There's something that doesn't pass my "Sniff Test" with this stuff.
The A1C is a measure, in percent, of how many red blood cells are glycated. A cell remains clycated until it dies. What happens when a patient "Binges on Sugar?" We can assume that the patient's glucose works it's magic on the haemoglobin at that time and an immediate A1C test would reflect this. But what if the A1C test was taken a month later? By this time, roughly one-third of the glycated cells would've been replaced. In two months, only one-third of the glycated cells would remain. At the third month, all evidence would be gone.
Considering this, the A1C is only valid for patients who have some consistency in their diet. Although, in theory, the A1C indicates sugar management over time, it's significantly influenced by the most recent eating habits.
I suppose I'm making a case for following a good diet without exception!
Cheer, PW.
P.S. If you're about to "cheat" do it BEFORE your A1C. But you'll only be fooling yourself. (You can try keeping your lack of willpower a secret, but eventually the guide dog and wheelchair will tell on you.)
P.P.S. Maybe the A1C is valid because few people "cheat" once, or even twice. Cheaters may be as consistent in their cheating as the strict people are in their adherence. Both behaviours would lead to meaningful A1C values. (Although they'd differ profoundly in their consequences,) |
