Using The Glucose Tolerance Test To Prove Fructose Intake Is Safe For Diabetics

[kondevantoni]

This morning did the fructose test:

8.20 woke up- BG= 5.6 mmol/l
8.30 ingested 75g pure fructose with water
9.00 BG=6.4 mmol/l - 0.5h
9.30 BG=6.6 mmol/l -1h
10.00 BG=5.1 mmol/l -1.5h
10.30 BG=4.5 mmol/l -2h
11.00 BG=5.3 mmol/l -2.5h
11.30 BG=5.3 mmol/l -3h

WOW I am impressed by how fructose performed! There was no crash after 1 hour and i felt much better so i managed to stay hungry for 3 hours (don`t see a point why keep it longer, since BG is stable). Going to use fructose on daily basis even though it costs 5 times more than table sugar.

 

[yerrag]

This morning did the fructose test:

8.20 woke up- BG= 5.6 mmol/l
8.30 ingested 75g pure fructose with water
9.00 BG=6.4 mmol/l - 0.5h
9.30 BG=6.6 mmol/l -1h
10.00 BG=5.1 mmol/l -1.5h
10.30 BG=4.5 mmol/l -2h
11.00 BG=5.3 mmol/l -2.5h
11.30 BG=5.3 mmol/l -3h

WOW I am impressed by how fructose performed! There was no crash after 1 hour and i felt much better so i managed to stay hungry for 3 hours (don`t see a point why keep it longer, since BG is stable). Going to use fructose on daily basis even though it costs 5 times more than table sugar.

Those are very different results from that of glucose. Seems like the glucometer wasn't insensitive to the fructose, and iif the meter measured fructose the same as glucose, the body was metabolizing fructose. On the first hour, the intake was more than metabolism can burn, hence the increase in blood sugar reading; but on the second hour, the body continues to metabolize the blood sugar close to a point where glucagon would be released, on the third hour glucagon (and adrenaline) was certainly released, and blood sugar was converted from glycogen, and this increased the blood sugar, and the blood sugar level increased. Had you continued on to the 5th hour, you would also learn about how long your glycogen storage would have lasted in augmenting your blood sugar on a fast.

I'm guessing that the blood sugar level didn't go so high that there was either no insulin response or the response was muted. The insulin, if there was, was not so much to trigger a rapid drop in blood sugar.

Yes, fructose is very expensive, but it's good that it's available for you. There's a thread above de novo lipogenesis where tyw has a long discussion on fructose. Do a search on it so you'll know about the limits of using fructose. It was a long thread and I didn't have the motivation to read through it but you may want to check it out as it is more relevant to you.

Also, think of fructose as a temporary solution as you work towards making your body tissues back to being able to metabolize glucose. A lot of it has to do with avoiding PUFAs. With time, like 4 years, you would possibly be back to that state. It will be a gradual process, and before you reach that point, you may already be able to take to honey and fruit juice because they are 50/50 blends of glucose and fructose.

While PUFA fatty acids are still in your system, you can also consider use of aspirin and niacinamide to inhibit lipolysis, to reduce the presence of fatty acids in your blood stream. This will enable more glucose to be metabolized. A word of caution with aspirin, take it dissolved in water. It dissolves better in water that has baking soda dissolved (1/4 tsp to a liter of water will do). Also, aspirin is a blood thinner and some people will have nosebleeds and wound healing is affected. Have vitamin k2 on hand as k2 is needed in blood clotting for wound healing.

 

[tara]

Probably won't matter as much, as long as blood glucose levels are accurately reflected, assuming that it is glucose that determines the insulin response and it is glucose that determines the body's responses to high and low blood sugar.

I think the body is influenced in various ways by high and low sugars, not just glucose.

 

[yerrag]

I think the body is influenced in various ways by high and low sugars, not just glucose.

I agree with you Tara.

This morning did the fructose test:

8.20 woke up- BG= 5.6 mmol/l
8.30 ingested 75g pure fructose with water
9.00 BG=6.4 mmol/l - 0.5h
9.30 BG=6.6 mmol/l -1h
10.00 BG=5.1 mmol/l -1.5h
10.30 BG=4.5 mmol/l -2h
11.00 BG=5.3 mmol/l -2.5h
11.30 BG=5.3 mmol/l -3h

WOW I am impressed by how fructose performed! There was no crash after 1 hour and i felt much better so i managed to stay hungry for 3 hours (don`t see a point why keep it longer, since BG is stable). Going to use fructose on daily basis even though it costs 5 times more than table sugar.

