CGMS a hoax, Sensor Accuracy dreadful. Can't be more active or flexible food

[turtlea]

Minimed CGMS is merely a hoax thing.

You will exhaust all your effort and time if not your life, in order to seep through CGMS benefit claimed to provide. MiniMed CGMS working with pump 522/722 is really dismally lame.

After these two weeks' intensive second try in May and lots of decent effective good help from this forum literally,
(my first try of CGMS is in Feb 2008, and it was a complete dismissal)
I got CGMS to work more properly this time.
CGMS is very demanding, subtle.
In order to derive any useful results from it, I will need to monitor MUCH MUCH MORE closely myself, MORE than I normally
do without aid of CGMs. If I can do that, my control will be just fine. CGMS does nothing to you unless you INTIMATELY know
what you have been doing with when to calibration, bolus, carbs,
timing, every nuances of managing your condition !!!

Shame for MiniMed that even do not point out how limited if not almost impossible to use CGMS in addition to
so many glitches such 'weak signal", constant false low/high alerts...

Check Sensor Feature Guide on
its Sensor Accuracy on page 47: it is dreadful. What's the use of CGMS if you can not be more active or can not be with "poor" eating habits ??
How many of us can eat at the same time every day and same food
and do the activities at the same time ??

No wonder I still couldn't get Aetna to cover CGMS, who has kept on insisting CGMS is experimental.

To me, CGMS is pretty close to nothing. It is no where to compare with using pump. Often many kind people compare CGMS learning curve
as learning using the pump. Pump is a real thing that works as
you expect. CGMS is bogus.

I guess I am about to drop the hike to this CGMS FALSE "promised land".

Hope there is such a thing next generation of CGMS coming soon.

Ironically,
Imagine if insurance does not pay current CGMS, maybe
Minimed will feel more urgent to invest in rolling out a TRUE
useful CGM.

BTW, I often wonder if we can stick to a regular schedule of activities, meals of set food choice and amount daily,
we can do very well control of our glucose level, couldn't we?

I wonder how people in this forum (with good sense of CGMS)
deal with their meals, activities, daily routines or how they manage them for their type 1 condition.
Could you be very flexible with food, activities with the aid of CGMS?
What are the major changes and monitoring your activities with and without using CGMS?

Turtlea

[belyro]

Wow. That's really unfortuate that you've had such a bad experience with the CGMS. I don't blame you for wanting to ditch it if your experience was that bad.

I started on the CGMS about a month and a half ago, and I LOVE it! I don't know how I lived without it. I don't do anything differently than I used to without it except enter my meter BG into my pump 2-3 times daily. My schedule, eating habits, activity levels, etc. haven't changed at all. I've definitely found limitations of the CGMS (e.g. it won't catch a super-fast rise or super-fast fall in glucose levels), but overall it's provided me with a much greater sense of security in my BG levels than I've ever had before and it lets me feel comfortable with letting my levels run lower than before without worrying about an unnoticed hypo....especially at night. Plus, it makes it SO much easier to find BG trends that I need to deal with. I pay out-of-pocket for it, and I intend to keep doing so as long as I have to because I love it so much.

That said, I know that some people do have a LOT of difficulty making it work for them, including some of our other DF members. It's really unfortunate. Hopefully they'll continue to work on the technology (and other similar technologies) so that they can come up with something that works more consistently for everyone.

In the meantime, though, I'm EXTREMELY happy with mine...and I know there are a number of others on here who are too (Duck? Noel? Chime in here!)

Sorry it's been such a bad run for you.

[xucub]

I believe I have posted this elsewhere, but I too believe that the MM continuous monitor is terrible and believe it should be taken off the market. (I actually filed a complaint with the FDA re. my findings and dissatisfaction.)
I too was finding that I was testing MORE often with the monitor than without because I was trying to check its accuracy or at least determine if there was some correlation between my finger stick numbers and the monitor. (By the way, no relationship exists.)
I talked to MM several times re. this, and it seems like all i got was a series of excuses....May not be accurate during periods of rapid rises in blood sugar or during periods of rapid falls...Many not be accurate for 2-3 hours after a meal....may not be accurate 2-3 hours after any bolus...monitors can be up to 20% off (not my experience....yada, yada, yada.
It seems like the only time that consistently meets the qualification above is overnite/morning upon arising. But found that to be inaccurate. I typed a summary for my endocrinologist showing that, even pre-breakfast, results were up to 60% different. I am looking at that summary now and, as an example, I see where the continuous monitor is showing a 182 and my finger stick shows a 118. Major difference!!
I actually got myself in trouble a few times by treating apparently high numbers from the continuous monitor only to find that my real blood sugars were in an appropriate range. (Of course, MM says never to eat or take insulin based on the numbers on the continuous monitor---so what is the point of the monitor then??
I have also advised the insurance company (anthem) of these issues so perhaps they can put pressure on MM to get the problems corrected.

