Several years ago, when I was still pretty much a believer in mainstream health advice, I would have my fasting blood glucose checked once a year, along with other basic lab tests. It always came back in the normal range, and I was not overweight, so I didn't think much of it - even though diabetes definitely ran in my extended family.
I also had a brother-in-law with Type 2 diabetes and one day I saw an advertisement for a free glucose meter, so I sent away for it thinking I would give it to him. (Boy was I naive, now I know it's like printers and their ink, or for those who remember, Polaroid cameras and their film - it's not the machine that's expensive, it's the supplies that go with it.)
Anyway, I happened to have it with me, at work one day and thought it would be interesting to check my own glucose after eating a typical lunch, one that I had always thought was healthy. It was beans, collard greens, and sweet potato. To my surprise it was 190! This is high. Ideally it shouldn't be over 140 one hour after a meal.
Well I ended up keeping the meter for myself and became quite interested in seeing how different foods affected the reading. I went on to read quite a bit about it - finding these two articles particularly interesting: How to Lower Your Blood Sugar and How to Prevent Diabetes and Heart Disease for $16
I now feel that being aware of one's blood glucose, and keeping it in check, is possibly the single most important thing you can do for your longterm health. Even more important than knowing your cholesterol numbers (the significance of which sparks a lot of controversy and the whole statin debate.) This is because a high blood glucose has been associated with pretty much everything you don't want to have and affects every system in the body...eyes, kidneys, blood pressure, heart disease, liver, blood vessels, brain, depression, nerves/neuropathy, Alzheimer's, gum disease, infections, some even say cancer, etc, etc.
And ironically, had I not tested it for myself, I might not have discovered my propensity for high blood sugar until much later, if at all. Because the fasting glucose - which is traditionally checked - is much slower to become elevated than the post prandial (after meals) reading.
Though fortunately there has been a shift towards checking the Hemoglobin A1C. This lab test gives you an average of your blood sugars over the past 2 to 3 months. It is not completely accurate, as factors like anemia, for example, can affect the reading. But overall it gives a better picture of a person's tendency towards diabetes - or if they already have diabetes, how well-controlled it is.
I think everyone should know their A1C number. Because you really can't know if you have glucose issues otherwise. There isn't necessarily a typical diabetes look - you'd be amazed at how many thin people have diabetes. And young people. Although extra belly fat (even on a non-obese person) is often a tip off of glucose dysfunction. And apparently damage can be occurring even if not diagnosed with diabetes. It is more of a continuum effect (the higher the number, the greater the correlation with disease) - than a sharp cut off of either you have it or you don't.
There are still old-fashioned doctors who don't agree with this. When I asked my mother's doctor to check her A1C, he said we only order that test for diabetics (and she wasn't). A friend of mine, who has a strong family history of diabetes, asked her doctor to order a glucose meter and the supplies for her, and was told no, only if you already have diabetes or pre-diabetes. (The test strips can get expensive, but some insurance covers it, or I've heard you can but them at Walmart or on Amazon for less.)
This to me is SO shortsighted. But typical of our American way of dealing with health and disease. We will try to manage the problem once you have it...but let's not give any thought to what might be causing the problem and how we can prevent it. Really stupid.
I think if everyone who wanted one was given a free meter and test strips, we would go far towards having a healthier nation. Of course there are plenty of people who just don't want to be bothered, but there are many who would welcome the chance to possibly improve their chance of avoiding serious illnesses.
I actually find it quite interesting to see how different foods and time of day affect me. I remember years ago a patient telling me that a plate of pasta made her blood sugar spike higher than eating a bunch of candy. At the time, I didn't know much, and found that astonishing. Now I have observed the same to be true for me. Rice too, has a strong elevating effect on my blood sugar. As do oatmeal and potatoes.
Another surprise was how much fruit can increase my blood glucose. I used to think fruit was healthy no matter what, but I now know that fruits can cause a significant rise in glucose. Especially bananas. I still eat them, but usually only a half at a time and without too many other carbs. I can usually tolerate one or two servings of a carb food per meal. Beyond that, the additive effect is too great. Berries, such as blueberries or strawberries, are the least likely of any fruit to raise my blood sugar, so I try to eat more of those.
I have also noticed that I can eat way more carbs in the morning than at night, in terms of not sending my sugar too high. But I had a diabetic patient (who was type 1, in which the pancreas does not make insulin vs type 2, which is more common as one gets older, and the cells become insulin resistant) who told me her experience is exactly the opposite.
So, I believe, testing for yourself is the way to go. And you don't have to test all the time. Once you learn how various foods affect you, it's not necessary to keep testing unless you introduce new foods.
