[Discussion] the A1c advice in here is 2 years out of date
the A1c advice in here is 2 years out of date. Making the case below, and I expect to lose some of it in the comments.
To save the first four comments: 2 years.
Continuous monitoring shows the shape: postprandial excursions, overnight behaviour and time in range. Two people with identical A1c can have very different distributions.
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.
Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
Retitled — the original quoted an obesity endpoint as a glycaemic one.
Have you taken this to whoever manages your diabetes?
I would not compare your numbers to that population. Different baseline, different regimen, different trial.
Yes — the person managing your diabetes is the one to talk to, and this board is explicit about that.
[removed by moderator]
Certain conditions affect A1c independently of glycaemia. If a result looks inconsistent with the sensor data, that is a question for whoever manages your care rather than for this board.
Agreed. A1c is an integrated average over roughly three months and treating it as a current reading causes a lot of unnecessary alarm.
- 1Retitled — the original quoted an obesity endpoint as a glycaemic one.8 comments in this branch · started by u/gentle_correction