Sue, that basically has nothing to do with what I was talking about. The person who posted the question had excellent labs. This would not be indicative of diabetes.

Perhaps you missed my prior post, but my point was that one can't use fasting insulin ALONE to determine whether or not one is in the Zone, because a fasting insulin needs to be considered with other factors, such as what was mentioned. If one does not know what one's blood sugar status and lipid profile is, then a fasting insulin by itself is meaningless.

I'll defer to Barry's opinion on how to determine that one is in the Zone. He is the author of the Zone and he uses fasting insulin readings to define it.

I think highly of Dr. Sear's work with the Zone. However, I also choose not to be too "tunnel-visioned" about it. But,he is only one voice, and there are so many other voices out there to be heard. You, yourself, said that you also highly regard the opinion of your endocrinologist. I bet that there are some occasions in which they may not agree entirely on each and every issue.

That is what makes the "science" behind this so interesting!

Couldn't agree more Cranberrycat. If everything Dr Sears said was perfectly correct then i would still be eating mostly fresh watermelon and pineapple for carbs like his first book said was favorable and i still wouldn't be eating carrots.

Often times one of his new books will have a revelation that i had been aware for months if not years form a seperate source.

The base of his diet is by far the best i have ever come across for nutrition and overall health but it will always continue to evolve through his own work and the work of others.

Sue,

When I speak about "tunnel-vision", I am referring to the fact that I prefer to collect information from a number of authors, not just one. With regard to insulin control, Barry defines the Zone as insulin levels between 5-10 (which I would certainly agree with). I think that the discrepency comes not in what Barry is saying, but with the fact that OTHERS acknowledge that a low fasting insulin (lower than 5) could also be indicative of a pancreatic disorder, such as diabetes. I think even Barry would acknowledge the possibility of a low fasting insulin in light of other factors (considering the labwork that was mentioned earlier) as being indicative of a disease rather than an "excellent" lab result.

I think you are missing the point that I was making. I was merely trying to point out to the other readers of this thread that one must consider other things rather than going solely on fasting insulin levels as a meter for the Zone.

Sue, I don't mean to be rude, but do you plan on deleting all of your posts after I have replied to them?

Type I diabetics do not make insulin. Type II diabetics make insulin, but have become resistant to it. The body makes more and more insulin, which does not move glucose into the cells. A low insulin level, in light of good blood sugars, is a GOOD thing in Type IIs. Type II diabetics do not 'eventually' develop Type I diabetes. They are totally separate diseases. Type II diabetes is reversible, if the causes of insulin resistance are removed.

Good point, Debbie.

Sometimes Type I Diabetes is associated with Insulin-Dependent Diabetes, rather than the fact that it is a separate disease. But, you are correct, type II doesn't turn into type I. Type II has to potential to be come insulin dependent, but that is not necessarily type I. However, I would also add that those who develop insulin dependent diabetes are much more difficult to reverse the disease. It all depends on how much damage is done, and how capable the pancreas is at producing insulin. It "over-produces" in the phase of pre-diabetes and insulin resistance, but when type II is setting in, it becomes less capable of producing insulin, which is why the blood sugar gets so screwed up.

This is great! Heavy Breakfast is must!