@kondevantoni what kind of fructose are you using? Corn, beet, or cane -based? Is it free from allergens? If so, where are you buying it, as all the fructose I'm seeing at Amazon is corn-based?

 

[Aries]

I don't think my GTT curve looks like that now. I imagine if I did my GTT now, I would have have start off with a blood sugar level of 85 at 0 hour, then 90 at 1 hour, and it would level off at 85 at the third hour, and stay constant till the fifth hour. This is a curve of a person with healthy blood sugar control. Keeping the blood sugar level consistently within safe range, to me than would be 80-100, would be a sign that we are metabolizing sugar well.

I'm now going to be the healthy test subject. I'll do a series of GTT on myself. I have a blood glucose meter to take blood glucose readings. I'll use different kinds of sugar - a) 75 grams of glucose, b) 75 grams of fructose, c) 75 grams of cane sugar, d) 75 grams of honey, e) 75 grams of orange juice, and f) 75 grams of pineapple juice.

Have you retested GTT or done these other tests?

I thought my carb metabolism would be anything from great to excellent because I have always tested hba1c and fasting glucose midrange. No subjective blood sugar issues either. I did a GTT myself measuring from finger and never had symptoms like this except maybe from heavy workouts.

GTT
Fasting 4.9mmol/l
10min BG=5.7mmol/l
30min BG=6.5mmol/l
60min BG=5.7mmol/l
90min BG=5.9mmol/l
120min BG=5.4mmol/l
150min BG=3.9mmol/l
180min BG=4.2mmol/l
210min BG=4.1mmol/l
240min BG=4.3mmol/l
300min BG=4.8mmol/l


Hunger started between 120-150min.
150min no signs of hypoglycemia other than hunger.
180min hand shaking when holding in parallel, mild sweating, weakness. From this point on I felt mildly bad for the rest of the time including the last measurement even though blood sugar was on the raise again at that point.

I have tested hourly after a mixed high carb meal (60/20/20, 850 calories) and peak was higher (7.5mmol/l) but I did not get hypoglycemia in 5 hours. Micronutrients or fructose/fat/protein make all the difference. Juice tests would be interesting. I still think I handle carbs quite well but pure glucose is poison.

 

[yerrag]

Hi, sorry for late reply. I had to give it some thought.

What did you take for the GTT? Was it 75g glucose or was it a meal?

I've put in a line graph what your values look like compared to an ideal OGTT.:

You can see how your blood glucose levels dropped abruptly, and that would explain when you started to feel hunger, and when you started to shake, at the lowest value in blood glucose. The ideal curve shows a gradual decline in blood sugar indicating a constant usage of blood sugar after sugar intake (or meal) which gradually tapers off to a relatively high plateau, which indicates a constant blood glucose value. When the blood glucose eventually settles down a constant value long after a meal, blood sugar regulation is optimal. This is when we feel constant availability of energy. We don't feel sleepy nor hungry nor grouchy nor feel like we're going to get sick. When you began to shake, that is indicative of blood sugar low.

 

[Aries]

Thanks for the reply @yerrag . It was a ready made 75g glucose drink meant for GTT.

Do you think that is ideal fasting glucose at 80mg/dl or 4.4mmol/l? I felt worse than normal at 3.9-4.3mmol/l in the GTT even though technically that is not hypoglycemic as the cutoff is 4.0mmol/l. My fasting glucose is 4.8-5.0mmol/l, that is also where it settled from my mixed meal ”GTT” without dipping below my fasting glucose at any point as opposed with the actual GTT.

What could cause the reactive hypoglycemia in GTT? I don't get hypoglycemia from normal meals and this lead me to think that GTT is not accurate for testing carb tolerance because in normal situations carbs are accompanied with protein, potassium, B1 etc. that level the rise in blood sugar and prevent the reactive hypoglycemia from too steep blood sugar spike.

