023: Vitals - How I Lowered My Blood Sugar After 40 (The "So What" Filter)
Note: This post contains affiliate links to some of the products I use in the Lab. If you make a purchase through these links, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. I only highlight products that are a core part of my actual routine.
A Metric Without a Mandate Isn't an Insight. It's Dead Weight.
My HbA1c came back at 5.7 — right on the borderline of pre-diabetes.
I had archives of analytics. Blood panels, continuous glucose monitor graphs, DEXA scans, smart ring biometrics, and a decade of tracked macros. And with all that data, I still hit executive paralysis on the only question that mattered: what actually changes on Monday?
For a long time, the data didn't drive results. It just drove anxiety. Because a metric without a mandate isn't an insight. It's just dead weight.
If you've been Googling how to lower blood sugar after 40, or how to lower HbA1c without another extreme reset, this is the filter I actually used. I borrowed a framework from an unexpected place — Smart Brevity, a book about corporate communication. It handed me the one operational filter I now run every biomarker through, including that 5.7. Two words: so what?
That filter is how I brought a borderline HbA1c back into range in my 40s — not by obsessing over another readout, but by forcing decisions. A detailed dashboard creates the illusion of control. But data is just overhead until it shifts behavior.
Welcome to The Company of One
Welcome to The Company of One — applying executive discipline to personal performance.
This is the Season 3 finale. Last week was the audit trail: 10 years of longitudinal data. Today is the governance — the single filter that converts raw metrics into real-world motion, including the lab work that put me on the borderline of pre-diabetes. Tracking data is passive. Translating it into decisions is the operating system.
Here's the top line: a two-word prompt, deployed across three operational fronts — at work, at home, and against the HbA1c readout that forced my hand. I'll share what happened when I stopped admiring the problem and started auditing the inputs.
In the last video, I shared my real operational blind spot. I don't have an information shortage. In fact, I track more metrics than almost anyone I know. What I have is an execution bottleneck. And piling on more data never solves an execution problem. It just gives me a more elaborate place to hide. A 5.7 on paper doesn't move itself.
Why does this matter? Here's what I notice about us: executives who lead in the boardroom, lead at home, and are finally ready to direct that exact same operational rigor toward ourselves. We are drowning in data. The KPI dashboard at the office, the inbox count, the readiness score on our smart ring, the dense metabolic panel — HbA1c, fasting glucose, the full biomarker stack.
And staring at a robust dashboard feels productive. It feels like operational control. But a dashboard is completely passive. It has never made a single executive decision. High performers don't fall for sloppy mistakes. We fall for sophisticated ones. When we're used to managing complexity, diving deeper into the analytics feels like due diligence. It feels responsible — until we realize that endless analysis was just a very sophisticated form of procrastination. At the end of the day, admiring the metrics is not managing the business.
If we're just meeting, I'm Alysia Bell — a 44-year-old executive, a mom, and honestly, the poster child for data overload. A smart ring on my finger, a continuous glucose monitor on my arm, a smart scale on the bathroom floor, a decade-plus of DEXA scans, and a hundred-plus biomarkers on my dashboard. For years, I acted like knowing the score was the same thing as winning the game. It's not. I'm not a physician and I'm not a wellness guru. I'm in this with you — running N-of-1 experiments on myself first, and opening the books on what actually worked for me.
When I tell you I lowered my blood sugar after 40, it wasn't a miracle sprint. It was a slow, methodical way to lower my HbA1c. Here's the audit trail: my HbA1c moved from the borderline of the pre-diabetes range at 5.7 into a stable 5.2 to 5.3. And my biology is not your biology — we'll get very precise about that when we hit the operational breakdown.
Three line items today. One: the filter itself — "so what?" — and why an executive communications manual unlocked my personal health. Two: how I deploy it across two operational fronts, in the boardroom and at home. And three: my wake-up call — clocking an HbA1c of 5.7, and the operational pivot that took me out of the red. And at the very end, I'll share the single quiet thread connecting every episode in this season. It took six episodes of data for me to finally connect the dots.
The Filter: "So What?"
