No eating before Class 1 medical

[CirrusF]

The medical centre always advises me not to eat anything in the morning before my Class 1 renewal, particularly when they do a blood test.

I'd be grateful for any explanation as to why this is requested, and the consequences for ignoring the advice?

To get to the medical centre I have a three hour drive and have to be there at 0800 - not pleasant on an empty stomach..

[AreWeNearlyThere]

Well, when I was waiting to do my class 2 a while back, there were a few people in the waiting room (Dr was late as usual..hehe) and there was a bowl a sweets on the table.

One of the guys took a sweet and began to enjoy it, as one would, but Dr gave him a warning and told him not to have too many as this could show as an excessive protein level on the urine tests.

If this is the case, then they probably advise against this sort of stuff so it doesn't show up on the tests. I can't see a good breakfast being a problem (obviously go for a bowl of cereal and not a fry up :ok:) Would be a bit of a problem if your test was 4pm and you went all day without eating! - I'd say that you are safe if you eat something proper before hand but wait to see what other think 1st!.


AWNT

[Bealzebub]

There are minor conditions that can give rise to false positive tests for more serious conditions. For example people with Low renal thresholds may give a positive reading for glucose in their urine at the sort of levels that would require further investigation for diabetes. In order to prevent the inconvenience and delay that might cause, it could be suggested or advised that such individuals drink plenty of water and refrain from eating sugary foods for a short period prior to the medical. Do you know why you were advised to do this?

For many people there shouldn't be any problem undergoing the routine tests conducted on a class 1 renewal after a normal breakfast or lunch.

Ps I can't imagine many sweets would give rise to albumin problems? More likely the advice was glucose.

[zlin77]

Fasting before medicals, only required if blood tests are being done, checking the blood sugar levels after fasting can often indicate potential problems with diabetes, also it allows HDL,LDL & Triglyceride(Sp.) levels to stabilise for more accurate readings as far as I am aware.

[tolisshow]

as far as jar is concerned,docs dont check blood glucose levels(finger prick),do they?
the only way to detect diabetes is if there is sugar or ketacidosis in the urine
correct me if im wrong

[gingernut]

There are minor conditions that can give rise to false positive tests for more serious conditions. For example people with Low renal thresholds may give a positive reading for glucose in their urine at the sort of levels that would require further investigation for diabetes.

That's probably the underlying reason, although it's rare. I've probably performed a few thousand such tests, and I've come across this only once.

Diabetes won't be diagnosed on a positive urine test alone, as the test isn't good enough.

Diagnosis is usually only made after two positive fasting tests, unless symptoms are "barn door" in which case one test will suffice.



The reasoning behind fasting prior to these tests- it puts everyone on the same baseline, and the big studies, (which ultimately guide our interventions) are based on fasting studies.


If your quack asks for a fasting blood test, not fasting may result in a "false positive!- ie labelling you with a condition which you don't have.

If you have eaten, make sure he knows, he can take it into account when interpreting the results.


Incidentally, it's important that one drinks well, as sometimes we (but probably not AME's) look at renal function, which may give a false result if you'rea little dry.



good health, ginge!:)