"Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
. ..
> Susan > wrote:
>>Even if it were, to be so familiar when there's no basis for it is
>>offensive.
>
> Plenty of strangers call each other "sweetheart" or "honey" regardless of
> gender, marital status or familiarity. I was just trying to let Lee know
> that
> we're on the same side regarding Wayne's "codependent" struggles with his
> partner David.

Not around here they don't! Maybe if they are Southern, elderly ladies...

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> Susan > wrote:
>>>Even if it were, to be so familiar when there's no basis for it is
>>>offensive.
>>
>> Plenty of strangers call each other "sweetheart" or "honey" regardless of
>> gender, marital status or familiarity. I was just trying to let Lee know
>> that
>> we're on the same side regarding Wayne's "codependent" struggles with his
>> partner David.
>
> Not around here they don't! Maybe if they are Southern, elderly ladies...

It's sort of like the "with all due respect, you moron"...or "let me explain
this to you...babe."

Cheri

"Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
. ..
> Susan > wrote:
>>Even if it were, to be so familiar when there's no basis for it is
>>offensive.
>
> Plenty of strangers call each other "sweetheart" or "honey" regardless
> of
> gender, marital status or familiarity. I was just trying to let Lee
> know that
> we're on the same side regarding

True, it happens to me a lot here in Oz. Mostly "luv", "darlin" etc.
People in the street I stop and talk to often call my daughter
"sweetheart". "princess" gets used a lot for her too (she has Down
syndrome). Like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, names are in
perception of the recipient. A lot of people here accepted it before it
became PC and accept it afterwards.

"Janet" > wrote in message
...
> Alan S wrote:
>>
>> I have major problems with 20gms+ for breakfast and lunch, but not at
>> dinner.
>>
>> Trust your meter.
>>
> So this morning I got up and tested: 88. That's nice.
> Since FBG was so low, allowed self to eat 2 slices of l/c toast with an
> ounce or so of smoked gouda instead of eggs. Tired of eggs. Total carbs
> ostensibly about 12 gms. Also had a couple cups of coffee, fully
> caffeinated because we've run out of decaf beans.
>
> Tested 1 hr later (still drinking coffee): 205!!! Washed hands and
> retested to make su 197!!
>
> Maybe it's the caffeine. Either that, or some change in the formuation of
> the supplements I take with meals. I've switched to a new bottle of ALA
> that must have something different, because the capsules are the same size
> but only have 108 mg each so I have to take 2 or 3. I've also started an
> anti-inflammatory recommended by second doctor (Zyflamend) in hopes of
> helping ongoing pinched nerve-related pain that is quite debilitating at
> times.
>
> This is insane. I've been eating something like this for breakfast quite
> frequently for months without this kind of number. The only difference is
> that I have been unable to get in any significant exercise for a few days,
> but still!
>

Don't discount that exercise thought!

> I'm back to feeling as if every bite I put in my mouth is poison.
>
Oh, I feel so bad for you. {{{Janet}}}
>
>

"Janet" > wrote in message
...
> Alan S wrote:
>> It's the bread. I know they call it low-carb - but trust your meter,
>> not a label.
>
> I know, but this is the same bread I've been eating for months! Maybe a
> bad batch?
>
> BTW--I apoogize for posting this thread to the food group, rather than
> ASD. Oops!

I just came here for the first time. I do see that Orlando is mixing up
what he read where.

"Stormmee" > wrote in message
...
> change in formula of bread? reason i say this is because i just went
> through a two week stint of "premigraine" and couldn't figure out
> why...finally dh started reading labels in the house... they ave added
> nutrea sweet into my diet activia... before was only splendia... so no
> more of that for me, Lee

Highly possible. Also possible there was a mixup at the bakery and they put
regular bread in the low-carb packaging.


> "Janet" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Alan S wrote:
>>> It's the bread. I know they call it low-carb - but trust your meter,
>>> not a label.
>>
>> I know, but this is the same bread I've been eating for months! Maybe a
>> bad batch?
>>
>> BTW--I apoogize for posting this thread to the food group, rather than
>> ASD. Oops!
>>
>>
>
>

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Janet > wrote:
>>>Tested 1 hr later (still drinking coffee): 205!!! Washed hands and
>>>retested
>>>to make su 197!!
>>>Maybe it's the caffeine. Either that, or some change in the formuation of
>>>the supplements I take with meals.
>>>This is insane. I've been eating something like this for breakfast quite
>>>frequently for months without this kind of number. The only difference is
>>>that I have been unable to get in any significant exercise for a few
>>>days,
>>>but still!
>>>I'm back to feeling as if every bite I put in my mouth is poison.
>>
>> Further proof that even the most assiduous efforts at micromanagement
>> don't
>> always work. While I'm not opposed to people tweaking their diets to
>> lower
>> their BG numbers, Janet's baffling case confirms that such efforts don't
>> always
>> work and that some diabetics must evidently resign themselves to high BG
>> values
>> regardless of what they eat.
>
> I seem to be in that group you are talking about.
I think your case is complicated by all your other conditions.

"Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
. ..
> Julie Bove > wrote:
>>If you're not testing... How do you know?
>
> I don't test now, but when I was married to a diabetic, I used to test
> with her
> for kicks. My blood sugar never rose above 120 or went below 90.
>
> Orlando

Why would you assume that your readings now are the same as your readings
then? People's systems change over time.

"Ellen K." > wrote:
> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
> > Julie Bove > wrote:
> >>If you're not testing... How do you know?
> >
> > I don't test now, but when I was married to a diabetic, I used to test
> > with her
> > for kicks. My blood sugar never rose above 120 or went below 90.

> Why would you assume that your readings now are the same as your readings
> then? People's systems change over time.

Poor Orlando. I hope someone can shake the dust of ignorance and obsinancy
off his eyes. He bored me and I cut him loose. Sorry, 'Lando. I can deal
with ignorance, but not what I perceive as stupidity.

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/ Thank a Veteran! Support Our Troops!
http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~

"Nick Cramer" > wrote in message
...
> "Ellen K." > wrote:
>> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
>> > Julie Bove > wrote:
>> >>If you're not testing... How do you know?
>> >
>> > I don't test now, but when I was married to a diabetic, I used to test
>> > with her
>> > for kicks. My blood sugar never rose above 120 or went below 90.
>
>> Why would you assume that your readings now are the same as your readings
>> then? People's systems change over time.
>
> Poor Orlando. I hope someone can shake the dust of ignorance and obsinancy
> off his eyes. He bored me and I cut him loose. Sorry, 'Lando. I can deal
> with ignorance, but not what I perceive as stupidity.
>

Humans are very, very good at rationalizing.

> --
> Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
> families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/ Thank a Veteran! Support Our Troops!
> http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~

Ellen K. wrote:
>
> "Nick Cramer" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Ellen K." > wrote:
>>> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
>>> > Julie Bove > wrote:
>>> >>If you're not testing... How do you know?
>>> >
>>> > I don't test now, but when I was married to a diabetic, I used to test
>>> > with her
>>> > for kicks. My blood sugar never rose above 120 or went below 90.
>>
>>> Why would you assume that your readings now are the same as your
>>> readings
>>> then? People's systems change over time.
>>
>> Poor Orlando. I hope someone can shake the dust of ignorance and
>> obsinancy
>> off his eyes. He bored me and I cut him loose. Sorry, 'Lando. I can deal
>> with ignorance, but not what I perceive as stupidity.
>>
>
> Humans are very, very good at rationalizing.
>
>> --
>> Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
>> families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
>> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/ Thank a Veteran! Support Our Troops!
>> http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~
>
Orlando has moved his business to rec.food.cooking and is looking for
verification of his no testing, occasional carb splurging life-style. I
gave him a little sympathy, but he really needs to be educated. The poor
fellow is so in denial.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
...
> Ellen K. wrote:
>>
>> "Nick Cramer" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Ellen K." > wrote:
>>>> "Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
>>>> > Julie Bove > wrote:
>>>> >>If you're not testing... How do you know?
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't test now, but when I was married to a diabetic, I used to
>>>> > test
>>>> > with her
>>>> > for kicks. My blood sugar never rose above 120 or went below 90.
>>>
>>>> Why would you assume that your readings now are the same as your
>>>> readings
>>>> then? People's systems change over time.
>>>
>>> Poor Orlando. I hope someone can shake the dust of ignorance and
>>> obsinancy
>>> off his eyes. He bored me and I cut him loose. Sorry, 'Lando. I can deal
>>> with ignorance, but not what I perceive as stupidity.
>>>
>>
>> Humans are very, very good at rationalizing.
>>
>>> --
>>> Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
>>> families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
>>> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/ Thank a Veteran! Support Our Troops!
>>> http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~
>>
> Orlando has moved his business to rec.food.cooking and is looking for
> verification of his no testing, occasional carb splurging life-style. I
> gave him a little sympathy, but he really needs to be educated. The poor
> fellow is so in denial.