[steamfan261]

My experience has been the diametric opposite of what you report. My CGMS has been consisitently, superbly accurate. Usually within +/- 10 of my meter. I've no idea why you experienced what you did, but I am extremely pleased with the Medtronic CGMS. It has been accurate, reliable and I consider it a very, very valuable tool.

[xMenace]

...monitors can be up to 20% off (not my experience....

The only part I'll disagree with is about the meters. I've done significant testing with several meters - lately with BD link, Aviva, Ultra 2, Advantage, Contour, and a Contour link. They are at best a guess. All are at least 10% off and I'd bet money I could show close to 20% variances with most.

[Funnygrl]

I had very similar frustrations and stopped using it. It was ridiculously wide off, sometimes by over 200. Then I hear abotu people who actually use it to replace finger sticks. Scares the crud out of me. And I hate how Carelink uses huge squares to mark fingersticks on the chart. It makes it look a lot closer than it is.

[Keezheekoni]

Put me in the spot for people whose CGMS works wonderfully. As long as I calibrate it at a good time, I'm gold for the rest of the day...

I haven't changed my testing habits. I was always a little OCD on testing, up to 12 times a day, a lot of times more.

[NoelD]

Put me in the spot for people whose CGMS works wonderfully. As long as I calibrate it at a good time, I'm gold for the rest of the day...

I haven't changed my testing habits. I was always a little OCD on testing, up to 12 times a day, a lot of times more.

Sounds a lot like my experiences too, except I test less now. 4x a day does it now.

[turtlea]

yes, we need to tell the FDA seriously

I thought the CGMS is helping you with your flexible schedule of activities and easy way of doing meals. Obviously it does not work in THOSE circumstances as I have experienced
and as it is stated very clearly in Sensor accuracy of Guardian RT readings on
the Sensor Features User Guide.

I should have known better but we are not informed of its limited capability. It markets itself as the savior of our type 1 in the meantime
when every insurance coverage is a struggle. Some people in the world know better obviously. We are the strugglers consumed by this lame if not lousy technology. I'd demand my money back from MiniMed.



Turtlea

[turtlea]

it is just a joke. Read the Sensor Feature Guide on its
Accuracy you will find you mistreat yourself badly.
and you have been cheated for 100% or you
come from a horrible control before and thought
this CGMS got you a little control while it was
actually NOT except displaying those dreadful #.

Experienced and knowledgeable people should
get the lame FDA to take all CGMS off the market
and PROTECT consumers.

Turtlea

[turtlea]

Keezheekoni & NoelD & ...,

Sounds a lot like my experiences too, except I test less now. 4x a day does it now.

I bet that you have mostly good daily schedule of
activities and regular meal times, and meal amount.

If I have set schedule, doing the same thing at the same time
eating the same thing, same amount at the same time daily,
my control will be perfect anyway. My control
had been non-diabetic (HbA1c 5.5 plus and minus, my endo
was shocked with my control in the Palo Alto Medical F.
where there are thousand of diabetes patients)
for the first 5 years of my type 1 because I simply just
did the set schedule.

What are your daily activities and meal times and amounts
like ??
What are your HbA1c now and before CGMS?
In what way have you improved with the aid of CGMS?


Turtlea

[Keezheekoni]

I bet that you have mostly good daily schedule of activities and regular meal times, and meal amount.

What are your daily activities and meal times and amounts like ??
What are your HbA1c now and before CGMS?
In what way have you improved with the aid of CGMS?

I don't have a schedule. I hate schedules. The only schedule I'm on is to make sure the kids get to school on time in the morning... I don't eat the same things everyday... Sometimes I eat out for lunch, sometimes I don't. I'm a stay-at-home-mom, so my days vary.

My daily activities include housework, running errands (in my new convertible!), being my dh's secretary, maintaining the family social calendar, accounting, etc...

My last A1c was skewed a bit because the week before I had it done I was ill with the flu. However, it was 6.4%. Usually I have tight control in the mid-5's. I haven't had my A1c done since CGMS since I had it done about a week prior to receiving the CGMS.

