[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
  [Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

[IP] Re:Is there any one eles like this?& Heart attack from lows

On Friday, April 4, 2003, email @ redacted wrote:

> email @ redacted writes:
>> after he told me how I was unduly overstressing myself
>> and how much more prone I was to heart attack and stroke by doing so.
> Tami,
>   Is it really true that lows increase the risk of heart attack and 
> stroke? I've
> always heard Drs say that lows do not lead to any long term problems. 
> Then again
> they always hit me so hard I had trouble believing they were harmless. 
> Still
> heart
> attack and stroke is pretty extreme.

When I was diagnosed with Coronary Artery Disease (in my early 40s, 
though STILL not through menopause almost 14 years later), I heard and 
read about worries about hypoglycemia for people like me, and even was 
directed at one point to raise my target bg.  My experience, though, 
during that period and also during a more recent period when the angina 
wasn't stable, was that I NEVER got angina when my blood sugar was low. 
  I'm one of those people whose blood tends to look thicker with highs 
and runnier with lows, so this seemed quite logical.  I wondered if the 
missing piece was the adrenalin reaction to lows, which I, by then, was 
no longer getting.  I could see how that could cause a problem.  But if 
you were keeping your bg continually low, the adrenalin shouldn't be a 
problem then, either.

It would be (theoretically) interesting to see tests of mental acuity 
and responsiveness carried out when one was keeping their bg very low, 
as compared to the same tests when that same person was (and had been 
for a while) keeping them a bit higher.   My personal feeling about me 
is that I feel best when I wake up on the low side of normal, but that 
the line is very fine (most days a 60 reading is great, but the other 
day I had a 58, which by any standard is the same reading, and my 
vision was affected.)  So I aim just a little higher, 70-80.  (No, I 
don't always reach my goals <gr.>). But this is still too close to the 
level where my vision and concentration and responsiveness will be 
affected (and, of course, bg tests aren't exact, and a reading of 80 
could really be representing a blood sugar that was a good bit lower), 
so I would not drive with this reading.  Just yesterday, I had a 
reading of 89 as I was finishing my walk, but  with no unused insulin 
presumably on board, and I took a glucose tab before driving home, just 
in case.

Of course, this time the error was in the other direction, and I was 
167 when I got home. :-P

Linda Z
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: