Paul Saladino· MD
but if you're talking about your cgm yeah like elevation of your blood sugar after two hours is a problem
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
but if you're talking about your cgm yeah like elevation of your blood sugar after two hours is a problem
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.
so do you think people should look at maybe what happens two hours after they eat a meal and if they're still elevated and having issues then then there might be something to look at
if i checked two hours later and i was still at 140 then it sounds like that might be an issue exactly
do you think people should look at maybe what happens two hours after they eat a meal and if they're still elevated and having issues then then there might be something to look at
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.