I don't know that I've improved as yet with it, however I'm able to catch swings and correct for them with CGMS, without having to actually test on my fingers. It's been working quite well for me, without testing to see if the number is truly in that range, since I calibrate at times when I know I'm flat and not changing rapidly (usually right after waking and right before bed are the times I calibrate).

I'm sorry that it's not working for you and you feel the need to get the FDA on Medtronic's rear. If I were you, I'd absolutely complain. I just hope it makes you feel better.

[marchez]

Why is that we have black or white here? It either works perfectly or is completely useless.

I have also consistently experienced lost sensor and inaccurate readings with no success and zero value from CGMS.

Are we dealing with a manufacturing problem or are we dealing with human based anatomical profile that some how impacts the performance of the technology?

[Alice]

That is one question I have also...why some love it...and some are very disappointed...not much in the middle. I'm going to wait til the practicality improves to spend my insurance money on these devices. I've only used one (MM) a few years ago from the doctors office...she had paid $5000 for it and seemed disappointed I wouldn't use it every 3 months...(to help pay for it?)...

I thought it would be much more beneficial...instead I had to defend my written meter numbers to her. The CGMS was off by as many as 50-75 points sometimes. Not good enough for me.

But, I'm happy many are satisfied with the new models. I'm just waiting a bit longer. I'm terribly excited by the progress, really, I am...

[RobiJo]

I'm extremely satisfied and I will continue to pay OUT OF POCKET for these supplies. Sure there are glicks but it's a science and it will continue to improve. Peeing on a strip wasn't very accurate either (hours behind), but that's what was available at the time. I have very flexible mealtimes and activities.

I have dropped my A1c from 8.7 to 6.8 since I started using the sensor last August. I test with a regular meter about the same amount as I did before. (6-10x day).

I feel sorry for you because you are so negative about it, but I guess for some the glass is ALWAYS half empty.

Oh and just for the record---113meter/112sensor right now. It hasn't been more than 10 points off all day.

[RobiJo]

You obviously like to start flamers.... so I'll add my $35 worth.

I'm extremely satisfied and
I will continue to pay OUT OF POCKET for these supplies. Sure there are glicks but it's a science and it will continue to improve. Peeing on a strip wasn't very accurate either (hours behind), but that's what was available at the time. I have very flexible mealtimes and activities.

I have dropped my A1c from 8.7 to 6.8 since I started using the sensor last August. I test with a regular meter about the same amount as I did before. (6-10x day). Hardly a hoax.

I feel sorry for you because you are so negative about it, but I guess for some the glass is ALWAYS half empty.

Oh and just for the record---113meter/112sensor right now. It hasn't been more than 10 points off all day. Again hardly a hoax.

[duck]

I'm extremely satisfied and I will continue to pay OUT OF POCKET for these supplies. Sure there are glicks but it's a science and it will continue to improve. Peeing on a strip wasn't very accurate either (hours behind), but that's what was available at the time. I have very flexible mealtimes and activities.

I have dropped my A1c from 8.7 to 6.8 since I started using the sensor last August. I test with a regular meter about the same amount as I did before. (6-10x day).

I feel sorry for you because you are so negative about it, but I guess for some the glass is ALWAYS half empty.

Oh and just for the record---113meter/112sensor right now. It hasn't been more than 10 points off all day.

I second the continue to pay out of pocket. I'm in love with my CGMS, it's given me even more freedom and control. There are times when I think it's psycho, but maybe I'm a little more lenient since I have lived with this disease since the dark ages of bleeding onto a test strip, counting down for one minute, wiping the blood off, inserting the strip into a meter to read, waiting another minute, etc. for a half-accurate reading.

[RobiJo]

I second the continue to pay out of pocket. I'm in love with my CGMS, it's given me even more freedom and control. There are times when I think it's psycho, but maybe I'm a little more lenient since I have lived with this disease since the dark ages of bleeding onto a test strip, counting down for one minute, wiping the blood off, inserting the strip into a meter to read, waiting another minute, etc. for a half-accurate reading.

Thanks duck!!! Maybe your right...maybe it's because we're from the dark ages. But then again, the first cell phones, cars, computers, heck even insulin pumps ALL had some issues that improved with time.

[Funnygrl]

I don't think my lack of being from the dark ages is what lead me to believe that it's unhelpful for a device to tell me I'm 130 when my meter tells me I'm 244.

