The ultimate I believe is when they test BOTH insulin and glucose response/recovery in 30 min increments for 2 or 3 hrs.
I'm a Lean Mass Hyper-Responder (LMHR) Now - You?
- Thread starter jetman
- Start date
For the last 6 mths (when I got a BG meter) I purposely eat a diet that never spikes my glucose above 140 mg/dL.
Same. If I hit 150 I don’t freak out though
Its not just WHAT you eat, but HOW MUCH you eat of it too.
That is my problem!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the order in which you eat it.
Eat BG spiking food last or combine with non-spiking food (fat).
Eat BG spiking food last or combine with non-spiking food (fat).
Then don't drive down to Lake Stevens and go to the South Lake Stevens Pizza and order "The Barge!"
https://southlakepizza.toast.site/
I prefer choice ribeyes now
Agree on all of it!Bikman and most of the other doctors I pay attention to say fasting insulin below 6.0 UIU/ML is healthy. Mine was 2.0 UIU/ML when I tested it a couple of mths ago
but,
when I check my fasting glucose (remember my OMAD meal eatin by 3 pm everyday) in the morning between 6 to 10 am BG its usually 100 to 109 mg/dL, rarely in the 90s.
Medical powers that be feel the need to draw a line in the sand.
I'm no rocket scientist but even I know there isn't much difference between 5.6 & 5.7
Man has messed with some of our fruit, making it have a lot more sugar than it originally had. Example = apples, they use to be bitter.
Darn, got the name wrong, the book listed most all well known on the fasting insulin by name. There were two outliers. I know mine at 11.3 wasn’t good as I also did that resistance calculator. So I wasn’t with the outliers thoughts and for the majority.
Yes most modern fruit is sweeten and even vegetables have been modified in ways that are questionable
Last edited:
That’s what my CGM shaded area shows as well.
I set the target range as shown.
As I work to some kind of standard for myself I read (or one of your recent videos) ultimately a fasting BG of 70 to 90 would be nice. For me as close to 70 as I can get.
This the current setting. It keeps track of when you go outside of it in weekly reports.
Last edited:
Weird, chart showing fasting BG @ 80-100
Healthy Normal IMHO (?)
typically its 70-100 I think the chart maker goofed!
I might be wrong but does the Diabetes foundation something like 70 might he too low if your diabetic? I dont know.
Oh on the low end. I wasn't too worried about that. I think they just defaulted to ADA on the low side. 50-100 is fine - again IMHO.
Here's a new video with Dave Feldman and Nick Norwitz talking about the high cholesterol study a lot more good stuff:
Here's a video talking about ketosis, ketogenic diets, fat adapted, and the effect that ketones have on the body:
HEART FUNCTION UP…on ketones as fuel
I can't use more heart function! One great thing I got going for me!
However, it is interesting as my brother EF score is around 25 (not a misprint) Im in the 57 to 60 range. Ive had many, many heart function tests. So many I cant remember them all and multiple different ways.
Im am now almost in a great place as far as my fasting diet plan. Refining it before I stop using the CGM. Going to miss it. Just not practical summer swimming season.
Interesting video that started playing right after your heart function link.
LDL ... levels and death.
I wonder, my own thoughts. Those with higher LDL might be eating less processed foods, less refined carbs and more animal protein that doesnt create inflammation than that of those with less LDL.
I pretty much learned LDL doesnt cause heart disease but once you have arterial heart disease it is the LDL that starts clinging and infiltrating the damaged lining of the arteries which were damaged by other causes. Maybe over simplistic but for me I dont have to think much more about it. I HAVE the disease and unless the day its written in stone by my doctor or doctors I could find to review my file. I have to go with the lower and less bad fats in my blood the better. Also keeping in mind my high Lipo a.
SO far is has worked HOWEVER I WANT that CT angiogram to prove I am doing thing right!
My CAC 477 Score sucks, my invasive Cardiac angiogram 5 years ago wasnt very pretty but the saving grace was minimal plaque however ALL over the place.
so I would like to know if it still is minimal or did the plaque build up lets say past 30%. IF the CT angio can go that low.
LDL ... levels and death.
I wonder, my own thoughts. Those with higher LDL might be eating less processed foods, less refined carbs and more animal protein that doesnt create inflammation than that of those with less LDL.
I pretty much learned LDL doesnt cause heart disease but once you have arterial heart disease it is the LDL that starts clinging and infiltrating the damaged lining of the arteries which were damaged by other causes. Maybe over simplistic but for me I dont have to think much more about it. I HAVE the disease and unless the day its written in stone by my doctor or doctors I could find to review my file. I have to go with the lower and less bad fats in my blood the better. Also keeping in mind my high Lipo a.
SO far is has worked HOWEVER I WANT that CT angiogram to prove I am doing thing right!
My CAC 477 Score sucks, my invasive Cardiac angiogram 5 years ago wasnt very pretty but the saving grace was minimal plaque however ALL over the place.
so I would like to know if it still is minimal or did the plaque build up lets say past 30%. IF the CT angio can go that low.
Last edited:
My EF was 69%