Is the ideal range yours from GTT? Healthy people generally don't do GTT and every result I found to compare to were already narrowed to people with issues in fasting blood sugar or hba1c. Compared to that my spike of 6.5mmol was decent, often it raises to 8-9mmol/l and stays for at least two hours in suspected diabetics.

 

[yerrag]

Do you think that is ideal fasting glucose at 80mg/dl or 4.4mmol/l? I felt worse than normal at 3.9-4.3mmol/l in the GTT even though technically that is not hypoglycemic as the cutoff is 4.0mmol/l. My fasting glucose is 4.8-5.0mmol/l, that is also where it settled from my mixed meal ”GTT” without dipping below my fasting glucose at any point as opposed with the actual GTT.

Personally, I think that below 70 mg/dL is definitely at hypoglycemic levels. So as to have a buffer, I'd consider 75-85 mg/dL to be the sweet spot. I think that the data points didn't capture the dip in blood sugar that went lower than 70, and would explain why you still felt hypoglycemic effects. The shaking is definitely a sign of hypo. I used to shake when I went past 3 hours in a long 7hr drive across state lines. Then, I would always bring beef jerky with me as that worked better than something sugary, as sugary stuff would cause my blood sugar levels to go down further (after the insulin kicks in). But that was then. My blood sugar regulation now is a vast improvement, thanks primarily to mercury detoxification and going cold turkey on PUFA for 4 years plus.

What could cause the reactive hypoglycemia in GTT? I don't get hypoglycemia from normal meals and this lead me to think that GTT is not accurate for testing carb tolerance because in normal situations carbs are accompanied with protein, potassium, B1 etc. that level the rise in blood sugar and prevent the reactive hypoglycemia from too steep blood sugar spike.

Could be plenty of PUFA fatty acids in your blood, blocking the absorption and metabolism of blood sugar. This causes your blood sugar to go up, as it's not being used up while sugar keeps getting in to your blood after a meal, or after the glucose intake. But you're right, potassium isn't included in the glucose you took and that would not favor good absorption of sugar into your tissues. Potassium is also abundant in meat, and having meat together in a carb meal would certainly help in sugar absorption. Still, the OGTT is like a tough challenge where in passing it you pretty much aced it with your blood sugar control. If say you embark on an extended fast, you're not going to be stressed from the low blood sugar condition it would put you in. And even in normal day to day activity, you don't have those low moments as you're constantly fueled by enough blood sugar.

Is the ideal range yours from GTT?

No, I pulled that off the chart my alternative doctor used on me. That gives you a comparison, not an absolute goal.

Healthy people generally don't do GTT and every result I found to compare to were already narrowed to people with issues in fasting blood sugar or hba1c. Compared to that my spike of 6.5mmol was decent, often it raises to 8-9mmol/l and stays for at least two hours in suspected diabetics.

Conventional doctors will tell you, just as my conventional doctor told me, that you're "normal," and you're "inside the curve," hence you pass the test. They set such a low bar, and that's why so many people are sickly. When you consider sugar to be a major input for energy, its dysregulation certainly will have an impact on our health.

People tend to overlook this important thing - optimal blood sugar regulation - and just agree with what their conventional doctor tells them. Getting this wrong, they end up barking up the wrong tree and waste a lot of time and effort chasing improvements in their health that pale in comparison to the huge impact having good blood sugar regulation brings.

 

[Aries]

People tend to overlook this important thing - optimal blood sugar regulation - and just agree with what their conventional doctor tells them. Getting this wrong, they end up barking up the wrong tree and waste a lot of time and effort chasing improvements in their health that pale in comparison to the huge impact having good blood sugar regulation brings.

I agree. I think blood sugar regulation is very important for health as well as well-being. Before peating I used to do IF and I think one of the main benefits was tight blood sugar regulation from fasting even though my diet was not low in carbs when I ate. Since starting peating I think I have become more irritable and now after measuring blood glucose timeline instead of just fasting glucose and hba1c I see that it goes up and down quite a bit from both the meals and adrenaline afterwards which might be the reason.

It could be PUFA. I have only eaten low PUFA for less than a year but I think I started from a better place than many because of my age and bodyfat. From both of these glucose timeline tests (GTT+meal test) and fasting glucose it seems my body prefers higher blood glucose level and spikes adrenaline to get there. In the ideal graph there is little to no second blood sugar spike from adrenaline but rather the glycogen is broken evenly.