Here's the filter, and I love that it comes from an unlikely place. Smart Brevity was written by the founders of Axios. On the surface, it's a manual on modern communication: respect people's time, lead with the bottom line, cut the fluff, and only go deeper if it drives clarity.
The first time I read it, I realized I wasn't just guilty of over-communicating in my inbox. I was doing the exact same thing to myself with my health. I was burying myself in the long version — every decimal point, every fluctuating score — with zero executive summary. For me, the "so what" filter turned an avalanche of metrics into a clear, non-negotiable daily baseline.
So I began running my biometrics through the exact litmus test that Smart Brevity demands. So what? If a data point doesn't drive a clear decision, it isn't an insight. It's just operational bloat.
I considered two distinct moves. First, I asked: so what happens if I ignore this? That single test cleared the noise immediately. For 80% of the numbers, my honest answer was nothing. They're just daily fluctuations, and I let them go. But when the answer revealed real risk, that was my signal.
Second, with the old adage of "control the controllables" in mind, I asked myself a question to translate that signal into execution: what is the single lever that's actually mine to move? Not the macroeconomic environment. Not the entire diagnostic panel. Just the one input where I have immediate operational leverage.
Two words. So what? Cut the bloat, find the lever, take the action.
At Work: Where Smart Brevity Naturally Lives
First, at work — which is where Smart Brevity naturally lives, because it's fundamentally about executive communication.
In my organization, we commission rigorous third-party evaluations of our initiatives. They land on my desk as beautiful, dense 30-page reports. And my nerdy side loves this — I read every footnote, and I love the details.
But here's the lesson I had to learn the hard way: nobody else has the bandwidth to read my 30 pages. If I just forward that PDF to one of our external partners, I haven't informed them. I've simply outsourced my synthesis to their inbox.
So now, before a document leaves my desk, it gets the filter. So what? Out of 30 pages of methodology and charts, what are the one or two core takeaways that actually shift strategy, funding, or policy? I don't bury those findings on page 14. I lead with the headline — one sticky, memorable proof point, a metric or a concrete human outcome that a busy executive can retain and champion when I'm not in the meeting. The 30-page appendix is always there for the one or two analysts who want the charts and tables. But the executive summary does the heavy lifting.
Forwarding a raw report isn't communication. It's delegating our thinking. Brevity isn't dumbing down the work — it's respecting the reader's time by doing the analytical work for them.
And the fascinating part is how seamlessly that exact same discipline transfers to a space that has nothing to do with board packets.
At Home: Cognitive Hygiene
Second, at home. And this one might sound like an outlier until we look at the mental math.
I'm a systematic declutterer. Every quarter, I audit my home, room by room. For me, this isn't an aesthetic exercise. It's cognitive hygiene. Physical friction directly converts into mental friction. A crowded room is noise for me.
Naturally, I run this cleanup like an operating system. Every item gets categorized into keep, relocate, donate, or discard. It's the exact same rule as "only handle it once" email governance: decide immediately, never put an item back on the shelf just to re-litigate the decision later.
But the real friction isn't the junk. The obvious clutter is an easy call. The bottleneck is the sentimental items — the things I don't use, don't necessarily need a physical copy of, but hesitate to let go.
So I run the filter. So what happens if I release this? If the honest answer is "I will genuinely regret this," and it carries real emotional weight, then it stays. That is a legitimate signal, and I honor it. But far more often, the honest reality surfaces that I don't actually want the physical object. What I want is the memory attached to it. And a memory fits inside a photograph. So I capture the digital record, preserve it in the cloud forever, and let the physical asset move on.
It's the exact same governance as the 30-page report. Protect the signal, eliminate the noise, and never confuse the volume of things with the actual value they deliver.
Which brings us to the third and highest-stakes operational front: my health.
My Health: The HbA1c of 5.7 and the Operational Pivot
This was the moment that turned a simple productivity filter into something deeply personal.
January of last year, the HbA1c result of 5.7 wasn't an acute red alert on the chart. It was a standard blood panel — one-tenth of a point over the diagnostic threshold of 5.6. Barely over. Incredibly easy to brush aside.