[RobiJo]

I don't think my lack of being from the dark ages is what lead me to believe that it's unhelpful for a device to tell me I'm 130 when my meter tells me I'm 244.

Funnygrl you are able to discuss the pros and cons much better than a complete "its a hoax, and FDA should pull it" kind of comment. You tried it and didn't like it, no big deal. You are honest about your experience with it. But you've also read others' experiences where it's been very worthwhile. I think what Duck and I are getting at is that nothing has been completely accurate when it was first introduced, we've lived through some of these "new" things. Right down to the meters that are STILL 10-20% off after 25+ years of being on the market. Shouldn't the FDA be worried about that?

But to say that it is a hoax??? I have a problem with that. This is one person's personal experience and they are using it to flame or troll on this site. This person has never introduced themself and has only posted to say that CGMS is a hoax and completely worthless. Sensor or no sensor, I'll still be poking my finger, and MM never promised to make that part go away.

[duck]

We also have to take into account that this disease is VERY unique for all of us, which makes it much harder to paint this disease with a broad brush--what works for me may not work for you. I hate that the CGMS does not work well, or at all, for some of us. And honestly, it makes more more thankful that it worked out for me so far.

[Funnygrl]

Right, totally agree. I seem to have had exceptionally bad luck. I'm happy for the people that have had good luck though.

[solox316]

What are your daily activities and meal times and amounts like ??

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I shall chime in. My daily activities vary GREATLY. From sitting on my butt with potato chips to biking, gardening, sports, etc. 90% of the time, my CGMS is right there with me. When it isn't I usually attribute it to my own lack of planning, meaning bad calibration timing or something

What are your HbA1c now and before CGMS?
Look in my signature, the first one was without CGMS, the recent one with 24/7. I have only been below 6.2 one other time in 20 years. And that one 5.9 I was the most restrictive and rigid with eating and scheduling.

In what way have you improved with the aid of CGMS?

I attained my 6.2 without rigidity and sticking to a set eating plan/schedule. It helped me identify patterns of how activity and food affect me.

I understand there are like super-diabetics out there, that can make this happen without the CGMS, but I am not one of them. It changed the way I control my diabetes, entirely.

Needless to say, I support it, and I look forward to its improvements and changes over the years. My insurance pays 100%, but I would pay out of pocket if needed.

Please do not take offense, but I personally think it is up to the user to tweak and perfect its use. My first trial of it was terrible, but I realize the mistakes I made. Second time around has been stellar. I know I will upset people with that comment, but it is my experience.

Sorry it hasn't worked out for you, but I can't see it being a hoax. Companies wouldn't invest millions into R and D and lobbying for a hoax. Sorry.

[condensr]

Count me in as one of the fortunate folks for whom the MM CGMS has worked very well. Every sensor I have used so far has maintained a satisfactory level of accuracy for at least 7 days. In fact, I've not had to remove a sensor due to accuracy issues, I always pull them to save from scar tissue before they go 'bad'.

It must have something to do with body chemistry.. It's fascinating how they tend to work great for some, and off the charts poorly for others.

[fgummett]

Just an observation, but did you notice that in every comparison test here the assumption is that the meter is right... we already know how far of the meter can be and yet we trust our lives to them :)

[Funnygrl]

Just an observation, but did you notice that in every comparison test here the assumption is that the meter is right... we already know how far of the meter can be and yet we trust our lives to them :)
I absolutely trust my main meter. I compare it to the lab everytime I go and it's usually within 1mg/dl. Yes, 1. I've tested other meters against it and found that they're right on too.

[fgummett]

I absolutely trust my main meter. I compare it to the lab everytime I go and it's usually within 1mg/dl. Yes, 1. I've tested other meters against it and found that they're right on too.Oh I trust my meter as well and likewise test against the lab. It was simply an observation :)

[JediSkipdogg]

Just an observation, but did you notice that in every comparison test here the assumption is that the meter is right... we already know how far of the meter can be and yet we trust our lives to them :)

And if you use that thought of mind then the CGM sensor can be EXTREMELY off. If the meter can be 20% off, sometimes more if contaminated, and then the CGM can be another 20% off, wow, an 89 on a meter and a 224 could both be wrong at the same time.

That's one reason I'm waiting. That and too many stories of it not working for certain people. From having numerous 3 day doctor office wears fail, I'm definitely in the no group. Until they are more proven, I'm not wasting my money or my insurance's money.

