Margaret’s thumb swipes rhythmically, a metronomic blur against the harsh blue light of her iPhone 13 at one in the morning. She is scrolling past photos of her niece’s birthday, past a blurry shot of a sourdough starter that failed to rise, and past 33 screenshots of various recipes she will never make. Finally, she stops. It is a photo of a lab report. The white paper is slightly crumpled, and there, circled in a shaky red ink that looks almost like a wound, is the number: 113. Fasting glucose. Normal ends at 99. Diabetes begins at 126. She is caught in the ‘no-man’s-land’ of the 113, a numerical purgatory that her doctor dismissed with a wave of a hand and a vague, crushing instruction to ‘watch what you eat.’
Watching what you eat is not a protocol. It is an invitation to anxiety. It is the medical equivalent of telling someone in a sinking boat to ‘watch the water.’
As a sunscreen formulator, I deal in precision. If I am off by 0.3% in a zinc oxide dispersion, the entire SPF 53 rating collapses. We don’t just ‘watch’ the chemicals; we measure the shear, the temperature, and the molecular weight of the emulsifiers. Yet, when it comes to the complex biochemical cascade of human insulin resistance, we are told to simply observe our plates with a sense of impending doom. I cleared my browser cache three times today in a fit of digital housekeeping, a desperate attempt to feel some sense of control over a system that feels increasingly cluttered with half-truths and vague warnings.
The Insurance Code and the Parking Lot Pause
Pre-diabetes is treated as a lifestyle misdemeanor. It is the ‘fix it later’ of the medical world. You aren’t sick enough for the heavy artillery of Metformin or insulin, but you aren’t healthy enough to ignore the tingling in your feet that you’re 83% sure isn’t just your imagination. The healthcare system waits for the car to actually crash before they offer you a seatbelt. They wait for the 126, for the clinical diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes, because that is where the insurance codes are. That is where the ‘real’ medicine happens. In the 113 range, you are just a person who is failing a test you didn’t know you were taking.
The doctor had given me a printed sheet of paper from 1993 that suggested I eat more whole grains. It felt like being given a plastic umbrella to survive a Category 5 hurricane. There is a profound psychological burden in being told you are ‘pre-‘ something. It suggests a destiny that hasn’t arrived yet, a looming shadow that you are supposed to outrun without being given shoes.
The Cost of Uncertainty
Spent Last Month (Potions)
Open Browser Tabs (Noise)
I spent $373 last month on various ‘natural’ powders and potions, half of which tasted like the floor of a forest and none of which gave me a sense of security. The irony is that as a formulator, I know better. I know that raw ingredients need a delivery system. They need a rationale. My browser is currently burdened with 33 open tabs, ranging from peer-reviewed studies on berberine to the metabolic effects of cinnamon on the GLUT4 transporter. Most of it is noise. Most of it is marketing masquerading as biology. I find myself falling for the same traps I criticize in my own industry, buying into ‘revolutionary’ claims because the alternative-waiting for the 126-is too terrifying to contemplate.
Changing the Chemistry, Not Just Stirring
Oil & Water
System Screaming for Help (Separating)
We need to stop treating this as a minor correction. When we see a glucose level of 103 or 113, we are seeing a system that is screaming for help. It’s like the early stage of a chemical separation in a lotion; once the oil and water start to pull apart, you can’t just stir it with a spoon and hope for the best. You have to change the chemistry. You have to re-stabilize the bonds. For many of my clients and the people I talk to in the formulating labs, the search for that stability leads them away from the vague advice of the clinic and toward targeted support. They find themselves looking for something like GlycoLean, not because they want a miracle, but because they want a roadmap that the 15-minute doctor’s visit failed to provide. They want a way to address the biology before the biology becomes a permanent pathology.
The Engine vs. The Symptom
I have a strong opinion that the way we communicate metabolic health is fundamentally broken. We focus on the weight, which is the symptom, rather than the insulin signaling, which is the engine.
I’ve made mistakes in my own journey, too. I once tried a ketogenic diet so strict that I couldn’t think clearly enough to calculate the HLB values of a new surfactant. I was so obsessed with the numbers ending in 3 on my glucose monitor that I forgot how to actually live. I was ‘healthy’ on paper, but I was mentally fragile. There is a balance between being a diligent scientist of your own body and becoming a slave to the data.
The Micro-Droplets of Failure
I find myself digressing into the memory of a specific batch of SPF 53 I made last year. It was beautiful-silky, transparent, perfect. But after 23 days in the stability chamber at 40 degrees Celsius, it split. It was ‘pre-failure’ for weeks, showing tiny microscopic droplets on the surface that only a trained eye would see. The average consumer would have thought it was fine. But I knew. I knew the moment those droplets appeared that the integrity of the formula was gone. Our bodies do the same thing. The 113 fasting glucose is that tiny droplet on the surface. It is the warning that the stability is failing. To ignore it is to wait for the sun to burn you.
Integrity Lost
Integrity Salvageable
And yet, I continue to clear my cache. I continue to look for that one piece of data that will make sense of why my body feels different than it did a decade ago. We are a generation of people living in the liminal space between wellness and illness, armed with more data than any humans in history but with less wisdom on how to apply it. We have the ‘What’-we have the labs, the apps, the smartwatches that track our every twitch. But we are missing the ‘How.’ We are missing the bridge between the warning and the resolution.
From ‘Pre-‘ to ‘Pro-‘
The Distress Signal
I think about Margaret often. I think about her at 1 AM, her face illuminated by the 113. She isn’t looking for a lecture on ‘lifestyle choices.’ She’s looking for a way to stop being ‘pre-‘ and start being ‘pro-‘. She’s looking for the protocol that the system forgot to give her. We treat the body like a machine that is either ‘on’ or ‘off,’ ‘broken’ or ‘fixed.’ But biology is a spectrum. It is a slow, grinding process of shifts and adaptations. The 113 isn’t a parking ticket; it’s a distress signal from the engine room.
In the lab, when a formula is slightly off, we don’t throw it away. We adjust the pH. We add a chelating agent. We refine the process. We should be doing the same for our blood sugar. We should be looking at the 103s and the 113s not as a reason to panic, but as a reason to intervene with precision. The burden of the ‘pre-‘ label is heavy because it feels like a countdown. But a countdown can be stopped. You can pause the timer. You can even reset it, if you have the right tools and the right understanding of the chemistry involved.
The Formulator of My Own Life
I still have that photo of my own 113 glucose result in my hidden folder. I keep it there as a reminder. Not as a reminder of failure, but as a reminder that I am the formulator of my own life. I am the one who decides whether those droplets on the surface lead to a total separation or if they lead to a new, more stable version of the formula.
Stabilizing The System
We are all formulators, in a way, trying to find the right balance of ingredients to keep our systems from splitting under the heat of modern life. And sometimes, the most important thing we can do is admit that we don’t have all the answers, but we are damn sure going to keep looking for the right delivery system.
Why do we wait for the diagnosis to start the treatment?
It’s a question that keeps me up at 1:33 AM, long after I’ve cleared my cache and closed my eyes. I’d rather face the 113 now than the 126 later. I’d rather fix the formula while it’s still in the beaker.
