How necessary is the gestational diabetes test?

***Belle*** · May 9th, 2008, 06:43 PM

I was overweight in my first pregnancy and had the 2 hour GTT, came back normal, so weight gain is not and indicator. This time I only had the screening test and came back normal too, its possible for anyone can get GD, however must say it does depend on what you eat during pregnancy a little bit, if you eat sugar all the time the likely hood of getting GD is a bit higher.

I couldnt even compare the GTT test with the Step B, Step B is very dangerous and if you end up having it and give birth vaginally it is a worse danger to the newborn than not taking the ABs.

ETA my glucose level came back as 4 very low and im oveweight.

paradise lost · May 9th, 2008, 07:02 PM

*Belle* i think people are comparing the 2 tests because like GD, a +ve result doesn't mean much. One study read found that about 80% of women who had StrepB at 34 weeks no longer had it at term and 30% who didn't have it at 34 weeks DID have it at term. It's not that strep B isn't harmful, or that GD isn't, it's that the TEST is unreliable even as a diagnostic tool.

Bx

**sasha** · May 9th, 2008, 09:04 PM

One study read found that about 80% of women who had StrepB at 34 weeks no longer had it at term and 30% who didn't have it at 34 weeks DID have it at term.
Bx

Yes, that's my reasons for not taking the Strep B test. Besides, I have complete faith in the care I receive at the Birth Centre; I trust their decades of experience as well as their ability to help me make an informed decision about any test or disease which could affect me or my baby.

**~mamaspice~** · May 9th, 2008, 09:27 PM

My advice would be for the sake of a couple of hours of your time and a little discompfort to you, it's not worth taking the risk by skipping the test. Better to be safe than sorry.
My SIL had GD and she was otherise healthy and certainly NOT overweight (a size 6-8)
I, on the other hand ,am overweight and didn't have gestational diabetes at all.

**mountain mummy** · May 10th, 2008, 10:25 AM

I am small built, not overweight and have failed the GD test with all of my pregnancies so far - I am still waiting on the results of this one. But I also have a history of polyhydramnios and large babies, which wouldn't have been discovered the first time if I hadn't have failed the glucose test. Because of being very borderline with the test, I was sent for more ultrasounds to try to determine the cause. Although not officially diagnosed with GD, I am considered borderline and somewhat at risk.

Also, because of a history of thrombocytopenia, I have to have regular full blood counts anyway, so the glucose test was no biggie ....

But like everyone else has said, it is ultimately your choice (like I choose not to have the down syndrome testing done at 12 weeks)

If you feel it is totally unnecessary, then talk it over with your docs and midwives.

**fionas** · May 10th, 2008, 10:41 AM

I was a bit overweight when I got pregnant but only put on 6kg during pregnancy, so weight gain is kind of neither here nor there. But my age also put me at risk.

I can't comment on how reliable the actual test was but my results were borderline.

Down the track, knowing this actually helped a bit because DD was a biggish baby (8lb 10oz) but is now an average-sized baby. I've been told her big size at birth was probably down to the fact that I was borderline GD so that eased my mind a little when she was not gaining as much as might have been expected when she was a newborn.

**Jac** · May 11th, 2008, 11:58 AM

Can you have a smallish baby (ie. 6 1/2 pounds or less at full term) and still have GD or does a diagnosis of GD always result in a bigger baby?

**amberj** · May 11th, 2008, 05:07 PM

Gee I wish I had read this thread before my GD test! I really did not want to have it, but just did because it seemed the done thing.

If you do decide to have it, is not pleasant, but its not the worse thing ever. It was funny though, I was on like this sugar rush high in the path waiting room after the drink. I could hardly sit still!!

BTW, my results were fine,.

**melbel** · May 11th, 2008, 05:28 PM

Jac yes you could have a small baby and still have GD...the two dont necessarily go together. ANd Belle I have to say that what you say about what you eat causing GD is just so wrong it is not funny. Eating too much sugar does not cause diabetes of any kind full stop! It is far more complex than that.

Yes the test can give false positives, yes you can have GD and or elevated bloos sugar levels and not have sugar spill over into the urine as that is dependent on how well your kidneys are flushing the excess sugar out and also how well your body is at converting the extra suagr to glycogen stores.
I say it is better to be safe than sorry with this particular test. Even if you were to get a false positive the worst case scenario for first stage of treatment is that your diet would be modified and you would be asked to do some finger ***** blood tests a few times a day. If it was a false positive test your finger ***** tests over the course of a week or two will show this as if it is not truw GD they will fall within a normal range and the docs will quickly be able to see that things are okay.
The danger in ignoring gestational Diabetes has not a lot to do with the baby actually - it has everything to do with permanent damage to the islet cells of the pancreas - your pancreas. If they are overly stressed and it is left untreated permanent damage can occur. Statistically speaking 50% of people who have Gestational Diabetes and Do Not treat it will develop Type II Diabetes within 2 years. For those that do treat their GD and lessen the stress on the pancreas the outcomes are much better with less the 20% going on to develop Type II over the long term.
There ia a lot of controversy as to whether treating GD affects birthing outcomes for the baby (i.e. baby size, induction etc...) and I do not want to enter that debate

What I want to emphasise is that really the issue is so much bigger than just the pregnancy.....you need to think of it is a warning sign about the potential of long term damage to your own body not just how it affects the baby you are growing.