What I do find ironic is that it took probably 15 years for BG meters to become popular from visual read strips. It took about 10 years for pumps to become popular and people want one. Now a CGM comes out and it's popular on day 1? Where's the logic in that? No wonder insurance companies are still skeptical.

[SGT Shoutmore]

I must say that I am fairly disappointed in this thread, calling CGMS a "HOAX" is a libelious statement, fortunately, I am smarter than the average bear and wouldn't be disuaded in using CGMS by the OPs comments, however, this may not be the case with others. The bickering is unpleasant, at best.

I would like to remind the OP as well as a few other posters, not directing at names, it serves no purpose to berate anyone, that there is no device that is without flaws for as long as human hands are involved, things go wrong on occasion with anything MASS produced, while there are quality control starndards in place, no system is infallible.

While it is true that I do not work for Medtronic or any other such company involved with insulin pumps, CGMS or any such thing, nor do I play such an employee on TV, nor do I own stock in the same, there are only TWO reasons I do NOT employ CGMS:

1. My insurance will NOT pay for it.
2. I can not afford to CASH pay for it.

If any of those two reasons become contrary, I WILL use CGMS to:

Give me stronger tools to manage BG control to give me a better quality and longevity of life in my struggles to mitigate the complications of diabetes.

For those with less than stellar experiences with CGMS, I am truly sorry and you do have my sympathy, I would be left disappointed as well has I shared your experience. It is impossible to maintain use of any tool with which there is no confidence in it. That being said, be encouraged to continue to contact the manufacturer's support personnel to trouble shoot the issues present that you may use CGMS with accuracy and confidence, for your sucess serves to pave the way for us all in possible legislation that will force insurance to provide for CGMS for such patients with necessity for just this very thing, since my pancreas is simply stupid and refuses to do this for me, I find it necessary to have a device to take over this function yet remain without that device.

[Alice]

Is there a time period where they can be returned to the company if the results aren't stacking up? I'm just curious.

[JediSkipdogg]

Is there a time period where they can be returned to the company if the results aren't stacking up? I'm just curious.

Dexcom use to have a 30 day policy however it was extremely hard to get the money back. They'd basically ask if you tried 2 million items first before returning. I know Cyborg had a problem with them and his bank finally gave him the money back and went after Dexcom. I'm not sure if they still have that policy or not.

I wish he wouldn't have had such a bad experience then because I've heard the Dexcom Seven is superbly better than the original but since the company played games with him to much he's turned away from them. Pretty much the same way I am with MM and them playing games with me.

[NoelD]

Keezheekoni & NoelD & ...,

What are your daily activities and meal times and amounts
like ??
What are your HbA1c now and before CGMS?
In what way have you improved with the aid of CGMS?


Turtlea

1.) What are your daily activities and meal times and amounts
like ??

** My daily activities vary widely. Meal times,types of food, and amounts vary even more. I do not adhere to any type of schedule.

2.) What are your HbA1c now and before CGMS?

**Before: 6.3 was as low as I could get. Now, I stay from 4.8-5.1

3.) In what way have you improved with the aid of CGMS?

**Let's see, improved Blood Glucose control, less fingersticks, the ability to see what my BG is at any given time while knowing it is accurate. I see less than 10% variation between the sensor reading and a fingerstick 98% of the time. The ability to see that I am stable and jump on my motorcycle and ride without worrying so much about what my BG is doing. The low BG alarm and trending arrows have saved me from a few hypos. I am sure I could think of more, but I digress.

[NoelD]

I second the continue to pay out of pocket. I'm in love with my CGMS, it's given me even more freedom and control. There are times when I think it's psycho, but maybe I'm a little more lenient since I have lived with this disease since the dark ages of bleeding onto a test strip, counting down for one minute, wiping the blood off, inserting the strip into a meter to read, waiting another minute, etc. for a half-accurate reading.

I pay out of pocket too. Insurance picked up the kit on the first go-around. Now I pay for all supplies out of pocket, and will continue to do so gladly.

[Funnygrl]

Is there a time period where they can be returned to the company if the results aren't stacking up? I'm just curious.
MM doesn't accept returns on CGMS at all. If you want to use it, try and get a trial first so as not to be disappointed (and out $1,000 or more) if it doesn't work for you.

[turtlea]

Facts from MiniMed:

Sensor Features User Guide states very clearly on p47
Sensor Accuracy.