But it unsettled me. I viewed myself as a disciplined eater and consistently active. Yet here was a quiet, objective marker signaling a trajectory I did not like.
So I consulted the professionals. And to be completely fair, two different physicians reviewed the readout and were entirely unconcerned. Their perspective was standard and defensible: it's barely over the reference line, they see far higher numbers every day, and I shouldn't lose sleep over it. I want to be crystal clear — they were not negligent. In a clinical system built around diagnostic thresholds, theirs was a reasonable read. But their framework was: is this an acute clinical emergency?
My question was: so what happens if I ignore the trend line?
That question gave me immediate clarity. It wasn't panic — it was productive friction. So I moved to control the controllables. I wanted granular visibility, so I asked about a continuous glucose monitor to audit my body's real-time response to my default foods and drinks. They declined to prescribe one — which, again, is standard clinical practice when someone isn't diabetic. So I purchased an over-the-counter biosensor myself. I set up an automatic recurring order and applied the sensor every two weeks.
The data was an immediate wake-up call. Foods I assumed were metabolically inert — meals I ate specifically because I thought they were healthy — were generating dramatic blood sugar spikes in my body. I would never have assumed that absent the continuous glucose monitor.
So I audited the inputs. No extreme protocols, no crash elimination diets. Just targeted, high-leverage swaps dictated by my own biological curves. I focused entirely on the single variable that was mine to govern: my daily plate. I wasn't following a branded pre-diabetes diet. I was running a "so what" pass on my own food and beverage choices. I kept what didn't spike my blood sugar, and I swapped what did. Those weren't extreme cuts. They were the highest-leverage inputs I could control for blood sugar stability — the same levers people reach for when they're dealing with insulin resistance.
Seven months later, we retested. That 5.7 in January was down to 5.3 in August. Comfortably within the optimal range. This is how I lowered my blood sugar after 40: decisions, not another extreme reset.
My physicians were genuinely impressed by how quickly the marker normalized. But as we discussed this season, the headline sprint doesn't matter without the hold. Here are the receipts: 5.3 that August, 5.2 in November, 5.2 again in February, and 5.3 in March. An unbroken, stable baseline across four sets of labs and seven months.
Now, the necessary due diligence — and I mean this without reservation. I'm not a physician, I'm not offering medical advice, and you should never disregard your clinical team. These metrics moved alongside targeted lifestyle adjustments. Outside a lab, I cannot hand you clean scientific causation. My biology is not your biology.
More importantly, I could safely self-audit because I was sitting right on the diagnostic margin and otherwise healthy. If your labs are significantly elevated, that is a scenario where your physician needs to be more involved, not less. Strategic self-advocacy is about asking better questions and gathering clean inputs. It's never about going rogue when clinical stakes are high.
That is the "so what" filter, delivered. It didn't provide a magic cure. It simply refused to let me ignore an early warning sign.
The Bottom Line: Decisions Defeat Dashboards
A metric isn't meant to be admired on a dashboard. It's meant to drive a decision.
I used to think more data meant more control. It doesn't. Past a certain point, more data is just more noise, wearing the costume of diligence. And noise is where good intentions go to die. The number on the scan, the trend line on the graph, the lab panel with a hundred rows — none of it has ever changed a single outcome in my life. Not once. The only thing that has ever moved the needle is a decision. And the fastest way I know to bridge the gap between a metric and an action is two simple words: so what?
That's the entire filter. Not another dashboard to manage — just the intentional shift from "I have the labs" to "I know how I'm executing on Monday."
Here's the bottom line. Lowering my blood sugar after 40 didn't take an avalanche of data. It took a single non-negotiable choice.
Decisions defeat dashboards every single time.
Boring + Consistency = Results.
Two Things You Might Be Wondering
"Isn't buying your own continuous glucose monitor and ignoring your doctors reckless?"
I push back on "ignoring," because I didn't. I consulted my physicians first, I weighed their clinical perspective, and they made a completely reasonable call based on standard diagnostic thresholds. What I did was add personal visibility — not override their medical judgment. There is a massive operational difference between self-advocacy and going rogue. Self-advocacy means bringing cleaner data and better questions to the table. Stay in lockstep with your clinical team. Just don't outsource your curiosity to them.
