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.
1 Like
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.
9 Likes
Nicky…
-
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.
3 Likes
You go to bed.
I’m socializing here.
Only kidding. I’ve already got one eye shut.
1 Like
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!
6 Likes
@Eric, @bkh, glad to see you both talking to each other again.
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…
11 Likes
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
3 Likes
Sweat or water on your fingers mixing with the blood can also give a false low.
1 Like
@Sam, I found irony in the autocorrect making “verio”, verily…actually, maybe “verio” is a good moniker…
3 Likes
I washed my hands first… I always do when I first wake up cuz god knows where they’ve been
3 Likes
Three of these things is not like the other (part 2)
Not as dramatic a difference as Sam’s, but here’s a test of the three BG meters that I have strips for taken at the same time, same finger washed and dried between each. A CGM can be calibrated, and is designed to be calibrated. A meter isn’t so which one should we trust:
1 Like
The reality of the current situation is that you trust you to interpret the results and decide on a dose. Honestly, I just look at the error as a part of the equation. i.e. if you get blood values that change your dose by 1-2 units, then that is part of why sometimes the dose works and sometimes it doesn’t (assuming you calculate correctly). I think many of us (me included) don’t completely understand how much this slop in the bg measurements contribute to the success or failure of any one treatment decision. Thankfully the current regimen appears to have enough accuracy to avoid people dropping dead all the time, while able to maintain near normal blood sugar values.
5 Likes
the one that has the highest accuracy or least accuracy according to meter reviews I guess?
yep! This is how I see it too (even think of it as ‘slop’). The system has slop. If the magnitude of the meter/CGM error is, on average, lower than all the other random unknowns that affect things (Carb counting, hormones, weird site issues that are invisible), I just feel like it’s not worth losing sleep over most of the time.
4 Likes
I completely agree. The point is that there is uncertainty and variation in any hardware giving a test result, so getting all upset about a CGM is no more warranted than getting all upset about whatever meter you are using.
4 Likes
I agree it’s not worth getting upset about. Although I do think the error in both of these types of devices isn’t purely random. It’s biased, so that, for instance, BG meters on average might tend to have more scatter than CGM, any given BG meter might have a directional bias but also maybe not, and you’d have to know that about your meter first, and CGM tends to be much more accurate in some situations but most inaccurate in specific ranges of BG and when numbers are changing fast. And some sensors suck and some are awesome, etc. So it’s very possible for a person to glean information from the types of error they tend to see and then use that to make the best decisions on when to use one or the other, etc.
6 Likes