Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

examine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 130 posts

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#41

Post by kanjus »

crazygringo wrote: post #22
mjburgess wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A counter-point, in a certain sense: when the conclusions of scientific papers (in these softer science fields), contradict common sense, they tend to be unreproducible; the ones which don't, are. The problem with studying humans is, roughly, the central limit theorem doesnt work: properties of biological and social systems do not have well-behaved statistics. So all this t-test pseudoscience can be a great misdirect…

> when the conclusions of scientific papers (in these softer science fields), contradict common sense, they tend to be unreproducible; the ones which don't, are. Citation needed? I don't know what would lead to that conclusion. And it would seem to run counter to the entire history of the field of psychology, for example.

Can't find the citation, but remember gwern mentioning a study in one of his posts on replication that found that unintuitive findings tend to be both less replicable and more cited than intuitive ones.

Psychology is the field that is most hit with replication failures and has a slew of unintuitive results that turn out to be malpractice.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#42

Post by nradov »

jzacharia wrote: post #23
msarrel wrote: post #2

Fascinating. I've always felt that this was true with my own body, yet every medical professional I've spoken to said that I was wrong.

Hate to sound like "that guy" but a majority of medical professionals are running their practice on outdated data or false studies funded by pharma.

There are problems in the US healthcare system with slow adoption of clinical practice guidelines and lack of research funding for non-pharmaceutical treatments. But on an objective scientific basis the recent studies funded by pharma tend to be some of the highest quality work. They have huge budgets and are held to fairly high standards now by the FDA so we tend to see large subject populations, multiple sites, proper controls, and rigorous statistical analysis.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#43

Post by jodrellblank »

csours wrote: post #8

Some assumptions are so obvious no one bothers to state them, or even remember them. Assumption: Medical professionals are trained to use Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). One might assume that EBM means something specific, and I'm sure it does, but that specific thing is different for different people. One thing that EBM sometimes means is: common sense is no substitute for evidence. There are uncountable times that co…

> "So, you have a lot of people commenting here that this is obvious common sense"

You have this about everything, everywhere. It's a pet peeve how much stuff people will attribute to "common sense" so they can do the internet "I'm superior" thing.

"Wear sunscreen, it's just common sense". No it isn't. We evolved on Earth under the sun, we feel good when going out in the sun, it's bright and beautiful. Rubbing petrochemical distillate or industrially processed plant extract on your skin so the invisible light discovered in 1801 doesn't denature the invisible DNA discovered in 1869 is not common sense it's learned behaviour. Nothing much about Science is common sense, it took thousands of years from the dawn of Civilization until the Enlightenment era and still people can go through years of education and then choose to believe what we want to believe instead of what the evidence shows.

'Common Sense' is that the world is simple, designed for a purpose by a human-like mind one or two levels up from us on the power scale, and inhabited by life-like energies and spirits, some of them malevolent. Common Sense is that things which didn't happen today or yesterday will probably never happen. Common Sense is that things which happen together cause each other; if the relative comes to town and the crop fails then they are bad luck, if the relative comes to town and the baby is born healthy then they are good luck.

Why would it be any kind of 'common sense' - 'sound judgement not based on any specialised knowledge' - that glucose (1747) response differs for the same meal if you need a continuous glucose monitor (FDA approved in 1999) to find that out?!

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#44

Post by hinkley »

bilsbie wrote: post #28
blindriver wrote: post #19

I've been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes and wear a CGM. I find that my blood glucose spikes much later than what is suggested. For example, I might eat a meal and my blood glucose doesn't spike until after 2 hours. When it spikes, I see the body react with insulin and it drives my blood sugar levels down, so I'm not sure if I actually do have T2D or if this is just how my body works. Another thing I've noticed is th…

Interesting. What’s your a1c level ? I think you could have a point at around 100-105 baseline but 120 seems too high.

