Diabetes: Is low really worse than high?!
Question: I thought a diabetic coma was different to a hypoglycaemic coma, but today I was informed they are the same - low blood sugar. In my first aid training I was told if we aren't sure if a diabetic is low or high, give them sugar, because it won't hurt them to be high.
Is this correct?
What are the risks of having high blood sugar? If low is worse, why do we put so much effort into managing high sugar with insulin?
Answers: I thought a diabetic coma was different to a hypoglycaemic coma, but today I was informed they are the same - low blood sugar. In my first aid training I was told if we aren't sure if a diabetic is low or high, give them sugar, because it won't hurt them to be high.
Is this correct?
What are the risks of having high blood sugar? If low is worse, why do we put so much effort into managing high sugar with insulin?
High blood sugar really isn't a problem the way low blood sugar is. Low blood sugar is a more common emergency because you only have to drop below 60 (normal is 70-120) to have symptoms. Below 50 and you're in trouble, any lower than that and you're probably unconcious. There is also something that diabetics experience called Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA) which is a life threatning condition. This is how most diabetics are dignosed.. they end up in the ER with DKA. DKA occurs because diabetics cannot utilize their blood sugar, which is what most cells use for energy. Since they can't use glucose the body breaks down protein and fat which produces ketones that build up in the blood and cause problems. So, what do you do if you find a diabetic passed out... your training is correct, give them sugar. It won't hurt someone with DKA to get more sugar because that's not the issue. But if you fail to give someone who's hypoglycemic sugar they could die.
The problem with high blood sugar is that it does long term damage. All those complications you hear about with diabetes, (foot ulcers, blindness, neuropathy, renal failure) are a result of high blood sugar. That's why diabetes needs to be controlled.
super low is definately worse than a bit high (not super high)...it would take a uber high blood sugar to kill someone but you can bring it down with insulin.......once someones blood sugar is so low that they.re body pretty much starts shutting down its hard to get it back up.........so yah, if they are high, you might just boost them up a bit higher because the amount you would administer would not be huge....but if they are so low that they die, then thats it man....game over!!! high blood sugars all the time can lead to kidney failure, blindness, poor circulation to name a few........what they taught you in first aid class is in reference to dealing with emergencies.........in an emergency situation high is better than low......but for normal everyday life its essential to keep blood sugars in a normal range...
The level of blood sugar is the amount of glucose (sugar) in the blood. Also known as serum glucose level. It is expressed as millimoles per litre (mmol / l).
Normally, blood glucose levels stay within narrow limits throughout the day: 4 to 8mmol / l. But they are higher after a meal and usually lowest in the morning.
In diabetes the level of blood sugar moves outside these limits until treatment. Even with a good control of diabetes, the level of blood sugar is derived sometimes even outside o
I can treat a low in about 10 minutes or less. A high can sometimes take hours. I much rather be low than high. After a high I feel terrible the rest of the day. Lows are not my problem, its the highs. That is my experience.
High glucose is much preferable to low glucose levels. Been there on both of them.
Highs won't kill, just make you angry and feel bad.
Lows will kill!!
Highs just do damage to blood vessels, nerves, and heart muscles! Lows damage the brain by not allowing enough glucose to feed it.
We don't want to do all the damage to the tiny nerve endings and blood vessels that highs do to our feet, hands and eyes. So we work very hard at staying on a level playing field as in normal or as normal glucose readings as we can. This damage happens over a long period of time and can eventually hurt severely.
Both can be equally detrimenta but if I had to choose, I would say a low is worse.
The reason is this: when a person goes low, there is MUCH less room to work with. Although a person can be brought out of it pretty quickly, it happens very quickly and at times, without warning. You have a much narrower time frame and blood sugar range.
It is safer for a diabetic to be given sugar because there is a wider range to work with. So the answer to your question is that it's correct. A person would have a greater time period before they would reach DKA.
EMT
I sometimes have low sugar level and have even fainted.It is like you are stuck in a tin. You feel your whole body cold, and hear other people's voices but you can't answers them. It is not good at all.
And this had maybe happened cos I haven't had a meal or something like that.
From the other side my mumis a diabtic, and the high sugar level may cause you polyneuropathy ( diabetic and pre-diabetic neuropathy)It is no good either.And also diabetes can damage all your organs.
But hypoglycaemic coma is very dangerous too.Can be lethal.
It is bes to have a normal sugar level