unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about T2D is guesswork
Posting this as a discussion rather than a claim: unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about T2D is guesswork. Sensor accuracy varies across wear, and readings on the first day are the least reliable. Calibration practice and compression artefacts explain many alarming single values. Postprandial excursions…
Certain conditions affect A1c independently of glycaemia. If a result looks inconsistent with the sensor data, that is a question for whoever manages your care rather than for this board.
A1c reflects average glycaemia over roughly the preceding three months, weighted towards the most recent weeks. It cannot show variability and it lags any change you make.
A1c reflects average glycaemia over roughly the preceding three months, weighted towards the most recent weeks.
Agreed, and the glucose-dependence point is the reason the risk profile reads the way it does.
Panicked over a first-day sensor reading and rebuilt my week around it. It was the sensor.
How long between the two A1c measurements?
How long between the two A1c measurements?
Adding the obvious one — bring the export, not the single number, to whoever manages this.
I would not compare your numbers to that population. Different baseline, different regimen, different trial.
I would not compare your numbers to that population.
This is the distinction that resolves most of the confusion here — average versus shape.
This is the distinction that resolves most of the confusion here — average versus shape.
Disagreeing with this line: that endpoint is from the obesity programme and does not answer the question.