No trainer tells me that, as it should as it says on the first line!

Performance data is performed on subjects
who were more limited in their activities than what may
exist in home use. And there were provided with all
their MEALS.

RT can't deal with challenging-condition subjects
i.e. of more activities or with poor eating habits.

So I have no idea how those happy CGMs users
have coped with that. Dark age or not.

As I said if you have a set activities, provided meals,
CGMS works. However, it stops right there and does no more!

This was what I did the last 2 weeks,
(without doubt, you can repeat it with the similar results):

When my sensor says 105 and with two down arrows,
my meter is 49. I set my low alarm alert at 90,
how does the sensor feature catch any lows until I hit 40
or lower ? What I had done was that I got a hyper,
and treat it with a lot of insulin...

Same with hyper. When the sensor says 188 with two up
arrows just showing up, my meter is 315, and
my hyper alarm set at 200.
I calibrated after getting up and ate a big Sunday brunch
with friends.

You tell me how these sensor numbers and alarms tell me
much ??

You can't use CGMS in dynamic persons, whom MiniMed called challenging.

You tell me what's the use of it then?
It does not help us with managing our diabetes living.

And you remember how they have marketed it?

Reading the chapter 7 Sensor Accuracy in
"Sensor Features Features Guide", I found out
that RT only detect 49% hypo, and 53% hyper, many % of false alarms
...
and if those data come from their subjects of
limited activities and with provided meals?

How MUCH will it be FAR OFF for OUR daily home users?

FDA should not approved such a device of such crippled
limitation or restricted seriously about the product
marketing. They at the minimum have warning on such
devices. Theoretically you can suit them.

Turtlea

[fgummett]

When my sensor says 105 and with two down arrows, my meter is 49. I set my low alarm alert at 90, how does the sensor feature catch any lows until I hit 40 or lower ? What I had done was that I got a hyper, and treat it with a lot of insulin...

Isn't there a time delay between what your meter sees and what the sensor sees? What did the CGMS read 5-10 minutes later? It clearly knew you were quickly on the way down.

Also (same question?)
When the sensor says 188 with two up arrows just showing up, my meter is 315, and my hyper alarm set at 200. I calibrated after getting up and ate a big Sunday brunch with friends.

I must admit that just based on these two examples it does sound as if your control is not good... I hope I am wrong. The pump or CGMS are just tools and without you working at it as well the don't really do the job for you.

I'm really sorry this device is not working for you Turtlea but that does not mean it does not work... it clearly works well for some folks here on DF and others that I know personally. I intend to get one as soon as I can afford it :)

Perhaps you can tell us some more about yourself and your D..?

[SGT Shoutmore]

Is there a time period where they can be returned to the company if the results aren't stacking up? I'm just curious.


One would think there would at the very least be a replacement policy for a defective unit.

[SGT Shoutmore]

Facts from MiniMed:

Sensor Features User Guide states very clearly on p47
Sensor Accuracy.

No trainer tells me that, as it should as it says on the first line!

Performance data is performed on subjects
who were more limited in their activities than what may
exist in home use. And there were provided with all
their MEALS.

RT can't deal with challenging-condition subjects
i.e. of more activities or with poor eating habits.

So I have no idea how those happy CGMs users
have coped with that. Dark age or not.

As I said if you have a set activities, provided meals,
CGMS works. However, it stops right there and does no more!

This was what I did the last 2 weeks,
(without doubt, you can repeat it with the similar results):

When my sensor says 105 and with two down arrows,
my meter is 49. I set my low alarm alert at 90,
how does the sensor feature catch any lows until I hit 40
or lower ? What I had done was that I got a hyper,
and treat it with a lot of insulin...

Same with hyper. When the sensor says 188 with two up
arrows just showing up, my meter is 315, and
my hyper alarm set at 200.
I calibrated after getting up and ate a big Sunday brunch
with friends.

You tell me how these sensor numbers and alarms tell me
much ??

You can't use CGMS in dynamic persons, whom MiniMed called challenging.

You tell me what's the use of it then?
It does not help us with managing our diabetes living.

And you remember how they have marketed it?

Reading the chapter 7 Sensor Accuracy in
"Sensor Features Features Guide", I found out
that RT only detect 49% hypo, and 53% hyper, many % of false alarms
...
and if those data come from their subjects of
limited activities and with provided meals?

How MUCH will it be FAR OFF for OUR daily home users?

