. Some people will go nearly
unconscious at that level. Many more will just be impaired to varying
degrees. Often they will not even realize they are impaired. This is
much more likely to lead to "instant damage" situations while driving.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hard facts about helmets and safety?
    ... I've had two crashes within the past year. ... There was no damage to my bike and minimal damage ... professionals lucky enough to have excellent medical coverage are ... I'm distressed by the modern tendency to find terrible danger ...
    (rec.bicycles.misc)
  • Re: Thanks for the dump help, Vanilla
    ... > Colbrans are dangerous, agreed. ... I tend to avoid Colbrans even if I could handle the damage. ... > monsters with poison attack than basic four attacks. ... I accept that they might well be a cause of danger for, ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.angband)
  • Re: Vehicles damaged by rising bollards
    ... Danger Of Death" signs on ... property damage for disobeying a traffic sign, ... consequence of doing something stupid, ... Running with scissors is stupid. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: The total mass of meteorites
    ... Do you mean that Tunguska at the speed of light is not more dangerous? ... I am asking how much speed/mass does meteorite loose due to the atmosphere and if impact is the same if it hits as one large core or broken into pieces. ... How the danger is reduced as the function of the denominator? ... it exploded in the air and the sound wave caused a lot of damage. ...
    (uk.sci.astronomy)