Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Diabetes Discussions
DVLA and hypos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="catapillar" data-source="post: 1545007" data-attributes="member: 32394"><p>I think it's hugely risky to assume you monitor is innaccurate when you see readings below 4. When you see a reading below 4, you are hypo. There's no other way of operating. What other readings are you choosing to ignore on the basis of inaccuracy just because you don't like the look of it? If you see a reading under 4 and you don't have symptoms, then you are hypo unaware and your driving licence should be taken away.</p><p></p><p>Since 2016, blood sugar monitors must meet the following standards 95% of the time:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Within 0.83mmol/l of lab tests at readings under 5.6</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Within 15% of readings over 5.6</li> </ul><p>So 95% of readings under 5.6 will be within 0.83 mmol/l of a lab test of the same blood. A much closer accuracy than the 15% you are under the impression applies. Even if your monitor is pre-2016, it will still have had to be within 0.83mmol/l of any reading under 4.2 95% of the time.</p><p></p><p>Disregarding readings under 4 because you assume they are metre errors does suggest a rather reckless approach to diabetic management. You appear to assume that 100% of readings under 4 are metre errors, which just doesn't comply with the standard set for monitor accuracy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="catapillar, post: 1545007, member: 32394"] I think it's hugely risky to assume you monitor is innaccurate when you see readings below 4. When you see a reading below 4, you are hypo. There's no other way of operating. What other readings are you choosing to ignore on the basis of inaccuracy just because you don't like the look of it? If you see a reading under 4 and you don't have symptoms, then you are hypo unaware and your driving licence should be taken away. Since 2016, blood sugar monitors must meet the following standards 95% of the time: [LIST] [*]Within 0.83mmol/l of lab tests at readings under 5.6 [*]Within 15% of readings over 5.6 [/LIST] So 95% of readings under 5.6 will be within 0.83 mmol/l of a lab test of the same blood. A much closer accuracy than the 15% you are under the impression applies. Even if your monitor is pre-2016, it will still have had to be within 0.83mmol/l of any reading under 4.2 95% of the time. Disregarding readings under 4 because you assume they are metre errors does suggest a rather reckless approach to diabetic management. You appear to assume that 100% of readings under 4 are metre errors, which just doesn't comply with the standard set for monitor accuracy. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Diabetes Discussions
DVLA and hypos
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…