anyone else notice hypoglycaemia kicking in around week 8
Check-in as promised in the title: anyone else notice hypoglycaemia kicking in around week 8.
On hypoglycaemia, because the risk gets attributed to the wrong thing constantly.
Incretin-based agents stimulate insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent way: the effect scales with glycaemia rather than acting unconditionally. That is why monotherapy risk is low. Where risk rises substantially is in combination with agents that lower glucose independently of the current level.
Which means the question "does this cause hypos" is not answerable without knowing the rest of the regimen — and that the person who can answer it is the one who wrote the regimen. Nothing on this board is a substitute for that conversation, and the good threads here end by saying so.
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.
Screenshot none of this. Read the whole thread, including the parts where I am told I am wrong.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Incretin-based agents stimulate insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent manner, which is why hypoglycaemia risk with them alone is low. Risk rises with agents that act independently of glycaemia.
A1c is a three-month average and it lags everything
Brought the whole CGM export to my appointment rather than one number. Entirely different conversation.
That A1c change is inside the assay’s variability and the interval you measured over is too short.
Small fix — insulin secretion in this class is glucose-dependent, which is precisely why the risk you describe comes from the other agent.
hypoglycaemia risk depends far more on what else you take
Same. The first day of a new sensor is unreliable and people rebuild their whole week around it.
Same.
Disagreeing with this line: that endpoint is from the obesity programme and does not answer the question.
Panicked over a first-day sensor reading and rebuilt my week around it. It was the sensor.
What does time in range look like, not just the average?
a single high reading is not a trend
a single high reading is not a trend
hugo_norgaard is right that the fasting number moves last. Knowing that in advance saves months of worry.
A1c, CGM, or fingersticks — which are we discussing?
Variability dropped before the average did, which was visible on the sensor and invisible on the lab result.
dose for glycaemic control is not the same conversation as dose for weight
Correction: that trial is the diabetes programme and the figure you quoted is its glycaemic endpoint, not a weight result.
- 1Incretin-based agents stimulate insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent…6 comments in this branch · started by u/bianca_dziedzic
- 2a single high reading is not a trend6 comments in this branch · started by u/hugo_norgaard