With glucose tolerance tests or other postprandial tests, a common aim is to understand the ability of the person to maintain relatively stable glucose concentrations.
I.e. the outcome of the integrated response from all organs
2/9
We could sample blood from a few different sites, e.g.
1) artery 2) superficial vein (normally antecubital fossa of the forearm) 3) capillary (e.g. fingertip) 4) interstitial fluid (e.g. CGMs)
In summary, for understanding overall glucose control, venous sampling is actually quite far down the preference list. Beaten by: 1) arterial 2) arterialised-venous 3) capillary
End🧵9/9
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Our latest paper shows that a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) can overestimate blood glucose, and the size of this bias varies by person and the meal/beverage ingested… see below for more
CGMs measure glucose in interstitial fluid, then use algorithms to estimate what the blood glucose concentration is
Many factors could affect the ability for a CGM to accurately estimate blood glucose, and these could vary between people and when glucose fluxes are changing
In this study we compared CGM to capillary samples across a range of test foods/beverages
The idea that males display more between-individual variance than females has been considered for >150 years
In humans, this might be (partly) due to averaging of two parental copies in the homogametic sex but not in the heterogametic sex.
Since (premenopausal) women display greater day-to-day variance in sex hormones, it is reasonable to assume that women may display greater day-to-day variance in metabolic outcomes affected by sex hormones.
For context, the relationship between LDL-cholesterol concentration and coronary heart disease risk appears linear across the entire physiological range