Freestyle Flash: Beware inaccurate readings



B

Bay Area Dave

Guest
My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000 per year.

We have tried nearly every meter on the market and currently use Ultras and UltraSmarts. I used
the Ultra since it was introduced. Before that the Lifescan Fast Take and before that the
Lifescan Profile.

We have used Dex, Bd Logic, Accucheck Advantage, Accucheck Complete, Bayer Elite, Lifescan SureStep,
Precision QID, One Touch Basic and a couple older models of Precision.

ALL of the OneTouch meters give good results, although the older meters were calibrated to give
lower readings (the ole plasma vs whole blood argument).

Today we picked up a Flash and gave it a try. IT GETS A HUGE THUMBS DOWN! Readings from two people
were WAY higher than the consistent numbers obtained from our LifeScan UltraSmarts. 228 on the Flash
vs 164 on the UltraSmart. the other reading was 150 vs 125. The tests were repeated on the Ultras to
verify consistency (not that we had to second guess, but just wanted to be super sure). No way can
you control your bg if the meter reads so high. Glad I didn't push insulin to adjust for the bogus
228 reading!

Moral of the story: LifeScan meters are STILL the best. However, not ALL of the other meters I
listed in the 3rd paragraph are bad. The Bayer Elite was reasonably accurate. "Precision" is a
misnomer; all of their models gave the least accurate results.

Think twice before loading up on insulin based on the readings from the Flash.

Your health is more important that the few dollars you spent on a meter; I urge you to try a
LifeScan meter for YOUR improved DM control

NO, I'm not affliated in any way, blah, blah, blah. I'm just trying to help my fellow diabetics
who've not had an opportunity to try the various meters out.

dave
 
Bay Area Dave wrote:

> Today we picked up a Flash and gave it a try. IT GETS A HUGE THUMBS DOWN! Readings from two people
> were WAY higher than the consistent numbers obtained from our LifeScan UltraSmarts. 228 on the
> Flash vs 164 on the UltraSmart. the other reading was 150 vs 125. The tests were repeated on the
> Ultras to verify consistency (not that we had to second guess, but just wanted to be super sure).
> No way can you control your bg if the meter reads so high. Glad I didn't push insulin to adjust
> for the bogus 228 reading!
>
> Moral of the story: LifeScan meters are STILL the best.

Hi Dave,

It looks like you had decided the Flash was bad before you started testing.

Two samples per person are not enough to make an unbiased decision.

Practice your technique, collect more data and then report results,
--
Jim Dumas T1 4/86, background retinopathy, rarely hypoglycemic: <1/mo. lispro+R+U+NPH daily,
moderate exercise, typically <6% HbA1c
 
why not, moron?????????????

dave

Batezee wrote:

> You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>
> David
 
BTW, I take it you won't shell out $1,000 for the Guardian meter when it
becomes available from MiniMed?? :)

dave

Batezee wrote:

> You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>
> David
 
Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot.
"Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> why not, moron?????????????
>
> dave
>
> Batezee wrote:
>
> > You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
> >
> > David
 
nothing wrong with testing, twit bait.

dave

OldFartJAC wrote:

> Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>>why not, moron?????????????
>>
>>dave
>>
>>Batezee wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>>>
>>>David
>>>
>>
 
Don't criticize testing this often until you've walked in Bay Area Dave's shoes! Your experience is
not the same as his, no doubt. And not all people from the Bay Area are tree huggers!

OldFartJAC wrote:

> Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>>why not, moron?????????????
>>
>>dave
>>
>>Batezee wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>>>
>>>David
>>>
>>
 
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:51:19 GMT, Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote:

>My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000 per year.
>
>We have tried nearly every meter on the market and currently use Ultras and UltraSmarts. I used
>the Ultra since it was introduced. Before that the Lifescan Fast Take and before that the
>Lifescan Profile.
>
>We have used Dex, Bd Logic, Accucheck Advantage, Accucheck Complete, Bayer Elite, Lifescan
>SureStep, Precision QID, One Touch Basic and a couple older models of Precision.
>
>ALL of the OneTouch meters give good results, although the older meters were calibrated to give
>lower readings (the ole plasma vs whole blood argument).
>
>Today we picked up a Flash and gave it a try. IT GETS A HUGE THUMBS DOWN! Readings from two people
>were WAY higher than the consistent numbers obtained from our LifeScan UltraSmarts. 228 on the
>Flash vs 164 on the UltraSmart. the other reading was 150 vs 125. The tests were repeated on the
>Ultras to verify consistency (not that we had to second guess, but just wanted to be super sure).
>No way can you control your bg if the meter reads so high. Glad I didn't push insulin to adjust for
>the bogus 228 reading!
>
>Moral of the story: LifeScan meters are STILL the best. However, not ALL of the other meters I
>listed in the 3rd paragraph are bad. The Bayer Elite was reasonably accurate. "Precision" is a
>misnomer; all of their models gave the least accurate results.
>
>Think twice before loading up on insulin based on the readings from the Flash.
>
I talked to Therasense about the Flash last week. The Flash is just the Freestyle, but with a visual
facelift. Underneath the cover the Flash is the Freestyle. Same technology. I find my Freestyle is
more accurate than any Accu chek or Elite XL meter I have.

_____________________________________________
http://www.tcainternet.com/retired/index.html
 
oh, another thing, moron, checking 15 or so times a day doesn't mean checking 15 time from 9 to 5.
It includes checking late at night, and in the middle of the night...ie over a 24 hour period. Works
fine for me. If you don't like poking your tender little pinkies, no one's gonna care. You do YOUR
thing, and I'll do mine.

dave

OldFartJAC wrote:

> Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>>why not, moron?????????????
>>
>>dave
>>
>>Batezee wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>>>
>>>David
>>>
>>
 
In fairness Dave, you introduced the element of incredulity into this when, in your original post,
you said "My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000
per year" Most people would take that to mean that you were, yourself, flagging your testing regime
up as being somewhat extreme so don't act too shocked when they agree with you!!

Doug "Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> nothing wrong with testing, twit bait.
>
> dave
>
> OldFartJAC wrote:
>
> > Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>why not, moron?????????????
> >>
> >>dave
> >>
> >>Batezee wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
> >>>
> >>>David
> >>>
> >>
> >
 
luv2pump wrote:
| Don't criticize testing this often until you've walked in Bay Area Dave's shoes! Your experience
| is not the same as his, no doubt. And not all people from the Bay Area are tree huggers!

LOL... First time I heard that one.. Tree huggers... I have lived in the bay area every single day
of my 40 years and I have never hugged a tree, nor have I wanted to :) LOL

|
|
| OldFartJAC wrote:
|
|| Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
|| <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
||
||| why not, moron?????????????
|||
||| dave
|||
||| Batezee wrote:
|||
|||
|||| You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
||||
|||| David
 
it's only "extreme" to those who's bgs are so stable they don't need to test more often. count
yourself lucky. but don't count me as crazy because I test more often than you.

dave

Doug wrote:

> In fairness Dave, you introduced the element of incredulity into this when, in your original post,
> you said "My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000
> per year" Most people would take that to mean that you were, yourself, flagging your testing
> regime up as being somewhat extreme so don't act too shocked when they agree with you!!
>
> Doug "Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>nothing wrong with testing, twit bait.
>>
>>dave
>>
>>OldFartJAC wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
>>><[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>why not, moron?????????????
>>>>
>>>>dave
>>>>
>>>>Batezee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>>>>>
>>>>>David
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
 
oh, btw, it's not so "extreme" that insurance and my last 4 endos have
denied my RX's! :)

dave

Doug wrote:

