SPIKE!

Pinky the Voodoo Doll will unashamedly state that she is a Buffy the Vampire Slayer aficionado. (It sounds so much nicer than "addict" or "groupie.") She is also a bigger fan of Spike than Angel, and can give you a list of why Spike is better. (That's for another post.) However, I now must go on the record and say that I like Spike on TV and I do not like to see a SPIKE in my blood sugar.


After yesterday's Cream of Wheat debacle, I thought I'd play it safe the rest of the day. Protein only snack after breakfast. Low(ish) carb lunch. So far, so good. And for dinner? Food very similar to the same thing I had eaten for dinner the previous two nights.

So what went wrong?

That's where I am scratching my head, because I still got a SPIKE.

Technically, I still passed. It was exactly 130. My sugar must be 130 or lower, so this one doesn't count towards my "two spikes after the same meal and you have to call in Manticore." It did, however, make me nervous. And fussy. Because with the prior two spikes, after Quiz-NOs and after the Cream of Wheat, I could directly trace it back to excessive bread/excessive processed carbs. I didn't think, going into it, that either item WOULD make my blood spike, but I could go back afterwards and say, Well, I hate you, Quiz-NOs, and Cream of Wheat, you can bite me.

That wasn't the case last night, though, because I'd eaten just like I'd BEEN eating. All three nights, I was out and needed to rely on a drive through/fast food place to feed me my dinner. Tuesday: Rubios: Shrimp Burrito. Wednesday (after breastfeeding class): Taco Bell: Two chalupas, but I only ate one of the "shells." Thursday: Del Taco: Chicken burrito. All three had a mix of protein and veggies and a wrappable bread product. For dinner, I get 2-3 starches, so the tortilla or chalupa shell (1) should have been ok.

Tuesday post-dinner sugar: 121.


Wednesday post-dinner sugar: 115.

So why the frustrating Thursday?



Ok, so I admit that the difference between Tuesday's reading and Thursday's reading is only 9 points. But 121 doesn't rile me up. 130 does. Because just one more point--testing maybe a minute sooner?--and I'd have then lined myself up for ANY other spike requiring a call to The Center. So I don't like risking it.

So the logical part of me wants to know: What's up, Thursday burrito, why the 130 when a similar (heck, bigger!) Tuesday burrito didn't have me sweating?

At this point, I don't know. I have a theory, but it could be wrong.

Tuesday, I was eating consistently at about the right times for me to be eating. I am supposed to eat every 2-3 hours. On Tuesday, I ate my snack at 5:00 and dinner at 8:00. 3 hours, pretty much exactly. Thursday, though, I ate my snack at 3:20 and then went bridesmaid dress shopping (or observing the shopping, since I am too oddly shapen to try on dresses at this point) with my best friend and her sister in law, who modeled for us. I thought we'd be done in an hour or so but it took longer, and by the time I got to eat, it was 8:45, partially because the drive through line was really long and they screwed up my order. (I wonder if they screwed up other people's orders, too, contributing to the really long line?)

Then I had my spike into the almost-danger zone. So...was it the time lapse? Was it that I had gone so long without food that I caused the spike?

Could be. Both nights, I had a little-post-dinner walking, but not much. Not enough. And not more one night than another.

So now I am going to be even MORE vigilant about when I eat. I should have marched right into the bridal salon with my dinner. They may have frowned on that, but what if I brought enough for the whole class?  And promised not to use the veils as a napkin?



Besides, who is going to argue with a hungry pregnant woman?


Oh, that's right, the jerkface waiter at Haven Gastropub. But that's another story.