🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsMetabolic Health & DiabetesType 1.5 diabetes (LADA) and GLP-1 — May 2025

Type 1.5 diabetes (LADA) and GLP-1 — May 2025

WendyG_ATL Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 9:03 PM 12 replies 1,944 viewsPage 1 of 3
This thread is more than 24 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
WendyG_ATL
Member
1,023
5,678
Apr 2024
Georgia
Jun 12, 2024 at 9:03 PM#1

A1C went from 7.4 to 5.6 over nine months and my prescriber was more interested in the fasting insulin, which I did not expect.

Because it is glucose-dependent, this class carries a low intrinsic hypoglycaemia risk on its own — the risk arrives when it is combined with insulin or a sulfonylurea, which usually need reducing.

The bit I cannot resolve on my own is why A1C lags the way it does, and what to look at in the meantime if you want to know sooner.

I have searched first, so if this is covered somewhere point me at it and I will read it.

12 7Dr.SurgeonPGH, rachel_ABQ, traveltech_sara and 9 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.RenalNash
VIP Member
1,234
7,890
Mar 2024
Nashville, TN
Jun 12, 2024 at 9:54 PM#2
WendyG_ATL said:
A1C went from 7.4 to 5.6 over nine months and my prescriber was more interested in the fasting insulin, which I did not expect.

Insulin sensitivity test (HOMA-IR) on glycaemic control — arguably the most important metabolic marker most people aren't tracking:

HOMA-IR = (fasting insulin × fasting glucose) ÷ 405

My numbers: Baseline HOMA-IR = 5.3 (insulin resistant) → Current = 1.1 (insulin sensitive)

Anything above 2.0 indicates insulin resistance. The goal is below 1.5. GLP-1 agonists address the root metabolic dysfunction, not just the symptoms. This is why they work so much better than calorie restriction alone.

Last edited: Jun 13, 2024 at 2:54 AM
11 6pam_stl, wei_SG, cory_ATX and 8 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.SportsMedIN
Senior Member
1,456
6,789
Feb 2024
Indianapolis, IN
Jun 12, 2024 at 10:45 PM#3
Dr.RenalNash said:
Insulin sensitivity test (HOMA-IR) on glycaemic control — arguably the most important metabolic marker most people aren't tracking: HOMA-IR = (fasting…

Fasting insulin is the lab my functional medicine doctor cares about most for glycaemic control: it's a much earlier marker of metabolic dysfunction than glucose or A1C.

My fasting insulin: 25 → 13 → 5 uIU/mL over 9 months. Target is <7. By the time your fasting glucose is elevated, your insulin has been elevated for YEARS trying to compensate.

Ask your doctor to include fasting insulin in your bloodwork panel. It's cheap (~$20) and incredibly informative.

10 5adam_van, Dr.SurgeonPGH, rachel_ABQ and 7 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing

Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.

Verify Your Peptides

GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer

Est. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.

Browse GL Biochem
dan_philly
Member
456
2,123
Jul 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Jun 12, 2024 at 11:36 PM#4
WendyG_ATL said:
A1C went from 7.4 to 5.6 over nine months and my prescriber was more interested in the fasting insulin, which I did not expect.

Same pattern here, and in the same order. Nothing to add that would improve it.

9 4Dr.CardioMD, EndoResFellow, PharmacoVig_BOS and 6 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.PulmRoch
Member
456
2,345
Jun 2024
Rochester, MN
Jun 13, 2024 at 4:22 AM#5

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

Glycemic variability as the key metric for glycaemic control success: my coefficient of variation (CV) on CGM dropped from 39% to 21%. Target is <36%, with <30% being ideal.

Why this matters more than average glucose: large glucose swings cause oxidative stress, endothelial damage, and promote advanced glycation end-products (AGEs). A flat glucose line at 95 mg/dL is metabolically healthier than oscillating between 60 and 160, even if the average is the same.

8 3KristenIndy, MarkLI_maint, Dr.PeteFamMed and 5 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

SUSTAIN-6 to SELECT — the cardiovascular evidence timeline14 replies
GLP-1 and insulin resistance — HOMA-IR improvement data17 replies
Metabolic syndrome reversal criteria — how GLP-1 addresses all 55 replies
A1C target achievement rates — sema vs tirz comparison8 replies
SURPASS-CVOT: tirzepatide cardiovascular outcomes trial design3 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register