why my pp blood sugar did not reduce? i put all the food[breakfast 20% more than usual] in a mixie and ground,then ate it ,took 2hr test

why my pp blood sugar did not reduce? i put all the food[breakfast 20% more than usual] in a mixie and ground,then ate it ,went back to lab for ppbs.grinding has to make digestion easy.my normal ppbs came out.-result i mean.i was just experimenting on the effect ofstarch to glucose conversion time . it was mostly rice and vegitables ,usual cup of tea with sugar.i was prediabetic earlier ,but now normal ,below hundred after a lot of gusthy with the lifestyle

21 Replies

  • dear george,

    there is mistake in the question itself.

    i had corrected it and together with the correction only it was presented by diabetes india at that time .

    but now the correction is missing .and other esponses as well.

    may be due to the long time that expired.

    gusthy simply means wrestling in malayalam.

    the mistake was-

    it should have been -

    why my ppbs did not rise?

    i think you had read the corrected question.

    any way

    i will give the answer too,what i think now, .

    may be that i ate a balanced and limited food but for the 20 percent extra. and my

    body tissues were empty of glucose...

    and the ADA contention of

    gycemic index holds true in the conditions of my experiment.

    and one thing philosophical-

    every one thinks in terms of his knowledge,

    however limited and distinct it is .

    a manthravadi[witchcraft magician]

    would think in terms of his knowledge,

    that i might have carried the spirit of a healthy man at that time..

    the most perfect hypothesis.explains everything and always.

    excuse me i do not read the responses of certain persons.

    good luck.

  • [quote @Meetu77]

    indiacratus --

    Do you remember that you had mentioned a year back ..............


    This is confusing.

    I was under the impression that you are a knowledgeable new joinee to this forum & others were unnecessarily saying you were someone who has come with a new name.

    Am really confused ???


  • recyan,

    is this message meant for me?. any way i do not understand.

    thanks for response anyway.

    good luck

  • @indiacratus,

    No, it was not meant for you. Sorry for the confusion.


  • ok.

  • Dear indiacratus,

    Thank you for the clarification.

    Good luck to you too.

  • dear george,

    thanks in turn.

    good luck.

  • Dear indiacratus,

    You are welcome. :-)

    Good luck to you too.

  • please do not waste your time.

    i dont read your responses.

    i was in the indian institute of technology delhi for a very short time .enough time to know the

    many scientists there, what a sciense discussion is..

    you dont maintain[ and know] the protocols of a science discussion.


    good luck

  • Indiacratus you have not answered question of Meetu 77. Without that, all that you have been asserting loses meaning. If you have been in technology institute for a vey short time, I have been in research for much over 35 years. Technology is about application. Research is about fact finding. I endorse questions by Meetu 77. {I am in boxing this post to you because you mentioned you do not read comments)

  • my stand point is clear enough.

    i mean what i assert.

    in any medical matter we are to go by what they advise, the people in the university.

    they only have a laboratory. ada does not have a laboratory.

    therefore there is nothing such as my assertions lose meaning.

    in other words , i do not assert at all.

    it cannot lose meaning just because i do not answer a person.

    if you can show any of my 600 hundred plus responses

    during the last year and a half

    is in contradiction to contemporary medical knowledge,


    i lose meaning. i am at error.

    about medfree.

    a man who says WHO , ADA, mayo clinic all non sense.

    weight reduction nonsense.

    the list is never ending.for example

    whipping the pancrease!!

    when concrete scientific explanation is offered that sulphanylureas help the pancrease and not whip--

    he repeats the same again and again.

    he does not know what are the protocols of a scientific discussion.

    more over i do knot know at what time they will spit a mouthfull of venum onto me.

    what answer is to be given?

    his tactics is not to answer me.

    but keep his fag holders in union.

    i have no time.

    instead of giving a blanket support to medfree you have answer the many questions i asked. for example the above

    good luck

  • by the way where did you collect this information from?

    "Technology is about application. Research is about fact finding."

  • Since technology has an operational or applicative bent, in a conference I attended in late 70s in context of developing countries, the experts saw it as technical application or 'instructions' in context of countries other than G7/G8...The experts had tons of data to prove the point. Last of the panelist from our region passed away this spring at age 94+.

  • Dear Indiacratus:

    Do you agree that Mayo Clinic is one of the top two or three web sites respected not only by medical doctors, but also by serious medical scientists?

    By the same token, do you agree study and practice advisory from Johns Hopkins is taken very seriously?

    You will recall that specialists here do seriously not seriously suggest consultation for diabetic diet. On the question of exercise, again it is the top researchers who on basis of correlations in the 90s suggested life extension in year through work-out in normal range may be just 1.5 times the spent in work out itself. There are other studies that indicate benefit less than one. Now the latest is that in some populations, perhaps ethnic, exercise spoils the health indicators in up to 20% of the population. This generalization also requires micro-tuning.

    This forum is for both experience and knowledge sharing. If the objective was to blindly follow the doctor, there is limited point to be here!

