Hacking my Blood Glucose
So, I'm reading this today: In T2 Diabetes, Which Comes First: High Insulin Levels or Insulin Resistance? | Diabetic Mediterranean Diet
I'm not diabetic in any way, although, in my pre-primal days (pre-2010) I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic with FBG 110-120, but normal HbA1C.
No matter what I do, my FBG is always 95-110. I've even seen it at 116 after 2 years on PB.
I discovered that if I eat something, my blood sugar will spike a bit, then drop to the 80's where it will remain until next meal. When I go to bed at night, my blood glucose will be around 85, but next morning around 100.
The only explanation I can come up with is I am having some un-needed gluconeogenesis going on.
For the last 18 months, I have not eaten breakfast, IF'ing until lunch. I do really well and my weight has remained stable.
I have found it doesn't take much to get my blood sugar down to 85 in the morning--a piece of bacon will do it.
Slightly high FBG seems to be a common complaint amongst paleo folks. So if lowering blood glucose is a positive thing, eating a small breakfast first thing in the morning might be better than fasting until noon.
Those numbers do not seem worrisome in the least.
Not worried in the least, either! Just trying to maximize my body's quirks. It seems to be widely believed that higher blood glucose is a bad thing, if we can lower it first thing in the morning wouldn't that be better than walking around til noon with excess glucose. The excess glucose supposedly prevents fat oxidation--the reason for IF'ing til noon in the first place. Seems like a better plan for IF'ing would be a very tiny breakfast then nothing til noon or later.
Originally Posted by Knifegill
Didn't mean this to be about me, but about anybody who has high FBG and wondered about it.
I found this, too: Hyperlipid: Physiological insulin resistance
"...his gradual yet progressively rising fasting blood glucose (FBG) level over a 10 year period of paleolithic LC eating. Always eating less than 30g carbohydrate per day. Initially on LC his blood glucose was 83mg/dl but it has crept up, year by year, until now his FBG is up to 115mg/dl. Post prandial values are normal.
He wanted to know if he was developing diabetes."
In addition to what you got at hyperlipid there is this:
Ramblings of a carnivore: The carnivore connection hypothesis
That comes from this paper.... The Carnivore Connection Hypothesis: Revisited
So I guess the real discussion should be: Is there an optimal range for blood glucose?
We know having high blood glucose after meals, above about 140, is bad. We know fasting blood glucose, above 110, is bad.
Does it make any difference if you go from 6am til noon with BG of 100-110 or are there benefits to lowering it to 85 by eating a small meal?
The way I look at it is more in a cumulative effect. Of course there are certain parameters that indicate dysfunction, but I don't know that there is a an "optimal". As in if 90 fasting BG is good 85 is awesome! type of thing. I'm fairly certain that repetitive spikes throughout the day that never get a chance to come down to baseline is a sure way to produce neurological damage. This tends to fit with higher starch societies that seem to only eat 1-2 meals a day (thinking kitavins). Sure they eat a good deal but its not repetitive damage akin to drinking a 4 sodas between your 3 pasta and bread loaded meals each day. And Someone is gonna point out that the 140 thing is only if it remains elevated for a couple hours above that.....I have to look a bit more, but that was something I read in the PHD too. And all of this depends on your current carb level and lifestyle of course. Just as your link to hyperlipid points out.
Last edited by Neckhammer; 12-10-2012 at 04:26 PM.
My prescription medications increase my blood glucose (and trigs), but I seem to have the same experiences as you, otzi: my numbers go down after eating; increase while fasting AND post-exercise when they should go way down. I was just wondering yesterday if it was possible that I have excessive gluconeogenesis going on, if that's even possible. Another issue I have is extremely unbalanced hormones, so I'm thinking there's competing cortisol compounded by my RX and other stress hormones dominating.
Oddly enough, since doing the high-potato diet, my glucose numbers have improved, like I said in the other thread.
I have likely been insulin resistance most of my life, and I believe it's largely due to my life-long hormone imbalances. CHO manipulation seems to be how to manage the symptoms for many with IR, but I'm wondering if fixing the underlying condition(s) wouldn't improve insulin sensitivity? Food for thought.
In Type 1 Diabetes, they are so insulin resistant that they can have 'runaway gluconeogenesis', that's why diabetics always freak out about ketoacidosis. Another thing I discovered is that gluconeogenesis can occur in muscles and the kidney as well as the liver. Not sure what triggers it, but I think it is bizarre that I have high-ish fasting BG, but it goes down to normal after eating a strip of bacon.
Originally Posted by j3nn
Yep, ketoacidosis is potentially a deadly condition. But it's really ONLY a concern for those with type 1 Diabetes. What is basically occurring is, the body begins the process of glucogenesis, but the body of a type 1 Diabetic can't properly tell the body when to stop like a normally functioning body can.
Originally Posted by otzi
Fasting can potentially lead to spikes in blood glucose if you consider that fat lowers the insulin response and resultant blood ugar response. If you are fasting (not eating anything) and have an empty stomach when glucogenesis starts to occur, there is nothing in your body to mitigate the effect (such as fiber or fat) and the spike (at least as far as glucogenesis is concerned) will be higher. This is normal though, and nothing to be concerned about. Your body will get used to it over time and some people just naturally have a more prominent blood sugar spike from glucogenesis than others do.