if you had to pick.......

Sopies Grandma
By Sopies Grandma Latest Reply 2015-03-05 22:20:04 -0600
Started 2015-03-02 13:49:59 -0600

If you had to pick between having a high B/G, or having a low B/G which one would you pick? for me I would pick the high B/G. The only thing that happens to me is that I will get a headache, But the low numbers scare me. I have had many moments where my numbers dropped, very scary for me.
So I was curious to see what everyone would pick.

9 replies

GabbyPA 2015-03-03 08:37:04 -0600 Report

Lows scare me more, but highs are crappy because they can be subtle and just make me feel crummy all the way around. I have never had high put me in the hospital or a low put me on the floor. I hope I don't have to experience either. Right now, I would rather have lows than highs because it means I am getting closer to better control. My first 4 years as a diabetic I NEVER had a low and thought I never would. Now I have had a few and even though I don't like them, I know that at least my body can get lower numbers.

If I have to choose, I choose neither...I want stable good numbers. Until then, I choose lows.

lilleyheidi 2015-03-03 01:27:56 -0600 Report

In the past I've had high in the 600's and many in the 400's and I've had lows as low as 45 that I've metered, I suspect I've had lower that Ive not tested. As bad as the lows are I'd still rather have a low, as I know I can bring it up relatively fast. I do not do short acting insulin at this point so have no quick way to bring a high down. Both lows and highs have the possibility of coma and death, but I think I'm more aware of a low and can test and treat faster than I am aware of a high. That's just me.

RebDee 2015-03-02 18:09:57 -0600 Report

I agree. For me, High B/G does nothing. In fact, on Saturday, my friend Sam and I checked our Blood sugars at the same time and mine was high at 177 and he said it was because we had gone to Santa Barbara and I ate too much (which I actually did not). I remembered later that I had had a shot of cortisone in my painful right knee on Thursday. Cortison makes B/G go up. However, whenever I had had a low B/G, I had sweats, shaking, trouble breathing, and if my dog did not wake me, I might have gone into coma.

Type1Lou 2015-03-02 16:34:34 -0600 Report

Both extremes are to be avoided. But, if I had to choose, I would choose a low BG…because I can usually catch them in time to get it back up. It's easier and quicker to recover and return to a target BG from a low than a very high one. Consistently high BG's will lead to those nasty complications. Both, if left untreated, will lead to coma and death.

suecsdy 2015-03-02 15:57:44 -0600 Report

I'll take the low cause then I can have a bona fide sweet treat. Only happened once so far and I think the highs scare me more.

haoleboy 2015-03-02 15:13:39 -0600 Report

in 8 years since diagnosis the lowest I have seen is 78 and the highest 184.
Given those as the "extremes", I'll take low every time.


Jibber Jabber
Jibber Jabber 2015-03-02 14:21:14 -0600 Report

Depends of what you mean by low B/G…dangerously low..or just low and feeling a little off…if it is just low and feeling a little off…I vote for low…my body will eventually get use to it…when I started waking up in the 80's I felt a little woozy..now I am fine…probably been way too long since my body experienced a morning level in the 80's and was just screaming WHAT THE HELL IS THIS!!!!…High..anything over 140 is unacceptable to me…actually at this point anything over 130 is unacceptable to me…so yeah ill take the low…