I thought about incomplete glucose oxidation as potential culprit as well. Glycolysis produces less ATP, so cells would need more glucose to produce same amount of energy. Because of this my body keeps higher blood glucose to meet the energy needs. It would explain why low normal blood glucose feels so bad and why my adrenaline spikes already at relatively high blood glucose level. Potentially missing data points are a good point though. It seems high lactic acid and high blood sugar are correlated so excess glycolysis and dysfunctional electron transport chain could be my issue.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_of_lactic_acidosis_in_diabetic_ketoacidosis

FFA release or oxidation inhibitors in GTT could help identifying if PUFA is the issue but using those with limited carbs like in GTT is not a good idea. I think I will leave GTT for now but this was a good reference point for the future.

 

[yerrag]

Before I reply back, I thought it best to regraph your data, as well as show my current data. I did an OGTT yesterday on my down, using 75 grams of maltose ( which was very syrupy and had to be diluted with water and drank). I looked at my doctor's graph and realized that I was lacking another set of data. I showed you an ideal curve, which turns out to be the lower boundary values of a blood glucose area that needed a higher boundary. So now I'm including another curve called the "high ideal" as opposed to the "low ideal" curve. If your curve falls in between the low and the high curves, you are considered optimal.

So, here is your curve:

You will see your curve to be the red one. You'll see that your blood sugar wasn't going high enough in the first 100 minutes. And then dropping past the lower boundary towards hypoglycemia halfway through the next 100 minutes, staying that way for a while past the 200th minute mark, before hitting past the lower boundary and into the optimal area. So, for a considerable period, you were in a hypoglycemic state.

Here is my curve:

My blood sugar was staying too high, way above optimal for almost the entire first 100 minutes before it dropped quickly and went past the lower boundary. I was hypoglygemic as well for about half of the 2nd 100 minutes. Just like in your case, the blood sugar was able to get back into optimal territory.

But since we both breached the lower boundary, we both would feel hypoglycemic at a certain point. We both felt a sign of low blood sugar (yours was hunger, mine was sleepiness, and since your duration of hypoglycemia was longer, you also experienced some shaking.

I had encountered shaking before, around the year 2000, when I had my first OGTT.

Here is my graph which has curves from 2000 and 2002 (before and after therapy - mostly removal of mercury and chiropractic), as well as a curve from yesterday, labelled 2020. Too bad I have no curve for the 2017-2019, when I felt my blood sugar regulation was best, before it got bad last year, and led to my present ugly curve:

You can see the blue curve (2000) being terrible - I was very sickly at this state. It improved to the green curve, which looks nice but at that time I wasn't aware how bad PUFASs were. I'm not sure, but maybe I was big into supplements then, and I was also taking vitamin E. But it wasn't until around 2013 that I went cold turkey on PUFA, and by 2017, I didn't need to eat brown rice anymore. And I could eat cane sugar without feeling sick from an insulin reaction that would drive down my blood sugar eventually.

So, I was at my best blood sugar control-wise, from 2017 to early 2019. It was at this time that I took systemic enzymes to lyse away plaque from my blood vessels. I was to gain 20 lbs after that in the course of a year, and my blood sugar regulation went south. This had to do with periodontal being released from the lysed plaque, as biofilm was burst and this led to the release into the blood of periodontal bacteria. The periodontal bacteria produces enzymes called DPP4, dipeptidyl peptidase, which would interfere with peptides/proteins that help insulin with the regulation of blood sugar. These are called incretins.

Incretins are able to tell the body to not release insulin after a meal. This allows the body to first absorb the sugar going into the bloodstream from digestion and absorption into the blood stream. This allows the blood sugar to go high after a meal without triggering an insulin reaction. The body produces its own DPP4, and it does a good job without any help (or more likely interference) from periodontal bacteria. To make a long story short, this messed up the previously perfect system of blood sugar regulation. I would have sugar highs that would elicit a strong insulin response, and this would lead to sugar lows - as seen in the curve (see my red curve).

I have to cut this short else it gets too technical and I'll start losing you, but I just want to share with you the curves so you have some ideas to work with.