> In fairness Dave, you introduced the element of incredulity into this when, in your original post,
> you said "My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000
> per year" Most people would take that to mean that you were, yourself, flagging your testing
> regime up as being somewhat extreme so don't act too shocked when they agree with you!!
>
> Doug "Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>nothing wrong with testing, twit bait.
>>
>>dave
>>
>>OldFartJAC wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Speaking of moron's, 15 times a day? Another granola bowl state idiot. "Bay Area Dave"
>>><[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>why not, moron?????????????
>>>>
>>>>dave
>>>>
>>>>Batezee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You test 15+ times each per day!!!!!!!!! Why???
>>>>>
>>>>>David
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
 
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:58:21 GMT, Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote:

>oh, btw, it's not so "extreme" that insurance and my last 4 endos have denied my RX's! :)
>
>dave
>
>Doug wrote:
>
>> In fairness Dave, you introduced the element of incredulity into this when, in your original
>> post, you said "My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right;
>> 10,000 per year" Most people would take that to mean that you were, yourself, flagging your
>> testing regime up as being somewhat extreme so don't act too shocked when they agree with you!!
>>

Stupid question - How much of the total cost of those 10,000 Ultra sticks do you cover yourself?
OTU sticks cost $84 per 100 sticks at Walmart. Your total annual cost is $8400 at walmart. At my
local independent pharmacy the same ultra sticks cost $112 per 100 last fall., putting your annual
cost at $11,200.
 
now that post of yours takes the cake!!! LOL!

I use about 7K strips per year; not 10K. Guess you didn't read my earlier posts very carefully
(that's ok-- I don't even TYPE them too carefully!) :)

I pay $240 per year for my approx. 7K strips. Wadda think about that, nameless? Ever heard of
insurance? You are from planet Earth, are you not? You crack me up with your weird assumptions and
errors reading the posts.

dave

Hi_Therre wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:58:21 GMT, Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>oh, btw, it's not so "extreme" that insurance and my last 4 endos have denied my RX's! :)
>>
>>dave
>>
>>Doug wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In fairness Dave, you introduced the element of incredulity into this when, in your original
>>>post, you said "My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right;
>>>10,000 per year" Most people would take that to mean that you were, yourself, flagging your
>>>testing regime up as being somewhat extreme so don't act too shocked when they agree with you!!
>>>
>
>
> Stupid question - How much of the total cost of those 10,000 Ultra sticks do you cover yourself?
> OTU sticks cost $84 per 100 sticks at Walmart. Your total annual cost is $8400 at walmart. At my
> local independent pharmacy the same ultra sticks cost $112 per 100 last fall., putting your annual
> cost at $11,200.
 
Dave -

Whoa! A dozen+ tests/day! You GO!

Thanks for the heads up on the Flash. I'll keep an eye out, but... I've been using it for about 3
months, 6-8 test/day and I have to say my experience has been very different from yours. The Flash
is the first Freestyle meter I've used.

I've had DM, type I for about 30 years and have been testing my bG for about the last 24-25 year. I
started with the original AccuChek.

I've used almost all the AccuCheks, One Touch, and Glucometer Elite meters. I've tried out lots of
other meters, but didn't end up using them.

I've been using the OT Ultra and UltraSmart most recently, before switching to the Freestyle Flash.
Everytime I try a new meter or switch, I do extensive side by side testing to get a feel for how
the new meter compares to the one I'm used to, i.e. learn how to interpret readings from the new
meter, to avoid dosing errors.

The Flash matched my UltraSmart better that any other side by side comparison I've done in the
past. It was not perfect, but it was pretty good. This was over 50 tests.

Also, when my bG is high or low, I retest from a diffferent finger, usually on the other hand. The
Flash has been much more consistant on retests then other meters. Don't get me wrong. *Everytime*
I've retested with *any* meter, the original reading was confirmed. No meter I've used varied so
much on a retest that it effected how I handled the situation. But the numbers on the Flash seemed
to be a bit closer together.

