Glucometers that need the least blood?
View Full Version : Glucometers that need the least blood?
I've got the early signs of gestational diabetes and need
to monitor. I borrowed an accucheck from a friend, but
the meter takes way too much blood. I used to use the
Beyer elite for my diabetic cat...But that was a couple
of years ago.
which glucometer do you guys like teh best, and which
needs the least blood? I don't wnat to sit there milking
my finger.
thanks
LifeScan One Touch Ultra meter!!!
or if you are a PDA sort of person..... One Touch
UltraSmart meter
for a non-biased opinion check out www.mendosa.com and look
up his meter review section
the best meter is the one your insurance company will pay
for the strips on
kate
--
Join us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet
/server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More
info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/
"Sherry" <sherry@panix.com> wrote in message
news:b721ff28.0406300858.b2ae9f7@posting.google.com...
> I've got the early signs of gestational diabetes and need
> to monitor. I borrowed an accucheck from a friend, but
> the meter takes way too much blood. I used to use the
> Beyer elite for my diabetic cat...But that was a couple
> of years ago.
>
> which glucometer do you guys like teh best, and which
> needs the least blood? I don't wnat to sit there milking
> my finger.
>
> thanks
Two meters that I use require very little blood. Both meters
have strips that utilize a "sipper straw" technique to suck
the blood into the target zone. One meter is the Glucometer
Elite by Bayer that uses the Ascens strips. The other is the
Accu-Chek Advantage by Roche that uses the Accu-Chek Comfort
Curve strip.
Of the two meters, I prefer the Bayer, as it is more compact
and offers an average reading. I also think that the size of
the meter is easier to handle when taking a reading.
Both meters' strips are about the same price retail, but
my medical plan gets some kind of discount for the Accu-
Chek strips and encourages me to use them by offering a
lower co-pay.
I've used other meters that require you to drop blood on a
target. These strips require more blood.
"Sherry" <sherry@panix.com> wrote in message
news:b721ff28.0406300858.b2ae9f7@posting.google.com...
> I've got the early signs of gestational diabetes and need
> to monitor. I borrowed an accucheck from a friend, but
> the meter takes way too much blood. I used to use the
> Beyer elite for my diabetic cat...But that was a couple
> of years ago.
>
> which glucometer do you guys like teh best, and which
> needs the least blood? I don't wnat to sit there milking
> my finger.
>
> thanks
Well then try your pecker.
Sherry wrote:
> I've got the early signs of gestational diabetes and need
> to monitor. I borrowed an accucheck from a friend, but
> the meter takes way too much blood. I used to use the
> Beyer elite for my diabetic cat...But that was a couple
> of years ago.
>
> which glucometer do you guys like teh best, and which
> needs the least blood? I don't wnat to sit there milking
> my finger.
>
> thanks
UltraSmart or ULtra, by Lifescan.
dave
sherry@panix.com (Sherry) wrote in message news:<b721ff28.0406300858.b2ae9f7@posting.google.com>...
> I've got the early signs of gestational diabetes and need
> to monitor. I borrowed an accucheck from a friend, but
> the meter takes way too much blood. I used to use the
> Beyer elite for my diabetic cat...But that was a couple
> of years ago.
>
> which glucometer do you guys like teh best, and which
> needs the least blood? I don't wnat to sit there milking
> my finger.
>
> thanks
I have the Accu-Chek Advantage my study provided and I
recently purchased a Freestyle, too, since they had an
introductory offer. Both are fine--the Accu-Chek is a bit
easier to use at first, but once I got used to the Freestyle
(uses smaller amount of blood), it's less painful and you
can test in many more body locations. I have to test in a
hidden place, though, if I don't care to use a finger,
because it leaves tiny welts. I checked the 2 brands against
each other, and the difference in numbers is negligible. I
like the idea of the new one with the drum--that sounds like
it would simplify things considerably. CVS's store brand
costs about 1/5 the suggested retail price of the name brand
if you want to save money!
--pinecone
On 01 Jul 2004 01:08:54 GMT, bichud@aol.com (Bichud) wrote:
>Well then try your pecker.
Who are you Bichud? In '99 it was Diane C, in '00 it was Joe
and later Jay, all seemed like genuine T2s. Lately it's been
simple abusive one-liners. Playing with the parent's
computer are we?
