Can anyone help here

[pavmas]

I changed my meter from an xceed to an Accu check aviva 2009-2010,

I just noticed on their website that they changed from whole blood to plasma in 2010,

Now on the exceed if my blood read 4.7 then I assumed if I got 4.7 on the accu check it would be the same, but now Im a bit confused by this, have I been taking the wrong readings because of this plasma change.
https://www.accu-chek.co.uk/gb/news/14april10.html
cheers
joe

 

[Grazer]

Hi Joe,
most meters nowadays are referenced to Plasma, even though they take a whole blood sample from your finger. The readings will be different. If you had a reading of 10 before, it will show about 11 now. You just need to allow for it - if you compare with things like fasting readings given by others on this site, they will nearly all be plasma referenced, so you will now be comparing like with like. Most of the guidelines issued on BG levels are plasma guidelines I believe. You may have been flattering yourself a tiny bit before, but remember the meter readings can be 10% (or more!) wrong anyway!

 

[pavmas]

Cheers Grazer
well Ive worked out that when Im 5.1 then that means im 4.4 whole blood.
But in 2008 I was told anything below 4.0 was a hypo, so with plasma does a hypo start at 4.3-4.5 reading.

 

[Grazer]

Cheers Grazer
well Ive worked out that when Im 5.1 then that means im 4.4 whole blood.
But in 2008 I was told anything below 4.0 was a hypo, so with plasma does a hypo start at 4.3-4.5 reading.

I don't get hypos Joe 'cos I'm a type 2 on diet only, but I think most people consider a hypo to start when you get below 4 on the plasma meters readings, although people do vary. I'm sure someone will come along with more knowledge of hypos than me. In the meantime, it's a bit like when we went decinal on the currency - best to forget the old numbers and start thinking about the new ones. Not easy I know!
Good luck!

 

[Snodger]

I have *lots* of experience with hypos! :sick:

tbh different healthcare professionals give different answers to 'what is a hypo'. Many (most?) will say 4.0, but DAFNE trained ones will say 3.5. I've even seen some academic journals refer to hypos not being real hypos at lower levels than that. In my experience, hypo symptoms often come on when blood sugar is rapidly dropping; sometimes I've gone by the book and obediently not treated a hypo when I felt bad but I was 5.5 (definitely not textbook hypoglycaemia); 15 mins later I'll be 1.9 and struggling to get my blood sugars up. So personally I've learnt to trust myself, not worry too much about the exact reading, and go by what my body tells me. If you are getting symptoms at 4.3, don't wait for it to drop to the level defined (by people who've never been hypo) as hypo...

Others will disagree with me. And I should say the following. which you prob already know:
- if your bgs are running high most of the time, your body will tell you that you are hypo when you are actually in no danger of dropping dangerously low; it gets used to the higher bgs.
- if you aren't getting warning symptoms then, obviously, you can't trust your body in the way I've described; but in that case, it's probably better to assume a slightly higher level is hypo anyway, for safety's sake and to try and get symptoms back again.

 

[noblehead]

Cheers Grazer
well Ive worked out that when Im 5.1 then that means im 4.4 whole blood.
But in 2008 I was told anything below 4.0 was a hypo, so with plasma does a hypo start at 4.3-4.5 reading.

Don't forget also Pavmas that bg meters can be +/- 10-20% out so you really have to make your mind-up whether to treat a 4.3 as a hypo, personally anything close to 4 I'll have a small treat to bring my levels back up slightly.

''Four is the floor'' is good advice by our HCP's....... this way we (type 1's) can keep our hypo awareness intact and avoid the dangers of hypoglycemia and prevent losing our licenses sooner rather than later.