I’m with you (G6 since June last year), except for the first day. Wacky readings, sometimes so bad I’ve needed to restart the sensor, but great after that. Each sensor has to prove itself to me, and only then will I trust it enough to treat without fingersticks. I try to still calibrate 1-2 times per day to be sure but this gives me the freedom to not bother with test strips when I’m eating out or having lunch in the office.
I don’t think it’s rude, but I do think there’s also a little bit of a confounder in the dataset. A person who tests 20 times a day is someone who is willing to interrupt their life to do that extra step. We are a lot less meticulous in how we deal wth Samson’s blood sugar because it’s not our body and we have to balance his needs to be a kid with our responsibility as parents to keep him as healthy and safe as possible (and his brothers as healthy and safe as possible too). So I don’t doubt that if I were to do finger sticks 20 times a day I could probably get Samson’s A1C down BUT I’d also then be a person who is making lots of other decisions differently – I’d probably wait for him to come into range to eat 100 percent of the time, limit his intake to foods we think are easier to handle, wouldn’t choose to sleep through “high” alarms at 150 or 160 at night, and would set alarms on my phone so that I never, ever miss that second follow-up bolus for a long-digesting meal, for instance. So I think to some extent the sample is skewed by the fact that people who are choosing such a rigorous level of diabetes management have the mindset and other types of behavior necessary to maintain tight control.
For what it’s worth, in my CGM in the Cloud and Looped groups on Facebook, I see tons of people posting flatlines with minimal effort using DIY closed-loop algorithms. I suspect for every one person with a 5.0 A1C there’s another 10 in there with a 6.0 to 7.0, but it’s definitely possible to achieve very low A1Cs with a totally different approach than finger-pricks all the time.
It has been done!
Yes indeed it was a bit rude of me. But after you get poked in the eye, you sometimes respond in a less-than-pleasant manner. It’s not something I would have thrown out there without the provocation.
I was accused of being deceptive. I am not that. I have always spoken here with complete honesty. Stating everything to the best of my knowledge.
I try very hard to help people on their needs. I don’t spout simple answers, I always try to engage with them and ask pertinent questions so I can give them the best answer possible.
So my response came from less-than-ideal feelings at the time.
My Dexcom is showing a straight drop down thru 91 and I appear to be a gentle slope thru 141. It’s drunk again.
ETA: now it’s jumped up 15 points, then totally lost its arrow. It has no clue what’s happening.
Apology and explanation, to Eric and all:
Eric and all, it’s abundantly clear that I wrote a very bad post, and I apologize without reservation. I assert that Eric has a stellar reputation here, and he has vast knowledge and exceptional generosity in sharing it selflessly to help us. I know of no instance in which Eric has shown malice or deception.
This thread is called “One of these things is not like the other” and opens with a photo of 3 sets of sunglasses and one hat. For me that set a playful tone. It was followed by a photo of a CGM and two meters, with the CGM looking completely different. I shook my head in amusement because we can see the darndest things on CGM graphs depending on when we look. I supposed that Eric had measured after an IV correction for a persistent rise, and was showing us an outrageous (“outrageous” as in funny, not malicious) tableau. And I did shake my head in amusement, as I remembered a photo he posted quite a while ago that showed a CGM with a down arrow together with a meter with an up arrow, and the numbers were quite different. I commented in that thread and he indicated that yes, probably this photo was at a BG turning point. So I thought the photo here was just another example and said nothing. Initially. But then I got to thinking about the considerable influx of new members, and what this photo would teach someone who doesn’t have experience with CGMs. To my considerable regret, I had overlooked or forgotten posts like Some Dexcom disappointment and Sometimes acting on Dexcom data really needs a fingerprick which seriously point out that CGM is a YDMV technology and it works poorly for some. Instead I was thinking of posts like Why is Sam trying to kill me? that feature “blooper photos”. Anyway, there are obvious conclusions that a new member could draw from the photo of a CGM showing a wildly different story than a pair of meters. Things like CGM technology is dangerously bad, it never should have been approved by the FDA, and closed-loop systems are more likely to kill than to help until somebody manages to invent a good CGM. I was pushing for an explanation of the photo’s context because it truly hadn’t entered my mind that the CGM could be so persistently and grossly wrong, as it apparently is for several members. I will regret for a long time that what I posted was so poorly written and grounded on such incorrect assumptions that it was widely received as an attack on Eric and an indictment of his honesty and motives. Even after DN posted her reply which prompted me to re-read what I had written, I still didn’t get it.
Eric, I was way wrong and I’m truly sorry for the grief I caused you and the other members.
One of these guys in the group hug is clearly not like the others either.
And for the ladies looking for hugs…can you find what’s different?
@bkh, thank you for apologizing, and for the record I think you also have a great reputation around here, and I personally hope you keep posting.
Well in the guy photo it is really obvious, because only one guy is wearing the hat backwards, but for the life of me, i can’t figure out what is different on the girls picture. I guess one isn’t a blonde.
No, one has on a tank top!
Thanks @bkh, I appreciate the apology.
And I also want to apologize. My reply to you was not polite. I just reacted in response and did not measure my words carefully.
My original post was intended to be a bit lighthearted. The image struck me as funny because of the huge disparity, and I immediately thought of the Sesame Street song.
Anyway, I am sorry to you also. No worries, let’s move forward.
Check your txt messsge
Go to bed
This is a tough way to communicate with one another over even the most simplest of subjects… and this is not a simple subject.
I really hope you don’t, @bkh. You have so much good stuff to share… I vote for everyone just getting back to it.
You go to bed.
I’m socializing here.
Only kidding. I’ve already got one eye shut.
I am 100% with Nicky!
Small incident between two great members, solely due to the narrow bandwidth type of communications due to the inherent nature of forum posts.
Let’s forget and move on!
First and foremost we are people with our own individualized experiences that shape our perception of reality. It is also super difficult at times to infer the tone of a post without the normal audio/verbal clues and body language, so many myself included often assume the tone of a post based on previous interactions and posts. We make mistakes. Mistakes are OK and even valuable if we learn from them and progress forward.
I personally value the posts and input from both of you. I would be extremely sad if either @bkh or @Eric felt alienated to the point of not participating in the future. Your sometimes differing opinions are what provides balance and levity here. I wish to selfishly thank you both for finding a middle ground. And out…
Woke up and tested wirh my one touch verio. 28. Holy crap. That would have been a new record. So of course I start freaking out. “Do I feel ok? Am I thinking clearly ?” Yes, yes. “Should I check again” yes. Tested again with another meter— 75. Tested again with first meter— 72.
Clearly a bad strip
Sweat or water on your fingers mixing with the blood can also give a false low.
@Sam, I found irony in the autocorrect making “verio”, verily…actually, maybe “verio” is a good moniker…
I washed my hands first… I always do when I first wake up cuz god knows where they’ve been