a digression

Some people fret that, on a long-term low-carb diet, they seem to run a slightly higher blood sugar than they did, when they first started.  I just had a little idea that might explain what they see....

You know how PHYSIOLOGICAL insulin resistance is different from its PATHOLOGICAL alter-ego, i hope;  Petro has talked about this phenomenon at length.  The first is the normal body's reaction to starvation, designed to save glucose for the cells that really need it, and the second is the panic-stricken cell's way to avoid a perceived toxic situation.

I suspect that a slightly-raised blood sugar as seen in LC eating may be analogous.

Reading along at ketotic.org, i found a string of interesting articles about "excess" protein being converted to glucose via gluconeogenesis (GNG).  The short version is, doesn't seem to happen in the absence of GNG triggers like raised glucagon -- it's not a supply-motivated operation, but demand-inspired.

It occurred to me to wonder, if GNG is demand-motivated, does this not explain why we sometimes see a higher morning BG?  For SOME REASON, our bodies are asking for a little bit more glucose, and our livers are obligingly -- and appropriately -- responding?

It's not like our blood-sugar is steadily rising.  If that were the case, we could truly be described as "pre-diabetic" but although a little raised, the FBG is not actually GOING UP.

The Mayo Clinic's website tells me, "Illness or stress can trigger high blood sugars because hormones produced to combat illness or stress can also cause your blood sugar to rise."  It took me all of thirty seconds to find this information.  The site also volunteered that a change in physical activity can also result in varying glucose levels, as can certain medications.

So the next time you see a slightly higher than "normal" BG but it doesn't get worse, it just jumps around a few points, do NOT start thinking OMG I'M GIVING MYSELF DIABETES WITH MY HIGH-FAT DIET -- no.  Ain't happening.