We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Confused about fasting blood sugar readings

cloudy68
Posts: 65 Member
When I met with my diabetes educational coordinator, she said a reading between 80-130 was acceptable for a morning fasting reading. However, in reading all of your posts, most of you think anything above 110 is not a good reading and strive to have readings below 100 -- I usually get readings around 115-120 and have been thinking that was "ok" but apparently those aren't very good readings -- confused!!!!
0
Replies
-
I like to refer to this chart: http://www.type2diabetesguide.com/conversion-chart-for-blood-sugar-levels.shtml#.VesMnMu9KSN
Anything below 100 (5.5) is normal. Prediabetic is 101-125 (5.6-6.9). I am shooting for normal. Any lowering is an improvement though.0 -
Hm. Experts tell me to pack on the insulin for any sugars above 150, no matter when they happen (unless, of course, I forgot to let my alchol-rubbed finger dry, in which case I retest). I once got a pre-protein-snack reading of 90, which is supposed to be too little, but felt fine other than a moderate food craving, which my shake satisfied. I guess it depends on your body and situation, but I may be thoroughly confused as well.0
-
When I met with my diabetes educational coordinator, she said a reading between 80-130 was acceptable for a morning fasting reading. However, in reading all of your posts, most of you think anything above 110 is not a good reading and strive to have readings below 100 -- I usually get readings around 115-120 and have been thinking that was "ok" but apparently those aren't very good readings -- confused!!!!
I think that there are varying opinions about this, even the ADA has a different set of standard than The Society for Endrinologists. To me a FBS of 108 would be amazing. For you, maybe not so much. Its a puzzle.
0
This discussion has been closed.