Easter Thursday
Guess who has her annual exam today, complete with an A1c test
for which she has shunned sugar for 90 days?
And guess who is going to celebrate afterwards with this dessert? LOL!
Posted by
listener
at
1:00:00 AM
Powered by Blogger. DownRight Blogger Theme v1.4 created by (© 2007) Thur Broeders
Andrew Janz raised 1.1 megabucks in the first quarter. Maybe Devin Nunes has a real challenger this time.
ReplyDeleteAlan
Ted Cruz has a real challenger too! Beto O'Rourke raised $6.7 MILLION dollars in the first quarter!
Deletehttps://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/dem-lawmaker-delivers-brutal-comeback-sarah-sanders-complaint-failure-work-trump/
ReplyDelete"Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) appeared on CNN Thursday to hit back at White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who on Wednesday called on him to work with President Donald Trump to fix border security problems.
When asked to respond to Sanders’ statement, Gallego responded that there is no need for him to work with the president if the president is pushing bad policies.
“I’ll gladly work with the president when his ideas aren’t stupid and detrimental to the United States,” he said. “Unfortunately, this is what this plan is. It was not planned out. It’s using our National Guard troops, who are greatly trained. You’re going to pull them out of their private lives to essentially go and solve a political problem.”
Gallego didn’t stop there, however, and went on to say that Trump’s plan to send the National Guard to the border was a pitiful attempt to score points with his voter base.
“This is a failing presidency,” he said bluntly. “Their ideas are failing. Now they’re throwing red meat at the base by essentially sending troops to the border… This is what happens when you have a failing president and a bad administration.”
Wow! Where do I contribute to this dude's reelection campaign? He's a keeper!
DeleteHere you go, Cat:donate here. [Click]
Delete--Alan
He's an ex marine. No wonder he speaks his mind so bluntly.
DeleteHere's his ActBlue page:
Ruben Gallego - Click
Oops! It took me so long to bumble my way to his page, I missed your link, Alan. Thanks for being so prompt.
DeleteThanks, Alan, I sent him some love too.
Deletelistener, the doctors keep making the A1C harder to pass because they keep dropping the acceptable limit. I've been testing 5.9 for the past two years and *now* my doctor tells me they want the new level at 5.6. No way am I making that!
ReplyDeleteJust checked the political news--there is far too much of it today. On the brighter side, this stuff should at least sink the GOP for a generation. But rebuilding the country is going to be a herculean task.
ReplyDeleteAlan
Grrrr. PLUS they won't let it be a fasting test anymore. I think that's ridiculous, since then you can't truly compare it to past tests. But I don't care. Let them howl. I'm rather hoping that even with 90 super careful days I stayed in the "pre-diabetic" range, because then it's just my "normal" ~ which is what my immunologist believes. In other words, I can eat like people do and my number doesn't get high enough to warrant doing anything. I guess we'll see. I'll get the results sometime next week.
ReplyDeleteBP 112/70
and I lost 12.4lbs since the last time I was there.
My doc said I'm "an inspiration." :-)
Your doc is only just now noticing? *smile*
DeleteA1C (unlike blood sugar) isn't particularly influenced by what you've eaten in the past few hours. This measures average blood sugar levels over a long period, so fasting and non-fasting shouldn't significantly differ.
DeleteWow! You did great!
DeleteWhat Cat, Bill, and Susan said. And what your immunologist says could well be right. Those "normal ranges" are intended to include 95% of people who are well, so one person out of twenty who is well should be outside those ranges. Old physician's dictum: treat the patient, not the lab test. Then again, there is the Ulysses Syndrome. That's where the patient has one "abnormal" test result but no obvious disease; in an attempt to discover the cause and what underlying "disease" is causing it, one test after another, each more exotic than the ones before, is performed, and finally the investigation comes back to the conclusion that the subject has a blood test result that is outside the 95% normal range but has no disease. Read about it here. [Click] I see that the term has more recently been applied to a group of psychological problems afflicting migrants.
Delete--Alan
Currently reading A House Like a Lotus by Madeleine L'Engle. It is not an easy book, deep and complex as well, one might say, as unabashedly political. I'm enjoying it, perhaps the more that it takes concentration. Also, Part 1 includes descriptions of Greece that are so vivid, I almost feel as though I've stood in those places and experienced them myself.
ReplyDeleteCommenting on previous threads:
ReplyDeleteFrom the piece about the galaxy without dark matter:
"There must be more than one way to form galaxies."
Ya think?
Alan, I'm very glad you made the decision not to make that long drive!
With regard to the police shooting: One article I saw said officers thought the young man was armed when, in fact, he had a cell phone in his hand. It occurs to me that perhaps police training ought to include an intensive course on rapidly recognizing the difference between a firearm in someone's hand and another, harmless object, such as a phone. After all, nowadays, practically everyone goes everywhere with a phone in his hand. It would conduce to the safety of police as well as that of the public for police to know what they're looking at. Of course, not being fully sighted, I don't know how feasible such a scheme is. Still, I keep reading about tests and studies that involve people being shown items for incredibly brief periods and being able, with practice, to identify them. Surely it behooves police departments to train their officers to distinguish on the fly between, say, a rectangular phone shape and a gun shape. That doesn't solve the problem of them shooting kids with toy guns, but it's a start.
Interesting idea, Cat.
DeleteAlan