Am I prediabetic? Internet says yes, GP says no.

[ADsaremysalvation]

From time to time I used to have a go with my mums blood sugar monitor (she has type 2.) A month or so ago I went through a phase when I had a few slightly elevated readings that my mum commented on. So I bought myself a monitor - and after taking before breakfast readings every day for a couple of weeks I am now wondering if I am prediabetic. My readings are nearly always 6 something - from 6.2 to 6.9. Googling suggests this is definitely prediabetic but GP today said anything 4-7 is fine. I am now confused! Any insight/experience would be really useful.

That's quite high for a fasting glucose and falls within the pre diabetic range. I would try to see another GP and also have a look at whether you can bring your fasting glucose down with diet and exercise modifications (obviously the latter is not going to work for everyone).

Put it away! Only diabetics on insulin are supposed to monitor their blood sugar anyway with a finger prick monitor. Testing your sugar like this is the route to madness

Besides even if you were pre-diabetic the advice would be - lose weight, exercise, drink less alcohol, eat more fruit and veg, less cake and chocolate. Which is the same advice even if you aren't pre-diabetc

Diabetes is not diagnosed on a finger prick. You need a venous blood sample for this. Do what Wolpertinger says. Alter your lifestyle. Do you really want to load all your insurance premiums and holiday insurance costs by having pre diabetes on your records.

Is that American or UK (internet) thresholds for what is pre-diabetic.

The Americans changed their thresholds, somewhat controversially, not long ago. The UK stuck with thresholds that means fewer people fall in the prediabetic net. It's been argued that the American change unnecessarily 'medicalises' the status of lots of people.

Then there are people who argue with the whole concept of "prediabetic" and whether it's ever really meaningful, because as others point out, the main (arguably should be only) treatment for "prediabetic" is pretty much all the healthy lifestyle things that equally apply to people who aren't remotely prediabetic.

Can you tell I work in health research?!! I'd go with what my GP said, anyway.

"Only diabetics on insulin are supposed to monitor their blood sugar anyway with a finger prick monitor"

I don't think that's very good advice. Just because the NHS has issues funding test strips for non-insulin dependent diabetes, doesn't mean that finger pricks can't provide valuable information.

"Diabetes is not diagnosed on a finger prick". It can be.

No it's not t1mum - a fingerprick can be a useful tool but should not be used in isolation and not for diagnosis. Venous samples should be used in conjunction with a thorough history and assessment. Of course if someone presents with a fingerprick glucose of 20 or something then yes it's very likely they are diabetic but that alone wouldn't constitute a diagnosis.

Diabetes UK summarise the criteria here

Agree with sidge.

Two separate finger pricks above 11 mmol are diagnostic of diabetes I think? So not the case here, but not to say that finger pricks can't give an initial diagnosis of diabetes. As you say obviously more tests then done to confirm diagnosis, type of diabetes, HBA1C, ketones etc.

Soooo, if the OP is getting finger pricks in the pre diabetic range, that's useful information to take to a GP who should be taking it seriously. Or, if worried about insurance premiums, look for some dietary and exercise advice. Think about a low GI load diet - it's not just about "eat more fruit and veg, less cake and chocolate". Things like mashed potato, bread (whether wholemeal or white), pasta play more havoc with blood sugars than chocolate. Berries are good, things like bananas can be a nightmare.

If I was the patient. I would make lots of changes then go. You really don't want anything on your records that can load insurance premiums. You might be able to reverse the rise