why does nobody talk about CGM
why does nobody talk about CGM — that is what I am asking, and I have already read the wiki twice.
Assumed the weight endpoints from the obesity trials applied to my situation. They are different programmes.
Variability dropped before the average did, which was visible on the sensor and invisible on the lab result.
Kept fingersticks alongside the sensor for two weeks to sanity-check it. Worth doing once.
Tell me where this is wrong. That is the useful part of posting it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
Push back: one sensor reading is not a data point worth acting on, especially in the first day of wear.
Have you taken this to whoever manages your diabetes?
How long between the two A1c measurements?
Agreed. A1c is an integrated average over roughly three months and treating it as a current reading causes a lot of unnecessary alarm.
Postprandial excursions typically respond earlier than fasting glucose, so the sequence people observe is not a sign that something is not working.
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.
The diabetes and obesity programmes are separate, with different populations and different primary endpoints. Reading a result across from one to the other is not a comparison.
the fasting number is the one people fixate on and it moves last
time in range is the more informative number and it is newer