Alan
--
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:57:30 +1000, Alan <loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On 01 Jul 2004 01:08:54 GMT, bichud@aol.com (Bichud)
> wrote:
>
> >Well then try your pecker.
>
> Who are you Bichud? In '99 it was Diane C, in '00 it was
> Joe and later Jay, all seemed like genuine T2s. Lately
> it's been simple abusive one-liners. Playing with the
> parent's computer are we?
>
Or something else!
Cheers . . . JC
I never fails once a butt-head always a butt-head - I hope
you never become a diabetic!
Jim
"JC" <jhoppyc@westnet.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:nrb7e0d5nvs3evloflbcmkai3407d4c3j0@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:57:30 +1000, Alan
<loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
> > On 01 Jul 2004 01:08:54 GMT, bichud@aol.com (Bichud)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Well then try your pecker.
> >
> > Who are you Bichud? In '99 it was Diane C, in '00 it was
> > Joe and later Jay, all seemed like genuine T2s. Lately
> > it's been simple abusive one-liners. Playing with the
> > parent's computer are we?
> >
> Or something else!
>
>
> Cheers . . . JC
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:33:45 -0500, "Jim" <helieco@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I never fails once a butt-head always a butt-head - I hope
>you never become a diabetic!
>
>Jim
>
>"JC" <jhoppyc@westnet.com.invalid> wrote in message
>news:nrb7e0d5nvs3evloflbcmkai3407d4c3j0@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:57:30 +1000, Alan
><loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> > On 01 Jul 2004 01:08:54 GMT, bichud@aol.com (Bichud)
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >Well then try your pecker.
>> >
>> > Who are you Bichud? In '99 it was Diane C, in '00 it
>> > was Joe and later Jay, all seemed like genuine T2s.
>> > Lately it's been simple abusive one-liners. Playing
>> > with the parent's computer are we?
>> >
>> Or something else!
>>
>>
>> Cheers . . . JC
>
Um, Jim, who were you addressing?
Cheers, Alan
--
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 07:46:13 +1000, Alan
<loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:33:45 -0500, "Jim"
><helieco@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I never fails once a butt-head always a butt-head - I hope
>>you never become a diabetic!
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>"JC" <jhoppyc@westnet.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:nrb7e0d5nvs3evloflbcmkai3407d4c3j0@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:57:30 +1000, Alan
>><loralweightandcarbs@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On 01 Jul 2004 01:08:54 GMT, bichud@aol.com (Bichud)
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >Well then try your pecker.
>>> >
>>> > Who are you Bichud? In '99 it was Diane C, in '00 it
>>> > was Joe and later Jay, all seemed like genuine T2s.
>>> > Lately it's been simple abusive one-liners. Playing
>>> > with the parent's computer are we?
>>> >
>>> Or something else!
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers . . . JC
>>
>Um, Jim, who were you addressing?
>
>Cheers, Alan
He was responding to JC, Alan, but top posting instead of
abiding by protocol.
Just a note that might be of use to you when reading
vague posts.
When people fail to post correctly and don't clearly
indicate who they are replying to, particularly when they
clip all text, open full headers and double click on the
last message id in the references list. That will bring up
the message that they actually responded to.
If it is was a message that you haven't downloaded, and if
you are online at the time, Agent will find the original
message for you. So will Google.
Or don't bother reading them if they can't be bothered
posting correctly.
Regards
David
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 14:22:33 +1000, J David Anderson
<jdavidanderson_@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Um, Jim, who were you addressing?
>>
>>Cheers, Alan
>
>He was responding to JC, Alan, but top posting instead of
>abiding by protocol.
>
>Just a note that might be of use to you when reading
>vague posts.
>
>When people fail to post correctly and don't clearly
>indicate who they are replying to, particularly when they
>clip all text, open full headers and double click on the
>last message id in the references list. That will bring up
>the message that they actually responded to.
>
>If it is was a message that you haven't downloaded, and if
>you are online at the time, Agent will find the original
>message for you. So will Google.
>
>Or don't bother reading them if they can't be bothered
>posting correctly.
>
>Regards
>
>David
Yep. I did understand that.
However, I myself occasionally address the OP through
a subsequent poster; I was hoping he may have been
doing the same.
Storm in a teacup anyway, I suspect Bichud junior won't be
back for a little while. At least I hope so.
Cheers, Alan
--
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