Yep.

Janet Wilder > wrote:
>Orlando has moved his business to rec.food.cooking and is looking for
>verification of his no testing, occasional carb splurging life-style. I
>gave him a little sympathy, but he really needs to be educated. The poor
>fellow is so in denial.

I would appreciate a cessation of your education program. I know what carbs do
to a diabetic, but do not accept this dogma that a pre-diabetic with one
fasting BG test of 117 immediately must begin compulsive testing and cut out
all carbs.

Orlando

"Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
. ..
> Janet Wilder > wrote:
>>Orlando has moved his business to rec.food.cooking and is looking for
>>verification of his no testing, occasional carb splurging life-style. I
>>gave him a little sympathy, but he really needs to be educated. The poor
>>fellow is so in denial.
>
> I would appreciate a cessation of your education program. I know what
> carbs do
> to a diabetic, but do not accept this dogma that a pre-diabetic with one
> fasting BG test of 117 immediately must begin compulsive testing and cut
> out
> all carbs.

Then perhaps you could cease with bad mouthing us over there. Some of us do
read both groups you know.

Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
> Janet Wilder > wrote:
>> Orlando has moved his business to rec.food.cooking and is looking for
>> verification of his no testing, occasional carb splurging life-style. I
>> gave him a little sympathy, but he really needs to be educated. The poor
>> fellow is so in denial.
>
> I would appreciate a cessation of your education program. I know what carbs do
> to a diabetic, but do not accept this dogma that a pre-diabetic with one
> fasting BG test of 117 immediately must begin compulsive testing and cut out
> all carbs.
>
> Orlando

No one suggested you cut out *all* carbs.

Either you are a diabetic or you are not. If not, you don't need to
stick your fingers or watch your carb intake. If you are a diabetic,
then it behooves you to take control of the disease before it takes
control of you.

You have taken offense where none is due. People were trying to help
you. You, obviously, don't want to be helped. No one here or on any
other group has a magic cure for you.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Julie Bove > wrote:
>Then perhaps you could cease with bad mouthing us over there. Some of us do
>read both groups you know.

I haven't badmouthed anyone, much less named names. If you feel badmouthed,
it's because your rather dogmatic perspective is recognized wherever you bring
it.

Orlando

Janet Wilder > wrote:
>Either you are a diabetic or you are not. If not, you don't need to
>stick your fingers or watch your carb intake. If you are a diabetic,
>then it behooves you to take control of the disease before it takes
>control of you.

I am pre-diabetic, which means that I can still theoretically reverse my
current state and bypass full blown diabetes.

>You have taken offense where none is due. People were trying to help
>you. You, obviously, don't want to be helped. No one here or on any
>other group has a magic cure for you.


People have assumed that a pre-diabetic diagnosis automatically means I should
assume that full blown diabetes is coming down my pike. Isn't that pessimistic
and insensitive?

Orlando

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:18:23 -0400, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:

>People have assumed that a pre-diabetic diagnosis automatically means I should
>assume that full blown diabetes is coming down my pike. Isn't that pessimistic
>and insensitive?

It means that, at the least, you have insulin resistance, probably
some loss of beta cells, and quite likely some visceral adipose tissue
- with all the inflammation and downward spiral that implies.

Pre-diabetes as a diagnosis gives you room to treat it without the
degree of seriousness it implies. We see far too many people who think
they have " a touch of sugar", "not full-blown diabetes",
"pre-diabetes" and other such anodyne reasons for not trying pretty
damn hard to reverse the damage, not merely to keep the status quo -
because if you keep doing the things that got you there in the first
place (given the right gene set, etc) then you will deteriorate.

Sorry if that sounds insensitive; it's sadly much more realistic than
pessimistic. You possibly could reverse your damage; it takes a heck
of a lot of doing, though.

Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 150ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.2% BMI 26

Nicky > wrote:
>It means that, at the least, you have insulin resistance, probably
>some loss of beta cells, and quite likely some visceral adipose tissue
>- with all the inflammation and downward spiral that implies.

I understand that.