***Belle*** · May 11th, 2008, 06:03 PM

Yes, that's my reasons for not taking the Strep B test. Besides, I have complete faith in the care I receive at the Birth Centre; I trust their decades of experience as well as their ability to help me make an informed decision about any test or disease which could affect me or my baby.

i know this is off topic, but im sorry but no birth centre or hospital can guarantee any affects on your baby whether or not you take the test, the healthiness of the baby is up to you and your body and the baby, I understand not taking the test at 34 weeks and hope for the best (maybe they should do the test later, my OB does them at 36-37 weeks) totally your decision. Foe me I thought the test was easier than the pap smear and better to be safe and know as the antibiotics will be less harmful than if the baby actually got Step B while giving birth.

**BellyBelly** · May 11th, 2008, 07:20 PM

What about the risks of infections like golden staph etc that you are exposed to in hospitals? No-one seems to be worried about that

Those that stay at home are at less risk because there are no sick people in the family home.

**~Saram~** · May 11th, 2008, 08:17 PM

Hi Bec,

With my second I wasn't even offered, our Dr only did the GD on 2nd timers if they showed symptoms woohoo

***Belle*** · May 11th, 2008, 09:12 PM

What about the risks of infections like golden staph etc that you are exposed to in hospitals? No-one seems to be worried about that

Those that stay at home are at less risk because there are no sick people in the family home.

OMG Kelly im so glad you mentioned that about Golden Staph that is a real huge risk, it happened to a friend of mine when she gave birth. I am at total risk of that as I get excema all the time. Also when I gave birth to Julia myself, my husband and my mum all got a cold from the hospital.

**sasha** · May 13th, 2008, 12:19 AM

i know this is off topic, but im sorry but no birth centre or hospital can guarantee any affects on your baby whether or not you take the test.

I'm not demanding any guarantee from the carers in a birth centre or hospital - if that were my concern surely I would be taking every test under the sun and demanding a reason for not receiving the outcome I expected... what I said was, I trust their decades of experience to help me decide what is best for my baby and for me.

I think whatever you decide in pregnancy - and in life in general! - it should be an informed decision, taking on board the information you can find yourself as well as the advice of people you respect and who have your (and your baby's) best interests at heart, rather than simply because it's always been done that way, kwim?

paradise lost · May 13th, 2008, 12:37 AM

LOL, sasha your last post reminded me of when i was PG with DD. I was craving sushi and eating it more or less daily. I was sensible about what i ate (avoided too much tuna and swordfish and only bought it from very reputable places) and was really enjoying it. People CONSTANTLY said to me "umm..should you be eating raw fish? What about the baby?" and i used to want to lose it and yell (because i had done the research) "WHAT DO YOU THINK PREGGIE WOMEN EAT IN JAPAN!?" LOL. It sounds so obvious when one thinks about it but so many of these "facts" and "recommendations" are really cultural habits, myths and legends.

Bx

PS - i grew one SMART little girl on my fishy fishy fish fish diet....

**sasha** · May 13th, 2008, 12:01 PM

That's so funny, because fish is honestly the LAST thing I feel like eating right now!

Pregnancy seems to bring out the fruit monster in me ... I eat several pieces a day - yum! Excuse me, I'm off to find an apple

**maz** · May 15th, 2008, 11:35 AM

Sasha...please please have the strep test honey!!!

I was told that i didnt have to have it due to having a c/s..but as it pans out I had strepb, and my little man ended up having mengi****iles and a staf infection...due to them he has (still) many blood cots and dead brain cells and now has cerabal palsy.

please its just a little test that can save a life time of frustions, what ifs and emotional pain.

Bel was saying those things becasue she knows the heart ache I have been through.

Please consider EVERY avenue babe...I wouldnt want ANYONE going through what I am!

**Artechim** · May 26th, 2008, 08:41 AM

Ultimately the decision to have the test is only one that you can make, it doesn't really matter what other people think you should do as long as you are confident in your decision.

However, I had GD that required 4 shots of insulin and careful diet monitoring and I would not have been considered high risk for developing it. The common risk factors are:
*Obesity (BMI over 30)
*Of asian, african, pacific island, indigenous australian, hispanic ancestry
*Over 25
*Previous baby over 4kg
*Close family members with Type 2 diabetes

I was 25, a bit overweight but not obese, european decent , no previous babies. The only risk factor I had was being related to a bunch of Type 2 diabetics. The doctor commented that I had drawn the short straw in the genetic lottery and she even thought that I would remain a Type 2 after the birth because of the lack of risk factors and the severity of the insulin resistance that I had.

I am very glad that I had the test, I shudder to think of the consequences if I had spent 3 months walking around with sky high bsl (to the baby and myself).

BTW, that is interesting about the strep, it was never mentioned and I was never tested for it.