I just found out a friend was diagnosed with diabetes due to a sugar test while their a1c was still in the normal range. We’ve got a long way to go yet with diabetes research.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#45

Post by luckydata »

csours wrote: post #8

Some assumptions are so obvious no one bothers to state them, or even remember them. Assumption: Medical professionals are trained to use Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). One might assume that EBM means something specific, and I'm sure it does, but that specific thing is different for different people. One thing that EBM sometimes means is: common sense is no substitute for evidence. There are uncountable times that co…

I agree 100% but sometimes you see studies that confirm not only common sense but also very well researched science that is frankly beyond the need for replication, and that definitely triggers a "wouldn't that money be spent more efficiently by trying to do something new instead?? feeling anytime I see one of those studies.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#46

Post by slwvx »

Jessie Inchauspe [1] created a business (she's the "glucose goddess") and wrote books around the different blood sugar responses she and others have to meals, exercise, etc... I don't recall all the ideas, but here are the two I remember: Exercise before and/or after eating smooths out the blood sugar response to food. When eating a meal, it's better to eat high-fiber stuff first, then complex carbs, then protein, then fats, and eat simple carbs last (Or something like that order).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessie_Inchauspé

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#47

Post by bobmcnamara »

blindriver wrote: post #19

I've been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes and wear a CGM. I find that my blood glucose spikes much later than what is suggested. For example, I might eat a meal and my blood glucose doesn't spike until after 2 hours. When it spikes, I see the body react with insulin and it drives my blood sugar levels down, so I'm not sure if I actually do have T2D or if this is just how my body works. Another thing I've noticed is th…

Do you know if you do(not) have delayed gastric emptying?

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#48

Post by hinkley »

zingababba wrote: post #3

"Additionally, the summarized study did not record the timing of snack and water consumption. This is relevant because the sequence and timing of subsequent meals (or snacks), as well as the food processing and variability, can influence postmeal glucose responses." - probably a factor, hydration status is huge. This result is kind of like 'duh' though. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28739050/

Hydration, activity and stress levels. Adrenal responses can pause the digestive process to conserve energy for fight or flight. Muscle use also diverts resources, stressed or not. And being dehydrated essentially concentrates everything in your blood, complicating kidney and liver function.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#49

Post by zamadatix »

blindriver wrote: post #19

I've been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes and wear a CGM. I find that my blood glucose spikes much later than what is suggested. For example, I might eat a meal and my blood glucose doesn't spike until after 2 hours. When it spikes, I see the body react with insulin and it drives my blood sugar levels down, so I'm not sure if I actually do have T2D or if this is just how my body works. Another thing I've noticed is th…

I'm a fellow type 2, be sure to talk more with your doctor about these points as such comments/questions are of things they should have explained very clearly the first time they said your sugar seemed high.

Type 2 "resistance" is about the quality of the response to high glucose levels, not the complete lack of a response to them. There shouldn't be a long buildup overnight in that scenario for a person without insulin resistance/deficiency and still having a measurable insulin response is normal/expected of all but the worst Type 2 diabetics. Yes, you're still digesting, but in individuals without diabetes the blood sugar peak occurs (and ends) well before digestion is finished because influxes of carbs can still be effectively managed by the insulin alone rather than by the lack of additional carbs to digest. If it were just that one's digestion were a lot slower than a normal persons then it should still result in a lower, but still quickly managed to baseline, peak.

You may well actually be prediabetic though, it just depends on the specific numbers for A1C/average & peaks combined over time and not the presence of a response itself. The recommendations between higher side prediabetic and lower side type II diabetic shouldn't be all that different in the end anyways though.

Re: Continuous glucose monitors reveal variable glucose responses to the same meals

#50

Post by cfu28 »

hinkley wrote: post #44
bilsbie wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. What’s your a1c level ? I think you could have a point at around 100-105 baseline but 120 seems too high.

I just found out a friend was diagnosed with diabetes due to a sugar test while their a1c was still in the normal range. We’ve got a long way to go yet with diabetes research.

I mean, it is well known that A1c has a 3 month (usually) lag time assuming no hemolytic states. Could have been just caught early depending on what you mean by sugar test
Post reply on HN