The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
So in these studies that are measuring continuous glucose values in non-diabetics and normal weight, normal health metrics, so they're making sure that they have normal, you know, lipid panel, normal BMI, not smoking, and they stay below 140 98% of the time. So that gives you a good indication of where we want to be at. And not just at the 2-hour mark, you know, most of the time. And for those people who do go above 140, it's usually for five minutes or less.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
And where we're at right now at NutriSense, what the conclusion I have come to is that 140 I think is a reasonable ceiling or goal to reach for.
But again, if you hit a glucose spike above 140 within reason every once in a while, I I don't think that's breaking your metabolic system.
Post-meal glucose spikes in non-diabetics drive long-term cardiometabolic disease independently of HbA1c.
Wearing a continuous glucose monitor leads to personalized dietary improvements that hold up beyond 12 weeks.
Continuous glucose monitors meaningfully change behavior in non-diabetic adults beyond the first month.
CGM use in metabolically healthy adults induces orthorexic-style dietary anxiety without health benefit.