Using multiple meters

[flowerbabe68]

I read about many of this forum's users,having more than one glucose meters. Which one do you believe? Have you compared readings and found one to be more reliable than others? I just got a second meter and while it is close to my original meter, the second one still varies 5-10 points. I realize there is a 20% variance in any meter, but how do you keep from driving yourself nuts trying to get the lowest readings. That thing about driving yourself nuts is a very short trip somedays. Just trying to get comfortable with this diabetes thing. Thanks for any info.

[art]

I have 3
2 contours and a one touch.
With both contours I came across a batch of bum strips and got weird readings.
So far the one touch is accurate as far as I know.
Part of the meter thing is faith. You have to believe whatever meter you're reading is accurate. Don't second guess it . Unless you haven't eaten anything for 12 hours and it reads 350.
Don't start comparing readings between meters. No 2 will read exactly the same number except as an accident.
Trust the meter. Unless it goes crazy. And you'll know if that happens

Art

[sumi]

Hi flower,
I can certainly relate to you. Numbers (low ones) can cheer me up on a dreary day and vice versa. Eventually, I think we must just accept that 'about' is as close as we are going to get. It isn't easy, but since I have only once gotten two identical readings, I just average the two and move on. Unless your meter is showing a severe or unexpected high or low, it is really only of interest to you personally. I would love more accurate meters, but think I have accepted their limitations.

[foxl]

20% isa huge margin of error. If you use one meter most of the time you know if you are lower, or higher, and that is about all. SIGH.

Even in a research lab, you would NEVER publish assay data with that much error.

Now, to figure out WHY the error and variation is there ... relative humidity? Barometric pressure? Whaaaaaaaat? You could at least mentally compensate for some of it.

[flowerbabe68]

I so agree,Foxl, that the variance should be much tighter. I appreciate the feedback from all of you. It lessens my frustrations knowing others are having the same questions. Thanks again.

[foxl]

I so agree,Foxl, that the variance should be much tighter. I appreciate the feedback from all of you. It lessens my frustrations knowing others are having the same questions. Thanks again.

I do suspect it would increase costs to US, by quite a bit, though.

[CSTJ4]

I recently received my last A1c results and it was 5.6. Not disappointed really, but for the last three months I have tested a lot and only had a total of three readings over 94. And with 5.6 being about 122, I now question just how accurte the meters are. I am sure other variables could come into play but just seems that an average of 122 is way too high.


Charles

[foxl]

I recently received my last A1c results and it was 5.6. Not disappointed really, but for the last three months I have tested a lot and only had a total of three readings over 94. And with 5.6 being about 122, I now question just how accurte the meters are. I am sure other variables could come into play but just seems that an average of 122 is way too high.


Charles

You never know what your BG does while you are asleep, though ... ;)

I suspect A1c and average blood glucose do not correlate that closely. A big factor in A1cs is the rate of red cell turnover, for instance.

[Caravaggio]

When you go for your next A1c test, check your BG at about the same time your blood is drawn for your lab BG test to see how close the meter you are using to the lab result.

[zoelula]

I agree with you, Art. I have two meters simply because I bought the accucheck Aviva in the U.S. then moved to Guatemala where I couldn't get test strips for it so bought an asencia contour. I switch back and forth as I get test strips mailed from the states or buy them here. I never compare readings and I never think about the variability I've heard about. Unless something seems very off I just take the meter I'm using at face value. It would give me a headache to do otherwise!

[Hammer]

I don't think it really matters what meter you are using. If you take a fasting reading and it says 100, then you take a reading two hours after you've eaten and it says 150, then you know that your BG levels went up by 50 points after you ate. You can't be sure what your exact readings are, but you know that you went up by 50 points, and even then, it can be off by as much as 20%.

It's just like your bathroom scale. If you weight 200 pounds today, then after dieting and exercise, you weigh 190 pounds two weeks later, you know that you've lost 10 pounds, but you don't really know what you weight...only that you've lost 10 pounds.

Until they come up with a more reliable testing device, we can only guess at what our actual numbers are.