Failed 1 Hour Glucose Test, Onto the 3 Hour!

My number was 156 (whatever that means). I think normal was 140 so I don't
see WHY I have to take another test.

For those who've had it, what does it entail? Will I be able to drink the
stuff and then just come back 3 hours later?

If I do have it (what is it?) what does that mean?

~Carol Ann

Carol Ann wrote:

My number was 156 (whatever that means). I think normal was 140 so I don't
see WHY I have to take another test.

Normal 140???? Ouch. I think the upper limit of normal is 140.

My 1hr was 103.

Carol Ann wrote:
My number was 156 (whatever that means). I think normal was 140 so I don't
see WHY I have to take another test.

Shena Delian O'Brien
Normal 140???? Ouch. I think the upper limit of normal is 140.

My 1hr was 103.

Normal for the particular test they gave me was 70-140 at 1 hour
post glucose "meal".

No, they won't just watch your weight; your weight is not the
problem. Excess glucose in your blood would be taken up by the
baby, so even if you control your weight the baby may grow too
big and have other problems. If you are developing gestational
diabetes; just do the 3hr test and find out.

Carol Ann wrote:

My number was 156 (whatever that means). I think normal was 140 so I don't
see WHY I have to take another test.


Normal is 140 or *below*, so your glucose levels are
higher than expected. Nevertheless, I wouldn't get all bent
out of shape. The one hour test is a screening test and
many (most?) of those who "fail" it pass the three hour test
(which is much more reliable). Of course, if you ask me,
unless you're diabetic or near-diabetic normally, *neither*
of the tests are worth taking ;-) Your levels aren't *that*
high, so there's a decent shot at passing the three hour
test.


For those who've had it, what does it entail? Will I be able to drink the
stuff and then just come back 3 hours later?


Nope. They're going to draw your blood every hour.
You're techincally supposed to sit relatively still in the
interim, as "too much" exercise will drop your glucose levels
further.


If I do have it (what is it?) what does that mean?


It means you have a condition called "gestational
diabetes" which the medical community has little agreement
on, even regarding whether it's a real problem or needs
treatment. About the only thing everyone agrees on is
that if you are diagnosed with it, your risk for developing
type 2 diabetes later in life is significantly elevated.
Beyond that, while it's common to screen for and treat
in the US, virtually all of the analyses by organizations
looking at evidence based medicine find that there are only
weak correlations with "bad outcomes" (generally macrosomia
or neonatal hypoglycemia) and treatment (with diet or
insulin) doesn't improve outcomes significantly (treatment
with insulin makes for somewhat smaller babies, on average,
but doesn't improve outcomes--e.g., doesn't lower c-section
rate or the rate of shoulder dystocia, which one might
associate with macrosomia).
So, for myself, I don't really even see the sense
in testing unless there's a possibility that your glucose
metabolism is suspect normally (because if you're truly diabetic
or near diabetic there are a whole other set of issues
involved and that's a more risky situation that you don't
want to take lightly). Others see it differently. I chose
not to be tested with any of my pregnancies, despite having
one macrosomic baby (the second of three).
The one thing I would strongly advise is that *if*
the three hour test comes back positive and *if* diet
doesn't control it adequately (however your caregivers
define "control"--some are waaaaaaaay more liberal than
others, which should lead to some suspicion on your part),
I would think long and hard and do a lot of research
before going on insulin. There is very little research
to suggest that it's helpful. In fact, in Enkins et al.'s
_A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth_,
insulin treatment for GD based on the currently available
medical evidence is a practice that would be considered
*unethical* in many other areas of medicine.
Let me say again, though, that while I agree with
those who are very sceptical of GD and its treatment,
pregnancy in a true diabetic is a very different matter.
Insulin may well be necessary in those cases and a Very
Good Thing.

Best wishes,
Ericka

It means you have a condition called "gestational
diabetes" which the medical community has little agreement
on, even regarding whether it's a real problem or needs
treatment. About the only thing everyone agrees on is
that if you are diagnosed with it, your risk for developing
type 2 diabetes later in life is significantly elevated.
Beyond that, while it's common to screen for and treat
in the US, virtually all of the analyses by organizations
looking at evidence based medicine find that there are only
weak correlations with "bad outcomes" (generally macrosomia
or neonatal hypoglycemia) and treatment (with diet or
insulin) doesn't improve outcomes significantly (treatment
with insulin makes for somewhat smaller babies, on average,
but doesn't improve outcomes--e.g., doesn't lower c-section
rate or the rate of shoulder dystocia, which one might
associate with macrosomia).
So, for myself, I don't really even see the sense
in testing unless there's a possibility that your glucose
metabolism is suspect normally (because if you're truly diabetic
or near diabetic there are a whole other set of issues
involved and that's a more risky situation that you don't
want to take lightly). Others see it differently. I chose
not to be tested with any of my pregnancies, despite having
one macrosomic baby (the second of three).
The one thing I would strongly advise is that *if*
the three hour test comes back positive and *if* diet
doesn't control it adequately (however your caregivers
define "control"--some are waaaaaaaay more liberal than
others, which should lead to some suspicion on your part),
I would think long and hard and do a lot of research
before going on insulin. There is very little research
to suggest that it's helpful. In fact, in Enkins et al.'s
_A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth_,
insulin treatment for GD based on the currently available
medical evidence is a practice that would be considered
*unethical* in many other areas of medicine.
Let me say again, though, that while I agree with
those who are very sceptical of GD and its treatment,
pregnancy in a true diabetic is a very different matter.
Insulin may well be necessary in those cases and a Very
Good Thing.