FDA should not approved such a device of such crippled
limitation or restricted seriously about the product
marketing. They at the minimum have warning on such
devices. Theoretically you can suit them.

Turtlea

Interesting! Source URL please? I'm lazy. :cool:

[solox316]

When my sensor says 105 and with two down arrows,
my meter is 49. I set my low alarm alert at 90,
how does the sensor feature catch any lows until I hit 40
or lower ? What I had done was that I got a hyper,
and treat it with a lot of insulin...

The sensor is always 15-20 minutes behind, one of the challenges to get used to. In periods of quickly changing readings, it is bound to be more off. It is likely that you were 108, 15-20 minutes prior.


Same with hyper. When the sensor says 188 with two up
arrows just showing up, my meter is 315, and
my hyper alarm set at 200.
I calibrated after getting up and ate a big Sunday brunch
with friends.

Herein lies human error. A calibration after a big meal will mess up more than just a small time period.

The CGMS recalculates using the last 4 readings, so one bad calibration can trigger a long cycle. There is no way around this, since it is relying on accurate, steady data, since it is not actually measuring capillary blood glucose, like a meter.

I do feel for you that it hasn't worked out. I hope you can see the positives it CAN offer. There are many success stories, just as there are horror stories too.

[RobiJo]

Isn't there a time delay between what your meter sees and what the sensor sees? What did the CGMS read 5-10 minutes later? It clearly knew you were quickly on the way down.

Also (same question?)


I must admit that just based on these two examples it does sound as if your control is not good... I hope I am wrong. The pump or CGMS are just tools and without you working at it as well the don't really do the job for you.

I'm really sorry this device is not working for you Turtlea but that does not mean it does not work... it clearly works well for some folks here on DF and others that I know personally. I intend to get one as soon as I can afford it :)

Perhaps you can tell us some more about yourself and your D..?

Exactly. Well put Dennis.



RT can't deal with challenging-condition subjects
i.e. of more activities or with poor eating habits.

So I have no idea how those happy CGMs users
have coped with that. Dark age or not.

My eating habits vary greatly. I eat anywhere between 50-200 carbs a day. I am by no means a low-carber. My activity level varies from sitting on the couch checking out DF to running, biking, and white water rafting. I have never been limited because of the sensor. In fact quite the opposite.

When my sensor says 105 and with two down arrows,
my meter is 49. I set my low alarm alert at 90,
how does the sensor feature catch any lows until I hit 40
or lower ? What I had done was that I got a hyper,
and treat it with a lot of insulin...

Not surprising. The 2 arrows are the clue you are dropping fast. There is about a 10-15 minute delay, the sensor reads interstitial fluid not blood. Sugar levels there are more delayed. Also your must know (because you read the manual so closely) that the number displayed is an AVERAGE of the last 5 minutes. (Also why you'll never get an odd number on the sensor.)

Same with hyper. When the sensor says 188 with two up
arrows just showing up, my meter is 315, and
my hyper alarm set at 200.
I calibrated after getting up and ate a big Sunday brunch
with friends.

Again same thing the 2 arrows are the clue. What did you eat? If you drank a glass of o.j. and had a donut.... I'm not surprised by the change. See above answer for why. (And did you forget to bolus????) Certainly whenever there are 2 arrows pointing up or down the meter and sensor will not match for nearly anyone. Your bg is changing rapidly, your blood will be more accurate than your interstitial fluid.


You tell me what's the use of it then?
It does not help us with managing our diabetes living.

It has helped me a lot. If you were expecting the sensor to fix your apparent poor control, it won't. Your failure to answer other members questions regarding your D and habits suggests this. The sensor is not an end all. If your control has such fast and variable bg swings, it's no wonder you can't get an accurate sensor reading. Your calibrations are all off. That said, my own and other members experiences have shown it calibrates better when your bg is around 70-120 or so. The I-sig number is also important.

Perhaps instead of insisting that the FDA pull it; why not ask for some suggestions on how you could try to make it work better for you? (Or perhaps about your control in general.)