  • @norreal

    "This forum is for both experience and knowledge sharing. If the objective was to blindly follow the doctor, there is limited point to be here!"

    You have correctly pointed out. People don't need forums for mere knowledge.

  • dear norreal,

    who is opposed to experience sharing. ?

    if that were the case, why should i quote my own experience -in my anectdotes post?

    if experience or perception is unnecessary why should there be laboratories.

    we rationalise on the perceptions ,experience ,only.

    i do not know what profession you belong in order to draw a proper example for you..

    so i will give you 2 examples and conclude.

    copernicus after interpreting the planetary motions should not say :

    Ptolemy nonsense..[ and never said]

    watson and crick telling Darwin nonsense--unthinkable.

    medfree is sensfree in telling superior scientific people as nonsense.

    he is a person less than an udergraduate in biology or medicine.

    he should stop precisely at describing his experience.

    dr. bernstein advocates exercise for the diabetic and everybody in the world too..see the wikipedia where his life history is given. i quoted once.

    if exercise is counterproductive in a diabetic

    then i should say bernstein nonsense. and you say -get inspired from bernstein.

    moreover ,it is the scholar and not the person experiencing-

    who should interpret a set of experiences, observations.

    otherwise we will all be selfdiagnosing.

    kindly do not point out comparisons about me .

    thanks for the response.


  • Sorry if my naming you amongst ten most active members has offended you. I would love to bring carb intake to 20% calories that is why I mention Medfree. He vehemently opposed my 8+ km walk daily . . I think it makes me extremely productive because I use it to think, review and organize. It cheers me up too. Work wise, it is more productive than 3-4 extra hours at work! Lastly, I believe even if opposing views does not make our actions better, whatever path we choose, we are likely to be committed.

  • Yes Meetu 77. I probably have to modify my walk/workout. If I jog the last ten minutes a day, my resting rate improves by more than 5 pulses per minute.

    My parents never had diabetes perhaps because their carb intake was limited. My mother got < 15% calories through carb and last twenty years of her life, she averaged much less than 300 yards movement per day (bathroom end point 20' from her bed and dining table < 30' from her bed)...

  • Yes Meetu 77, you are right! When I jogged the last six to ten minutes once in 24 hours, my resting pulse per minute had come down by up to ten beats. [Ten kilometers per day could not do that]

  • dear norreal,

    probably you have not understood me correctly.

    suppose u are given two cases.

    1] a person reduces his weight by methodes what the medical scientists advise,. reach a safe weight. takes balanced and calorie limited food and lives happily.

    2] he goes for un recomended distortions in his diet like lchf

    gets reduction in his bs . because if you do not take carbs how can bs rise?bs falls . no doubt. his body starves for essential nutrients. his body is in a tortured state.

    in the long run his organs get damaged.

    which of the two will you follow.?

    i will not discuss the nutrient starvation and tortured state of the body.

    because it is the business of the nutritionist and the biochemist.moreover

    it is time consuming.

    they do not recomend lchf.


    3] there is a third option. this is for the obese


    obese and diabetic only.

    it is the low carb diet.it is slightly diferent from lchf.it is recomended for them.

    why the rest of the people be dragged into it?

    4] the medicine and balanced and limited food.

    lchf people compare their body condition with their condition prior to lchf.

    they are not competent or having enough knowledge to compare their present state to the 4th option .in fact i have rarely seen any one made such a comparison , even the scientists.i have once given a webmd article on it.lchf is just ignored by all.poor indians are dragged into it by some people, probably vested interests.

    it was the medical method of the 19th century.

    when insulin came up in1921 it disappeared.then dr. annika brought it for weight reduction and not for diabetes.

    then the swedish after studying 16000 research papers recomended both low carb and low fat for weight reduction.note carefully:low carb ,not high fat.

    In 2013, after reviewing 16,000 studies, Sweden's Council on Health Technology Assessment concluded low-carbohydrate diets are more effective as a means to reduce weight than low-fat diets, over a short period of time (six months or less).

    However, the agency also concluded, over a longer span (12–24 months), no differences occur in effects on weight between strict or moderate low-carb diets, low-fat diets, diets high in protein, Mediterranean diet, or diets aiming at low glycemic indices.[87]


    i am sure lchf and such terms as nutritional ketosis is not mentioned in any responsible websites.

    what the european union committe and ADA in a consensus statement recomends you is

    to go is for insulin pump on conditions.-- several times quoted by me.if lchf is a safe option , they would have recomended it.

    what is the big thing in low carb ?

    if you dont eat carbs there will not be rise in bs.

    If you close the tap to a bucket of water, water level cannot rise.

    body goes into limited muscle catabolism.

    if you go for limited carbs -- that is what they call carbohydrate counting.recomended.

    good luck.

  • Merely being at iit wont ceritify that u had appropriate knowledge in medical


    If that is case then its really pity that u wont understand basics also

You may also like...