[Discussion] we are measuring A1c at the wrong time and calling it noise
we are measuring A1c at the wrong time and calling it noise, and I am aware this is a minority view on this board.
Compared two draws across two labs and spent a week worrying before finding out the assays were different.
Took a baseline the week before starting purely because this board told me to. Best five minutes I have spent on this.
Draw at the same point in the week now, fasting, same lab. The noise dropped enormously once I standardised.
If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something. Alone it is an anecdote.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Nobody here can interpret your panel and this comment is not doing so. What a board can usefully do is help you ask better questions of somebody who can.
Time of day, fasting state, hydration and recent exercise all move common markers. Standardising the draw conditions is free and it removes most of the apparent variability.
Same view — ApoB if you add one thing. It answers a question the standard panel only gestures at.
ApoB is the one worth adding if you only add one
assay method matters, especially between different labs
Careful — that is a question for whoever ordered the panel, and nobody in this thread can answer it responsibly.
Careful — that is a question for whoever ordered the panel, and nobody in this thread can answer it responsibly.
Adding the obvious one — take it to whoever ordered the panel. This board cannot read it for you.
assay method matters, especially between different labs
jarno_karlsen is right that a reference interval is not a target. It is a description of a population.
Retitled — the original asserted a causal claim the post does not support.
a single triglycerides outside range is a reason to repeat, not to panic
That is a non-fasting value and the interval you are comparing it against is a fasting one.
Did anything else change in that window — training, intake, hydration?
Not convinced by the attribution. Weight loss alone moves that marker and you have no way to separate the two.
Reference intervals are typically the central 95% of a reference population. By construction one person in twenty falls outside one on any given test without anything being wrong.
My ALT moved and I spent a fortnight convinced I knew why. The repeat six weeks later was back in range and I had changed nothing.
I would not draw a line through two points, especially when the second was taken at a different time of day.
- 1Same view — ApoB if you add one thing. It answers a question the standard…7 comments in this branch · started by u/skip_week_sceptic