Interesting lab strategy

Decided to to an interesting set of labs with my doc. Going to do a c peptide (mines always been low while fasting) but we are going to jack my bg up first to see how or if it responds. Just drank 12 oz apple juice sitting in waiting room now… should yield far more value than a fasting c peptide

1 Like

I can’t remember if I asked this previously - sorry if I did.

What is the reason that you get a C-Peptide test other then for initial diagnostic purposes?

We’ll for type 1 it essentially loses all value unless it’s zero after you start insulin therapy, but the desired measure herebis to see if mine is still capable of increasing under challenge

So you are doing it strictly as an experiment ?

Doing it too further determine the status of my condition

I’ve never had a c-peptide test done, but if I ever got one I’d eat first to see if my pancreas was able to produce any insulin at all.

I saw a study in the U.K. that said that even after many years if you follow a fasting diet the beta cells can regenerate - Bernstein claims his did as well when he got his blood sugar normal and followed a low carb diet
Not sure I’d want them regeneration g to be honest - it would only complicate things more !

1 Like

And the expected results were confirmed— measurable c-peptide but did not increase at all under challenge. Challenge being blood glucose level of 200. C-peptide 0.6 (reference range .8 to 3.85— for fasting people with normal glucose levels).

under challenge-- still not even into the normal range for a fasting person. So either incapable of ramping up insulin production or the signaling system that should tell it to doesn’t work.

If this lab had been done with normal glucose levels there would have been little value to it because no matter how low the number was it would be appropriate if my glucose levels were normal

1 Like

Wow, that’s amazing. Now I’m curious to see what my results would be in that situation…too bad I couldn’t get a c-peptide drawn last night. :laughing:

1 Like

That is a really interesting test. You are 100% right, a lot better than a regular one.

Interesting test result, definitely more informative than the fasting one so many people seem to get. I’ve noticed in research studies they usually use stimulated c-peptide rather than fasting, maybe because it provides more information.

And hey, according to this study and a few others, even a very small c-peptide response to meals (such as going from 0.1 fasting to 0.3 after eating) and even a very low level of “stimulated” c-peptide after eating (the study says 0.2 or above) are correlated with reduced A1c, reduced risk of hypos, reduced complications, and reduced insulin dose. So it sounds like there may be some tangible benefits to even a very low level of insulin response to food.

1 Like

I had my routine labs drawn this morning, which included c peptide - I was so tempted to eat a bowl of cereal before getting them drawn. :laughing: I’m curious - was it you or your doc who thought to do this experiment (and if it was you, how did you get doc on board)? I know right now the disease isn’t far enough progressed for me to really bother trying this experiment; just curious for the future.

As long as you are getting a CMP at the same time as a C-Peptide then it will be obvious to the reviewing physician.

He had mentioned it a long time ago, like years ago— and this time he ordered labs without me seeing him and I emailed him and said let’s try it and he said ok…

Now on your caSe if you’re fasting, not on basal, and have normal bg the c peptide level mean so very little because no matter how low it is it is seemingly appropriate—- it’s only be meaningful if it were appreciably elevated—- which would indicate insulin resistance, which I doubt highly…

Although if your bg is elevated appreciably and your c peptide is low that would indicate insulin deficiency