I’m assuming they mean not using a meter aside from required calibrations. Otherwise, yeah, doesn’t work.
à la docdao
Just hypothetical, a thought exercise on how much you value each. Assuming we didn’t count calibrations…which would you pick if you could only have one?
Calibrations count.
So if it is CGM or meter than we must be talking about the G7 that doesn’t need calibrations.
So I choose G7.
ha ha ha
On your poll see what the correlation is when factor in “parent” vs “self”.
Might be some significance there…
2 Likes
Interesting. You have a good point, parent vs self.
Excellent point. Although I’ve determined a cgm really isn’t for me as a full time strategy, if either of my kids had diabetes I am almost certain I’d insist on a cgm for them…
The value of the CGM, assuming that it is accurate, is the trend line it provides, whether the numbers are off from the actual fingersticks. Even with fingersticks BG, I tend to make my decisions based on the circumstances, when did most recentlyI bolus, are the BG’s increasing or decreasing…etc.
The CGM is possibly most useful in determining basal dosage, just my opinion.
As many have pointed out, the leanness of the person, and also how well we are hydrated all affect the Dexcom readings because it’s measuring ISF, not BG directly. In a different thread, it was pointed out that Dexcom seems to have difficulty with accuracy if there is a large delta in BG. I found this to be my experience as well. So, I was often needlessly “frightened” by a low that was not a low. In my case, sleeping with it was problematic. Everytime I rolled over it, the readings became inaccurate and never recovered. So I am done with it. It did provide useful trend information.
This is exactly what I have been preaching since Dexcom came on the scene in April, 2006. I have been using it continuously, every day, since that time.
It has gotten significantly more accurate since that time, but its basic value continues to be the trend line, for which I find it invaluable and indispensable.
1 Like
As an engineer, and a PWD, I react to “a series of data”; not an isolated data point. When I make a decision to correct a BG, it is also with additional information such as, when did I last bolus, eat carbs…etc.
When medical healthcare professionals make decisions as to whether we ought to be “medicated” for high blood pressure or cholesterol, I also think those decisions ought to be based on a “trend”. Are the blood pressure, cholesterol rising over time? Sometimes, it would seem that there is the arbitrary guideline of cholesterol over 200, put the patient on lipitor (or its equivalent). I question the prudence of such practices. All “drugs” are not without potential ramifications. Any thoughts? Is it worthwhile to have a new thread about this?
1 Like
Yes!
I agree about reacting to a series of data not an isolated point. I have said before, no two BG measurements are the same, regardless of the number. You can be going up or down, fast or slow, with a lot of IOB or minimal, with unlimited access to food or limited access to food. You need to act based on all the factors.
Would love to hear your thoughts on medicating for cholesterol or blood pressure.
I started a new thread, To Medicate or not to medicate for cholesterol and blood pressure.
1 Like
I started a new thread: To Medicate or not to medicate for cholesterol and blood pressure.
it was the trend line that caused me endless panic; as soon as that arrow went straight up or down i became a mess. and i agree with eric about dealing with customer service and them always asking if i were lean. i couldn’t even put the darn thing on my abdomen; i had to wear it on my tushy 
and even then it didn’t work more than 3 days. all i ever got were ???
and i know that i have said this before on this thread, but i just felt that it needed more emphasis.
I always knew there was a good reason to be fat. Like I,'ve always said, it’s “survival of the fattest”.
1 Like
ha ha ha. my kind will soon be extinct. 