"I don't track 100 biomarkers. Does this even apply to me?"
It applies even more. The "so what" filter wasn't designed for people with complex dashboards. It was built for anyone staring at a single number they are quietly concerned about but haven't acted on. One borderline lab result. One stubborn trend line on a smartwatch. Run the filter: so what happens if I ignore this? Then identify the single lever within your control. You don't need an expanded data set. You just need to execute on the data you already hold.
The Thread Connecting Every Episode This Season
Here's the realization that only fully crystallized when I reached the end of this arc.
Six episodes. Six business frameworks: setting quarterly rocks, establishing how we decide, touching each input once, stacking and sequencing our habits, auditing a decade of longitudinal data, and today, the "so what" filter. A single operational move that turns a borderline lab panel, an enterprise KPI, or a closet full of clutter into immediate action.
Every single episode was executing the exact same play. Each one took an abstract business theory from a brilliant book and pushed it through one key filter: so what? What does this actually change about how I operate? That was the entire season. It was never about the books — Traction, Crucial Conversations, Smart Brevity were just frameworks. This season was about the translation layer: converting intellectual concepts into sustainable physical realities.
Because here's what I know to be true about us. We are already stellar at this in our careers. We take the high-level strategy, we build the roadmap, and we operationalize it until it works. This entire season was about taking that exact executive discipline — the muscle we already flex every single day — and directing it toward the one company we can never afford to run on good intentions: ourselves.
Your Next Move
Don't try to overhaul your entire relationship with your data tomorrow. Be kind to yourself. Pick one.
Pull out the one number you've quietly been avoiding. Run it through the "so what" filter: so what happens if I ignore this? If the honest answer is "nothing," let it go — it's noise. If it reveals real risk, that's your signal.
Then find the single lever that's actually yours to move. Not the whole diagnostic panel. Not the things outside your control. The one input where you have immediate leverage.
Then make the decision — the same way I had to when that lab report stopped being a piece of paper in a folder and became my operational mandate.
And if your numbers are significantly elevated, that's exactly when your physician needs to be more involved, not less. Strategic self-advocacy means better questions and cleaner inputs — never going rogue when the clinical stakes are high.
If you want a simple framework to audit your own numbers and see what's running in the red, the free one-page ASSETS Audit is linked below. Rate yourself across the six executive health pillars — Activity, Strength, Sleep, Equilibrium, Total Energy, and Sustenance. Find your lowest score, and start there.
Because you can't lead from empty.
When you're optimized, everyone wins.
Grab the free ASSETS Audit
Watch the full video: “How I Lowered My Blood Sugar After 40 (The 'So What' Filter)”
Coming next — Season 4: once our internal operating system is humming — the priorities, the habits, the baseline, the filters — what do we actually do with the capacity we just reclaimed? We scale. We stop being the operational bottleneck in our own life. Season 4 is entirely about buying back our time: high-leverage delegation, engineering support systems, and building the team around us so our performance never rests solely on our own shoulders.
Alysia Bell is the founder of All Green Lights CEO. She's tracked her nutrition for ~4,000 consecutive days, wears an OURA ring 24/7, and does N-of-1 experiments with a continuous glucose monitor. She just completed Season 3 of the show — The Company of One — a personal operating system that applies executive team standards to running oneself.
Topics referenced in this episode:
The "so what" filter and the lead-with-the-bottom-line communication principles from Smart Brevity by the founders of Axios; HbA1c and the pre-diabetes diagnostic threshold; continuous glucose monitoring; the "control the controllables" and "only handle it once" principles referenced from earlier in the season; and the ASSETS framework of six executive health pillars developed by www.allgreenlightsceo.com.
The N-of-1 Disclaimer:
I am an executive and a mom, not a doctor or medical professional of any sort. The content shared here — including biometric data, protocols, and "Vitals" — is for informational and experimental purposes only. It is a documentation of my personal journey and should not be taken as medical advice. Always consult with a qualified healthcare professional before making changes to your health, diet, or supplement routine.
