From what I've heard, a score less than 2 is good, and a score greater than 2 indicates Insulin Resistance. Looks like that's where I'm headed if I don't do something about it. Good thing I got this checked out.
Here are my test results. My Glucose is 88 mg/dL. My Insulin result is 9.4 uIU/mL. According to my calculations my HOMA-IR score is 2.04. I think I'm okay.
sure - put it on my tab. I'll add it to my collection of dubious bioinformatic software...
But seriously, doesn't the discrepancy seem a bit weird? This isn't just rounding error. By one measure bandman's numbers indicate serious IR, by the other (newer) index he's very close to in-range. Which is telling the truth?
CS created a HOMA calculator. I'll send it to you.
Is 25 cents a fair price? LOL Want me to add it to your bill?
Co
There's something I haven't been able to sort out about the HOMA index calculation - I'd be curious to hear any thoughts/corrections on this.
The simple formula for HOMA1 as Cory writes above is FI*FG/22.5 where FI is fasting insulin in uU/ml and FG is fasting glucose in mMol/L. If FG is reported in mg/dL, common in the US, you first have to change units by dividing by 18. So for bandman's readings, HOMA1 is
(16*(100/18))/22.5=3.94
which would be outside the normal HOMA range and indicate possible IR.
However, HOMA1 has been criticized for high variability and an updated formula, HOMA2, was introduced by the authors
Unfortunately the HOMA2 calculation is not a simple multiplication and involves a non-linear fit. Inputs are the same and it is available from the authors' site
http://www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/homacalculator/index.php
either as an executable or as an excel spreadsheet. For FG=100 mg/dL and FI=16 uU/mL the HOMA2 value is 2.1 which is close to normal.
Reference ranges for FG are normal lt 100 and FI normal lt 17 - or at least those were the ranges from my last FI/FG tests, the FI reference range may vary depending on test). So it seems consistent that in-range FI/FG would yield in-range HOMA2.
Well, I do find it rather interesting to note that whenever I have non-fasting liver labs and the glucose is in the panel ..just because.., my blood sugar is perfectly in the normal range and this is after a substantial, rather large breakfast, I might add. ( i.e., eggs, toast, cereal, fruit...), now I'm not trying to be argumentative but, IF I was IR, one would reason that I would have an elevated blood sugar after a high carb meal? I'm telling you that my blood sugar was like 70 after eating, toast, whole wheat cereal, egg-whites, fruit, juice, coffee.... The toast was not that cardboard tasting low-carb type, it was just normal variety whole wheat toast. The cereal was not some type of Kashi or Oatmeal, it was Wheaties complete w/all it's added (god-forbid...little bit of sugar). And, oh, by the way, I also eat chocolate. However, my weight is normal for my height. All the other markers for IR are not there. I have normal cholesterol, normal triglycerides. My waist size is within normal limits. This is based on my doctor's assessment, mind you. My thyroid is normal. My blood pressure is normal (in fact on the low side). So, why is it that so many on here are questioning my statement that I am not IR??? What do you expect me to do, go and stand in front of my doctor w/my hands on my hips and DEMAND that he do a fasting GTT? There are many reasons why someone can be not clearing the virus and it doesn't always have to fall into the category of IR. Yes, I do have some elevated blood sugar's, but they are not THAT bad and my doctor said that under to old guidelines, that we would not even be having this conversation. It's just since they lowered the limits on the blood sugar that this has become an issue. That's my opinion on this. Susan400