Thanks for feedback.

Mostly just to experiment on how foods affect my mood.

[Hello Stuart... Well, I think that is a superb idea, to
experiment to see how foods affect your mood, actually
to see how blood glucose levels affect your mood...

While you are at it, you should try to PREDICT your
glucose levels, which really isn't too difficult to do in
my opinion. To do this, you should first study how you
react to 5 gm., 10 gms., 20 grams, and 40 grams of SUGAR,
which is pure carbohydrates.

Then, learn to use the Carbohydrate Thermometer to get a
rough estimate of the carbohydrate content of almost every
food you might eat...

http://www.rajeun.net/carbotherm.html

At first you have to weigh various portions with a scale,
but soon you are able to guess with enough accuracy how
much carbs are in a plate of food. "Enough accuracy"
means something like "not much" or "too much"... that is
really all you need... just learn what is GOOD and BAD
for you, that's a huge step in the right direction.

Then... test your blood glucose... guess (predict) what
will be your glucose level 30 minutes later, based on how
you reacted to 5, 10, 20, and 40 grams of carbohydrates and
how many grams you calculate are in the food you are
about to eat... write it down... eat the food... and test
your glucose 30 minutes later and see how well your
prediction was.

If you guessed your blood glucose wouldn't go up very much,
and it did, then you have learned a very valuable lesson...
what you thought is o.k., is really not o.k. This is
really the most important lesson you can learn. Put that
food on your NO-NO list, in your mind, and try to avoid
that food from now on, or at least eat less of it because
before you thought it was good for you but now you KNOW
it is bad for you!

Remember, don't believe ANYBODY... Don't even believe ME...
You can ONLY BELIEVE THE GLUCOSE METER.

If you guessed your blood glucose level wouldn't go up,
and it didn't, you have confirmed that some food is o.k.
(I'll bet it was ANIMAL ORIGIN, or VEGETABLES, or a small
amount of FRUITS, or a very small amount of beans or nuts.)
Keep it on your YES list.

What this will do for you is that you learn what is really
not going to raise your blood glucose very much. If you
know what is good and what is bad, and you know how bad is
bad, you also know how to control your blood glucose. From
there on, it is up to you, you can decide to eat well or you
can decide to blow the roof off, but it is your DECISION and
not because you don't have a clue.

I try to avoid foods that I have learned raise my blood
glucose very much, or at least I eat less of them (ie, less
bread, less fruits, less spaghetti, etc.) I also know what
is "less evil" for example I know which is worse: chocolate
ice cream, or chocolate cake. (chocolate cake is much worse...)
So if I must have dessert, it is chocolate ice cream instead
of chocolate cake... and it is one scoop of chocolate ice
cream, and not a large glass full (which I would easily
eat before I learned to do this, but now I stop myself and
I don't eat too much of the bad stuff...).

Do you know which is THE BEST WAY to avoid JUNK FOOD?

DON'T BUY IT! It is at the supermarket or at the counter at
the restaurant where you can keep the bad stuff from getting
into your closet, which finally gets onto your plate. Sometimes
I tell the waiter in a restaurant to bring me a plate of
chicken, "without bread, without rice, and without potatoes."
I have to tell them before they bring it to me, because if I
don't tell them, they will bring it. Once there is a plate of
delicious fried potatoes in front of me, it is 10 times more
difficult to avoid eating them.

Every time I eat really poorly I think to myself "There go
some neurons!" or "Good bye, neurons!"... Just the thought
of losing ANY brain neurons is so scary that it serves as a
deterrent not to do it again, and for me to eat well next time.

And I mean it, I sometimes eat really poorly, and then I test
my blood glucose and it is out the roof... Then I eat really
well for weeks because I get so scared of what I suppose I
did to my brain.

There is nothing like a high reading on the glucose meter
to scare the hell out of me and make me try not to get it
again. Here, again, is MY INTERPRETATION of glucose levels
and in parenthesis the dose of insulin I take if I get these
levels:

Below 70 mg/dl is TOO LOW
70 to 90 is OPTIMUM
100 is HIGH (1 iu Rapid after I eat)
110 is VERY HIGH (1 iu Rapid after I eat)
120 is BAD (2 iu Rapid after I eat)
140 is TERRIBLE (2 iu Rapid after I eat, and test again...)
160 is HORRIBLE
180 is DEATHLY
200 and more is ATTEMPTED SUICIDE

(NOTE: I am not a doctor... This is not a recommendation
for anybody to do what I do... I suggest you should consult
with a doctor before you try to take insulin. Insulin is
like a gun... it is safe if you know how to use it, and it
is easy to learn how to use it correctly, but it can be
deadly if you don't know how to use it.)

You may or may not agree with this interpretation, but you
would do well to try to keep your glucose levels between
70 and 90 all day, every day, whether you agree with it or
not. You cannot lose if I am mistaken, and you can only
win if I am right. I must say that my own glucose levels
are between 85 and 120 all day long, but most of the time
I keep them very close to 90, because I inject insulin when
I know I am going to eat, or if I ate and I get a 110 or
120 when I test with the glucose meter. (I inject 3 iu Rapid
before I eat, and I inject 0, or 1, or 2 iu Rapid after I eat...)

If you do try to keep your glucose levels low, in the long
run you POSTPONE or AVOID DIABETES, perhaps "forever".
This will have a real impact on your overall health, years
down the road.

- Ellis]




Stuart Cracraft wrote:

> To: Rejuvenation@yahoogroups.com
> From: Stuart Cracraft <cracraft@...>
> Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:29:48 -0800
> Subject: [Rejuvenation] Meter?
>
>
> Is there a workable blood glucose monitoring meter that does not
> require blood or urine collection, keeps a record, and can handle
> both very high and very low levels?
>
> [Man, you want everything, don't you? You forgot to say, cheap
> too.
>
> Let me see... keeps a record, no problem... very high and very
> low levels, I suppose that's possible... but that does not
> require blood or urine collection... that's more difficult...
>
> The only way to get the reading would have to be through the skin,
> since what you want is to know how much sugar is in the blood,
> but you don't want to know it by measuring the blood... There
> might be some way to tell if there is sugar in the blood by
> measuring electrical resistance through the skin, but I can only
> imagine it would be less accurate than by testing a tiny drop of
> blood directly.
>
> Another problem is that the results might not be similar to what
> I and most other people are getting, which is with a Roche Accucheck
> meter or a Johnson and Johnson meter, and even these don't give the
> same results... so you would have a really hard time interpreting
> your results.
>
> There are some sensors, like a watch that is strapped tightly
> to the wrist, and it senses when a diabetic is hypoglycemic and
> sounds an alarm. These are a lot more expensive than a glucose
> meter, and I understand they have to be really tight so that the
> plate makes contact with the skin, and it irritates some people.
>
> But they just sense really low blood glucose and then they sound
> an alarm. I don't think that they are to the point where they
> can give you an accurate reading, nor is that the intention...
> they are meant to prevent death from hypoglycemia, especially at
> night when the person is sleeping and you can't tell that he is
> actually unconscious and going through a crisis.
>
> Does anybody know if there is a blood glucose monitoring meter
> that is accurate and does not require blood or urine?
>
> Thanks for writing... Why do you want a meter that doesn"t
> work with blood?
> - Ellis]