[whoami]

I know the MM CGMS isn't perfect, but I discovered that a good chunk of my problems were from the insertion techniques. As soon as i found a good place to put it (front of my thighs, towards the outer sides), with a slight change in the angle (made it a bit shallower than the recommended one), the numbers are have been much more accurate for me.

as for how accurate it is, it's accurate enough that I don't do more than about 3 to 4 finger sticks a day when i have it on. (mind you, it took a while to get to the point where i trusted it, but once you get a feel for how it works, you'll know whether or not you can trust the numbers you see). I haven't change my erratic schedule, but i can certainly prevent the high earlier than before, and suspend, or reduce my basal to prevent a low.

this last bit is the best, no more yucky glucose tabs as often. :D

[Beowulf]

I have been on the pump for almost 2 months now and I started the CGMS about 2 weeks after that. I'll be the first to say that it is far from perfect. With that said, the whole point of the CGMS is to recognize trends. The MM rep, the online pump school, and my trainer all said that never treat a high or a low based solely on the CGMS readings. The sensor read interstatial (sp?) fluids, not blood. So the readings generally lag behind the fingerstick by about 15 min. For me, I can't feel a difference in a drop or an increase in my BG until about a hour into it. The CGMS tells me what is happening before it gets out of hand. It also shows me if my basal should be increased or decreased at a given time of day (trends). This allows my team (trainer and endo) to make adjustments where needed without having to test 20 times a day. My last BG check was 163. My sensor said 174. Well within 10% deviation. Heck, my four meters will vary by that much at any given time! So, I guess, count me in the "really likes the CGMS" group.

[PumperinCT]

Minimed CGMS is merely a hoax thing.

You will exhaust all your effort and time if not your life, in order to seep through CGMS benefit claimed to provide. MiniMed CGMS working with pump 522/722 is really dismally lame.

After these two weeks' intensive second try in May and lots of decent effective good help from this forum literally,
(my first try of CGMS is in Feb 2008, and it was a complete dismissal)
I got CGMS to work more properly this time.
CGMS is very demanding, subtle.
In order to derive any useful results from it, I will need to monitor MUCH MUCH MORE closely myself, MORE than I normally
do without aid of CGMs. If I can do that, my control will be just fine. CGMS does nothing to you unless you INTIMATELY know
what you have been doing with when to calibration, bolus, carbs,
timing, every nuances of managing your condition !!!

Shame for MiniMed that even do not point out how limited if not almost impossible to use CGMS in addition to
so many glitches such 'weak signal", constant false low/high alerts...

Check Sensor Feature Guide on
its Sensor Accuracy on page 47: it is dreadful. What's the use of CGMS if you can not be more active or can not be with "poor" eating habits ??
How many of us can eat at the same time every day and same food
and do the activities at the same time ??

No wonder I still couldn't get Aetna to cover CGMS, who has kept on insisting CGMS is experimental.

To me, CGMS is pretty close to nothing. It is no where to compare with using pump. Often many kind people compare CGMS learning curve
as learning using the pump. Pump is a real thing that works as
you expect. CGMS is bogus.

I guess I am about to drop the hike to this CGMS FALSE "promised land".

Hope there is such a thing next generation of CGMS coming soon.

Ironically,
Imagine if insurance does not pay current CGMS, maybe
Minimed will feel more urgent to invest in rolling out a TRUE
useful CGM.

BTW, I often wonder if we can stick to a regular schedule of activities, meals of set food choice and amount daily,
we can do very well control of our glucose level, couldn't we?

I wonder how people in this forum (with good sense of CGMS)
deal with their meals, activities, daily routines or how they manage them for their type 1 condition.
Could you be very flexible with food, activities with the aid of CGMS?
What are the major changes and monitoring your activities with and without using CGMS?

Turtlea
I hear your disappointment in the Minilink CGMS but understand that I'm also wondering why the loud and repeated tones of such. It sounds like there's a little more to your story than you're letting on. I'm hearing more good than bad about it and that's what I'm holding on to as I just received the transmittor and sensor and am excited about improving my control like RobiJo.

Good luck. Maybe there is a better way for YOU.

[Tyna]

The only part I'll disagree with is about the meters. I've done significant testing with several meters - lately with BD link, Aviva, Ultra 2, Advantage, Contour, and a Contour link. They are at best a guess. All are at least 10% off and I'd bet money I could show close to 20% variances with most.


That's why I like lifescan.....I have 3 different lifescan meters, and all of them will test within a tight range of each other. If I use the same blood lot for the meters, they all give exactly the same reading. (remember, you can test twice in a row with the same meter and get a different result, especially when you're over 16 mmol's). When I have good control (4-6 mmol's), all my lifescan meters give the same result. The BD link, well, it's way out there. Haven't even used the Contour link that they sent, would have preferred that Medtronic had sent me the Lifescan model that they are offering in the USA.