[Question] how do you actually verify glycaemic control
Slightly embarrassed to be asking this, but: how do you actually verify glycaemic control.
My A1c moved and it turned out to have nothing to do with glucose at all.
The order things move in, since nobody explains it and it worries people.
Postprandial excursions generally respond earliest. Variability tends to narrow before the average does, which is visible on a sensor and invisible on a lab result. Fasting glucose is often the laggard, and A1c — being a three-month average — is the last thing to reflect anything.
So a month in which the sensor looks better and the fasting number has not moved is the ordinary sequence, not a contradiction. Knowing that in advance would have saved me a quarter of unnecessary worry, which is why it is worth writing down.
Assumed the weight endpoints from the obesity trials applied to my situation. They are different programmes.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Pointing this at whoever manages your diabetes. We compare experiences here; we do not adjust regimens.
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, CGM, or fingersticks — which are we discussing?
postprandial excursions are where most of the improvement shows up first
sensor accuracy varies and the first day of a sensor is the worst
Panicked over a first-day sensor reading and rebuilt my week around it. It was the sensor.
That A1c change is inside the assay’s variability and the interval you measured over is too short.
How long between the two A1c measurements?
Push back: one sensor reading is not a data point worth acting on, especially in the first day of wear.
sensor accuracy varies and the first day of a sensor is the worst
Disagreeing with this line: that endpoint is from the obesity programme and does not answer the question.
Variability dropped before the average did, which was visible on the sensor and invisible on the lab result.
Cosigning that postprandial excursions improve first and the fasting number is the laggard.
Yes — time in range tells you about variability, which the average deliberately hides.
the diabetes trials report different endpoints from the obesity ones
Postprandial excursions flattened out first and the fasting number took months to follow. Nobody had told me to expect that order.
- 1sensor accuracy varies and the first day of a sensor is the worst6 comments in this branch · started by u/fasting_insulin_f