Totally off topic, but are we finally seeing you in your avatar?
Yes that is I photo taken last month in Mablethorpe.
I think it very much depends on what medication one is on. The OP is T2 on Metformin and diet, so the risk of hypo is quite low. i am T2 also, but on a bgl lowering drug, so I need to be wary of sub 4 readings. I do get them, and sometimes I can accept it since my medication has a limited time of action where I could go lower still. But sometimes I take a few carbs to keep me off the bottom rung, which for me starts at 3.6.Of course, many people say I'm not normal, but if I wanted to never be below 4, I would be eating full-time, including through the night.
In my view, and from reading I have done, there are no issues being under 4, provided there are no symptoms. Under the very low 2s should be investigate, whether or not the individual feels tickety-boo. That low, and I have been there, I feel fine, except for very hungry. that's usually justified, as it would usually be pretty much just before eating, or where eating has been unavoidably delayed. I also get a bit grumpy, but then I'M HUNGRY!
As an non-medicated individual with a very good HbA1c, I have no intention of eating my scores up, unless there is solid data to compel it.
In my view, each individual has a running healthy range, and mine just so happens to be relatively low for someone with a past diagnosis of diabetes. I consider my body has recovered itself well, to be back no a robust functional place.
I would agree with you if our bgl meters were accurate so we could rely on them, But you have to allow for +/- 0.8 mmol/L error on any reading below 4mmol/L, so the quoted reading of 3.4 could actually be 2.6 and the meter would be considered correct. It is worse if the meter is an SD Codefree or an Accuchek since these are calibrated to measure 12 % higher than other meters, (3.4 then could be 2.3)
Does this refer to the difference between the basis being whole blood and the basis being plasma? Clinical measurement of glucose concentration is done with reference to plasma. While informally people speak of 'BG', blood glucose, the intravenous measurement of the fasting level is 'FPG', fasting plasma glucose. Are those two meters the only ones calibrated against plasma?
Some are and some aren't. In both the Codefree and the Accuchek Mobile it is detailed in the technical specifications in the booklet that comes with the meter.
So far they are the only ones using Plasma Calibration. I believe ALL Accuchek meters bought after 2011, and the SD Codefree. I have posted this info many times on different threads, and so far no one has identified any other bgl meters. Certainly my Abbott meters are all whole blood. The whole blood used to be called interstitial fluid which is what the finger prick tests measure. The problem may arise when doing alternate site testing which is capilliary blood, so closer to plasma.Does this refer to the difference between the basis being whole blood and the basis being plasma? Clinical measurement of glucose concentration is done with reference to plasma. While informally people speak of 'BG', blood glucose, the intravenous measurement of the fasting level is 'FPG', fasting plasma glucose. Are those two meters the only ones calibrated against plasma?
Here in the UK. the labs use plasma because most of the testing they do is on venous samples. It is almost impossible for a patient outside hospital to get to see a lab result on what you term FBGL, I made a special request so i could check my calibration of my personal meter, but they refused to tell me what it was in my venous sample. Our GP system here uses HbA1c as primary diagnostic tool, or they use a portable bgl meter just like we do. So Joslin advice seems to be irrelevant here in UK. They re certainly incorrect in their assertion that most meters are now plasma.Maybe whole blood meters are more important in Britain. You mentioned in an old post that DVLA uses whole blood numbers. Dealing with legal consequences, yes it's crucial to be on the same page as the government.
I may soon be monitoring my BG. I had thought whole blood meters were passe.
From the Joslin Diabetes Center (USA). "By having the meter record results as plama glucose, you and your healthcare team can more easily compare your lab tests with your blood glucose meter results. . . . today most newer meters provide blood glucose (sugar) readings as plasma glucose readings. . . . plasma numbers read about 10 - 12% higher than the older whole blood numbers. So if your fasting and pre-meal blood glucose target is 90 - 130 mg/dl plasma glucose, it would be 80 - 120 mg/dl if your meter reads whole blood."
http://www.joslin.org/info/plasma_glucose_meters_and_whole_blood_meters.html
This Webpage is undated, but the text could possibly be many years old.
So far they are the only ones using Plasma Calibration. I believe ALL Accuchek meters bought after 2011, and the SD Codefree. I have posted this info many times on different threads, and so far no one has identified any other bgl meters. Certainly my Abbott meters are all whole blood. The whole blood used to be called interstitial fluid which is what the finger prick tests measure. The problem may arise when doing alternate site testing which is capilliary blood, so closer to plasma.
Things get even more complicated, since the term plasma is used with different meaning in terms of blood transfusions.
Here in the UK. the labs use plasma because most of the testing they do is on venous samples. It is almost impossible for a patient outside hospital to get to see a lab result on what you term FBGL, I made a special request so i could check my calibration of my personal meter, but they refused to tell me what it was in my venous sample. Our GP system here uses HbA1c as primary diagnostic tool, or they use a portable bgl meter just like we do. So Joslin advice seems to be irrelevant here in UK. They re certainly incorrect in their assertion that most meters are now plasma.
Edit to Add: Apparently the MyLife unio is also now plasma calibrated. NZ has mandated their meters should be plasma, and appaently the Pharmaco range should comply. Also the Medica Pacifica meters as distributed in NZ. Now we know. Anyone else found one?
I've recently got a code free meter and it has recorded much higher readings than my old meter which is an Accu chek mobile, e.g. this morning 8.9 vs 6.2 and y'day 10.0 vs 6.9 these are consistent with other readings. I realise that there is a margin for error, but I find these differences more significant than that. It doesn't matter about pre and post prandial readings, as you're looking at the difference between the readings, but I'm thinking of funding the Accu chek for fasting readings.Some are and some aren't. In both the Codefree and the Accuchek Mobile it is detailed in the technical specifications in the booklet that comes with the meter.
I think there is good evidence that in the long term, all hypos are bad news, regardless of whether they are symptomatic or asymptomatic. Every time you go below 3.9, you are risking a small amount of brain damage, even if you feel fine. 9I do have a paper on it somewhere, but can't find it to upload.....sorry). When I started intermittent fasting, I was getting down to 4.1 sometimes, but no symptoms. So have taken myself off Gliclazide as just didn't want to risk going under 4. Now average BG a bit higher, but I'm OK with that. I'd rather be between 5 and 7 most of the time, than be between 4 and 6 and risk small hypos.
I've recently got a code free meter and it has recorded much higher readings than my old meter which is an Accu chek mobile, e.g. this morning 8.9 vs 6.2 and y'day 10.0 vs 6.9 these are consistent with other readings. I realise that there is a margin for error, but I find these differences more significant than that. It doesn't matter about pre and post prandial readings, as you're looking at the difference between the readings, but I'm thinking of funding the Accu chek for fasting readings.
Any thoughts?
I am not putting this here to blow mein own trumpet, but it contains a graph that demonstrated how my SD Codefree and my NEO / XCEED meters tracked each other quite consistently over time. I was able to detect and reject 2 paks of NEO strips that were duff (omitted from my results, so not shown in graph). I use my NEO for hypo management but the SD gives me confidence, especially when both trend together. Where the graph starts to diverge or converge, then this is usually due to a strip change.Thanks @Bluetit1802 . I think I've got used to the method of testing on the code free, but I will continue to double test to calculate average scores. Then, I'll try another set of strips if it's still out.
My problem is if the code free has significantly higher numbers such as 10 it would cause me real concern, when fbs should be under 7.0. I've had few over 7.0 and that was when I was ill, such as now.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?