Best wishes,
Ericka


Actually, unmonitored sugar levels in pregnancy are proven to lead to larger
babies (macrosomia) which can cause many problems for both baby and mom
alike. In addition, the baby's sugar can be low if mom's not taking care of
her glucose levels and the baby would need to be supplemented to avoid
"crashing" soon after birth...

New York Jen wrote:


Actually, unmonitored sugar levels in pregnancy are proven to lead to larger
babies (macrosomia) which can cause many problems for both baby and mom
alike. In addition, the baby's sugar can be low if mom's not taking care of
her glucose levels and the baby would need to be supplemented to avoid
"crashing" soon after birth...


Check out the research. Henci Goer has a good discussion
with abstracts in _Obstetric Myths versus Research Realities_.
There is also a good discussion in Enkins et al.'s _A Guide to
Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth_ (or you can check
out any of the Cochrane Group publications). There are also
statements from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
and the Canadian organization (forget their name) as well as
several others. While most agree that macrosomia is a risk,
macrosomia itself is not the problem. The potential problem
with macrosomia is that it can lead to shoulder dystocia and
instrumental or operative deliveries. While aggressive
treatment of GD sometimes can be shown to slightly lower the
incidence of macrosomia (though not by much), it has NOT been
shown to lower the incidence of c-sections or shoulder
dystocia. (And a fairly recent very large study in Australia
didn't document *any* correlation between GD and shoulder
dystocial to start with.) When it comes to neonatal hypoglycemia,
treatment has also not been shown to make much difference,
and at least one study showed that blood glucose levels during
labor had far more to do with neonatal hypoglycemia than
levels during pregnancy (maybe something to do with protocols
that tend to starve mom during labor...).

Best wishes,
Ericka

"New York Jen" wrote in message
.net...


It means you have a condition called "gestational
diabetes" which the medical community has little agreement
on, even regarding whether it's a real problem or needs
treatment. About the only thing everyone agrees on is
that if you are diagnosed with it, your risk for developing
type 2 diabetes later in life is significantly elevated.
Beyond that, while it's common to screen for and treat
in the US, virtually all of the analyses by organizations
looking at evidence based medicine find that there are only
weak correlations with "bad outcomes" (generally macrosomia
or neonatal hypoglycemia) and treatment (with diet or
insulin) doesn't improve outcomes significantly (treatment
with insulin makes for somewhat smaller babies, on average,
but doesn't improve outcomes--e.g., doesn't lower c-section
rate or the rate of shoulder dystocia, which one might
associate with macrosomia).
So, for myself, I don't really even see the sense
in testing unless there's a possibility that your glucose
metabolism is suspect normally (because if you're truly diabetic
or near diabetic there are a whole other set of issues
involved and that's a more risky situation that you don't
want to take lightly). Others see it differently. I chose
not to be tested with any of my pregnancies, despite having
one macrosomic baby (the second of three).
The one thing I would strongly advise is that *if*
the three hour test comes back positive and *if* diet
doesn't control it adequately (however your caregivers
define "control"--some are waaaaaaaay more liberal than
others, which should lead to some suspicion on your part),
I would think long and hard and do a lot of research
before going on insulin. There is very little research
to suggest that it's helpful. In fact, in Enkins et al.'s
_A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth_,
insulin treatment for GD based on the currently available
medical evidence is a practice that would be considered
*unethical* in many other areas of medicine.
Let me say again, though, that while I agree with
those who are very sceptical of GD and its treatment,
pregnancy in a true diabetic is a very different matter.
Insulin may well be necessary in those cases and a Very
Good Thing.

Best wishes,
Ericka


Actually, unmonitored sugar levels in pregnancy are proven to lead to
larger
babies (macrosomia) which can cause many problems for both baby and mom
alike. In addition, the baby's sugar can be low if mom's not taking care
of
her glucose levels and the baby would need to be supplemented to avoid
"crashing" soon after birth...

But studies have shown that diet and insulin don't make macrosomic babies
significantly smaller anyways, so its a catch-22 on that account. And
gestational diabetes isn't a guarantee of hypoglycemia. It's possible and
mothers at risk should be aware, but its not a guarantee as my doctor swore
it would be with me.

- Joanne
DS Ian, 11/6/03

: My number was 156 (whatever that means). I think normal was 140 so I
don't
: see WHY I have to take another test.
:
:
: Normal is 140 or *below*, so your glucose levels are
: higher than expected. Nevertheless, I wouldn't get all bent
: out of shape. The one hour test is a screening test and
: many (most?) of those who "fail" it pass the three hour test
: (which is much more reliable). Of course, if you ask me,
: unless you're diabetic or near-diabetic normally, *neither*
: of the tests are worth taking ;-) Your levels aren't *that*
: high, so there's a decent shot at passing the three hour
: test.
:
:
: For those who've had it, what does it entail? Will I be able to drink
the
: stuff and then just come back 3 hours later?
:
:
: Nope. They're going to draw your blood every hour.
: You're techincally supposed to sit relatively still in the
: interim, as "too much" exercise will drop your glucose levels
: further.
:
:
: If I do have it (what is it?) what does that mean?
:
:
: It means you have a condition called "gestational
: diabetes" which the medical community has little agreement
: on, even regarding whether it's a real problem or needs
: treatment. About the only thing everyone agrees on is
: that if you are diagnosed with it, your risk for developing
: type 2 diabetes later in life is significantly elevated.
: Beyond that, while it's common to screen for and treat
: in the US, virtually all of the analyses by organizations
: looking at evidence based medicine find that there are only
: weak correlations with "bad outcomes" (generally macrosomia
: or neonatal hypoglycemia) and treatment (with diet or
: insulin) doesn't improve outcomes significantly (treatment
: with insulin makes for somewhat smaller babies, on average,
: but doesn't improve outcomes--e.g., doesn't lower c-section
: rate or the rate of shoulder dystocia, which one might
: associate with macrosomia).
: So, for myself, I don't really even see the sense
: in testing unless there's a possibility that your glucose
: metabolism is suspect normally (because if you're truly diabetic
: or near diabetic there are a whole other set of issues
: involved and that's a more risky situation that you don't
: want to take lightly). Others see it differently. I chose
: not to be tested with any of my pregnancies, despite having
: one macrosomic baby (the second of three).
: The one thing I would strongly advise is that *if*
: the three hour test comes back positive and *if* diet
: doesn't control it adequately (however your caregivers
: define "control"--some are waaaaaaaay more liberal than
: others, which should lead to some suspicion on your part),
: I would think long and hard and do a lot of research
: before going on insulin. There is very little research
: to suggest that it's helpful. In fact, in Enkins et al.'s
: _A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth_,
: insulin treatment for GD based on the currently available
: medical evidence is a practice that would be considered
: *unethical* in many other areas of medicine.
: Let me say again, though, that while I agree with
: those who are very sceptical of GD and its treatment,
: pregnancy in a true diabetic is a very different matter.
: Insulin may well be necessary in those cases and a Very
: Good Thing.
:
: Best wishes,
: Ericka

I seriously do NOT want to go onto insulin. I don't have much longer to go
in the pregnancy. I believe 8 - 9 weeks. It may take 2 more weeks to
figure this all out.

So, they will put me on a 6 week diet? I could just start eating the way
they want now. I DID lose 20 lbs in 7 weeks while on a low carb diet. I
wonder if this would be similar?

I'm confused. I'll take the test. But I'm going to really find out all of
my options BEFORE I agree to taking insulin. Heck, I don't even take
Tylenol!

I wonder, though, if this is what may be causing my recent bouts of feeling
"icky" and "sleepy" and nauseous? It comes and goes.

Hmmm.....

~Carol Ann

I

In article . net,
Carol Ann wrote:

I wonder, though, if this is what may be causing my recent bouts of feeling
"icky" and "sleepy" and nauseous? It comes and goes.

FWIW, these are symtoms my DH had before he was diagnosed. Which doesn't
mean that's what they indicate for YOU, of course - but it's definitely
worth checking!

(He controls it with meds, by the way, not insulin; and his dad, who is also
type 2, controls it entirely with diet. Don't panic about needles until
somebody tells you you have to use them.)

Liz
EDD 5/22/04

--

"No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and
spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable - and we believe they
can do it again." -- John F. Kennedy, 6/10/1963

Carol Ann wrote:


I seriously do NOT want to go onto insulin. I don't have much longer to go
in the pregnancy. I believe 8 - 9 weeks. It may take 2 more weeks to
figure this all out.


It's not likely that they would ask you to, even if
you do fail the 3 hour test. That's usually reserved as a
last attempt if diet doesn't work, and with such little
time left, you probably won't have time to get to that
stage anyway. But even if you did, I'd seriously consider
refusing insulin.


So, they will put me on a 6 week diet? I could just start eating the way
they want now. I DID lose 20 lbs in 7 weeks while on a low carb diet. I
wonder if this would be similar?


It will be somewhat similar to a low carb diet. The
goal would not be to lose weight, of course. It would simply
be to keep your blood sugar levels closer to normal. You could
go on the diet now if you wanted. It's certainly not harmful,
as long as they don't restrict your calories too much.


I'm confused. I'll take the test. But I'm going to really find out all of
my options BEFORE I agree to taking insulin. Heck, I don't even take
Tylenol!


Oh, absolutely. You can always go to Medline and see
what studies say first hand and there are a number of other
sources as well.


I wonder, though, if this is what may be causing my recent bouts of feeling
"icky" and "sleepy" and nauseous? It comes and goes.


Hard to say. Those feelings are rather common in
perfectly normal pregnancies, so who knows? ;-)

Best wishes,
Ericka