>Pre-diabetes as a diagnosis gives you room to treat it without the
>degree of seriousness it implies.

Agreed.

>We see far too many people who think
>they have " a touch of sugar", "not full-blown diabetes",
>"pre-diabetes" and other such anodyne reasons for not trying pretty
>damn hard to reverse the damage, not merely to keep the status quo -
>because if you keep doing the things that got you there in the first
>place (given the right gene set, etc) then you will deteriorate.

I never assumed I could keep doing the things that got me here in the first
place; people keep missing that.

>Sorry if that sounds insensitive; it's sadly much more realistic than
>pessimistic. You possibly could reverse your damage; it takes a heck
>of a lot of doing, though.

Your comments don't strike me as insensitive at all. We probably disagree on
the "heck of a lot" it will take to reverse my condition. As of now, I'm
banking on dietary changes, weight loss and medication.

Orlando

In article >,
Orlando Enrique Fiol > wrote:

> Janet Wilder > wrote:
> >Either you are a diabetic or you are not. If not, you don't need to
> >stick your fingers or watch your carb intake. If you are a diabetic,
> >then it behooves you to take control of the disease before it takes
> >control of you.
>
> I am pre-diabetic, which means that I can still theoretically reverse my
> current state and bypass full blown diabetes.

Sure, possibly you can, but possibly you can't. It's not a matter of
willpower, or diet. Elevated blood sugar is a *symptom*. And, while the
general typology is of Type 1 (pancreas stops producing insulin) vs Type
2 (pancreas can't produce enough insulin to overcome insulin
resistance), there are many subtypes, with varying underlying causes.
So, whether you can bypass full blown diabetes depends on what's
actually broken in your metabolism.

--
"Isn't embarrassing to quote something you didn't read and then attack
what it didn't say?"--WG, where else but Usenet

Alice Faber > wrote:
>Sure, possibly you can, but possibly you can't. It's not a matter of
>willpower, or diet. Elevated blood sugar is a *symptom*. And, while the
>general typology is of Type 1 (pancreas stops producing insulin) vs Type
>2 (pancreas can't produce enough insulin to overcome insulin
>resistance), there are many subtypes, with varying underlying causes.
>So, whether you can bypass full blown diabetes depends on what's
>actually broken in your metabolism.

Since I'm not yet insulin dependent, I assume my pancreas can still produce
insulin but not as much as I need. So, I'm going to work on needing less so
that my pancreas can satisfy my insulin demands.

Orlando

"Orlando Enrique Fiol" > wrote in message
. ..
> Alice Faber > wrote:
>>Sure, possibly you can, but possibly you can't. It's not a matter of
>>willpower, or diet. Elevated blood sugar is a *symptom*. And, while the
>>general typology is of Type 1 (pancreas stops producing insulin) vs Type
>>2 (pancreas can't produce enough insulin to overcome insulin
>>resistance), there are many subtypes, with varying underlying causes.
>>So, whether you can bypass full blown diabetes depends on what's
>>actually broken in your metabolism.
>
> Since I'm not yet insulin dependent, I assume my pancreas can still
> produce
> insulin but not as much as I need. So, I'm going to work on needing less
> so
> that my pancreas can satisfy my insulin demands.

That's not necessarily how it works. Most likely you are insulin resistant.
Producing plenty, or perhaps too much in my case, insulin but your body
can't use it properly.

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:45:04 -0400, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:

>Alice Faber > wrote:
>>Sure, possibly you can, but possibly you can't. It's not a matter of
>>willpower, or diet. Elevated blood sugar is a *symptom*. And, while the
>>general typology is of Type 1 (pancreas stops producing insulin) vs Type
>>2 (pancreas can't produce enough insulin to overcome insulin
>>resistance), there are many subtypes, with varying underlying causes.
>>So, whether you can bypass full blown diabetes depends on what's
>>actually broken in your metabolism.
>
>Since I'm not yet insulin dependent, I assume my pancreas can still produce
>insulin but not as much as I need. So, I'm going to work on needing less so
>that my pancreas can satisfy my insulin demands.

Can you get a C-peptide test done, Orlando? That would answer that
particular question.

Recent research might suggest that a DEXA scan or similar might be
interesting too, to rule in (if appropriate) an issue with the
osteoclast/insulin feedback mechanisms.

But there are some 50 metabolic pathways that might be broken. Roll on
targetted approaches...

Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 150ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.2% BMI 26