Finally, this is the only meter that has the strip area and screen illuminated. I find this very
useful, as I often test in bed after my wife has fallen asleep. It is also useful at the movies. I
do wish the strips has a window to watch the blood go in, but after using the Flash for a week, i
have good confidence about getting a good sample without much trouble or mess.

By no means should you use a meter with which you don't have full comfort and confidence, but to
condem an entire line based on two tests with a single meter is a little harsh. I'm not trying to
change your mind, but your experience may be a fluke.

Good luck and take care.

- Tere

Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000 per year.
>
> We have tried nearly every meter on the market and currently use Ultras and UltraSmarts. I used
> the Ultra since it was introduced. Before that the Lifescan Fast Take and before that the Lifescan
> Profile.
>
> We have used Dex, Bd Logic, Accucheck Advantage, Accucheck Complete, Bayer Elite, Lifescan
> SureStep, Precision QID, One Touch Basic and a couple older models of Precision.
>
> ALL of the OneTouch meters give good results, although the older meters were calibrated to give
> lower readings (the ole plasma vs whole blood argument).
>
> Today we picked up a Flash and gave it a try. IT GETS A HUGE THUMBS DOWN! Readings from two people
> were WAY higher than the consistent numbers obtained from our LifeScan UltraSmarts. 228 on the
> Flash vs 164 on the UltraSmart. the other reading was 150 vs 125. The tests were repeated on the
> Ultras to verify consistency (not that we had to second guess, but just wanted to be super sure).
> No way can you control your bg if the meter reads so high. Glad I didn't push insulin to adjust
> for the bogus 228 reading!
>
> Moral of the story: LifeScan meters are STILL the best. However, not ALL of the other meters I
> listed in the 3rd paragraph are bad. The Bayer Elite was reasonably accurate. "Precision" is a
> misnomer; all of their models gave the least accurate results.
>
> Think twice before loading up on insulin based on the readings from the Flash.
>
> Your health is more important that the few dollars you spent on a meter; I urge you to try a
> LifeScan meter for YOUR improved DM control
>
> NO, I'm not affliated in any way, blah, blah, blah. I'm just trying to help my fellow diabetics
> who've not had an opportunity to try the various meters out.
>
> dave
 
Terence, glad to hear SOMEONE is getting good results with the Flash. I have NO tolerance for
meters that are unreliable, so if I get a bad reading right out of the chute, I'm not gonna
belabor the point, and do more "tests". I return it and move on. If it works for you though, just
ignore my observations and enjoy the light feature, which is why I decided to give it a try in the
first place.

Another thing I didn't like is the size of the readout for the bg. I wish they had utilized more of
the screen for the readings. One thing you mentioned about the Flash caught my eye too; the lack of
a confirmation window on the strips.

Anyway, as they say different strokes for different folks... :)

dave

Terence Griffin wrote:

> Dave -
>
> Whoa! A dozen+ tests/day! You GO!
>
> Thanks for the heads up on the Flash. I'll keep an eye out, but... I've been using it for about 3
> months, 6-8 test/day and I have to say my experience has been very different from yours. The
> Flash is the first Freestyle meter I've used.
>
> I've had DM, type I for about 30 years and have been testing my bG for about the last 24-25 year.
> I started with the original AccuChek.
>
> I've used almost all the AccuCheks, One Touch, and Glucometer Elite meters. I've tried out lots
> of other meters, but didn't end up using them.
>
> I've been using the OT Ultra and UltraSmart most recently, before switching to the Freestyle
> Flash. Everytime I try a new meter or switch, I do extensive side by side testing to get a feel
> for how the new meter compares to the one I'm used to, i.e. learn how to interpret readings from
> the new meter, to avoid dosing errors.
>
> The Flash matched my UltraSmart better that any other side by side comparison I've done in the
> past. It was not perfect, but it was pretty good. This was over 50 tests.
>
> Also, when my bG is high or low, I retest from a diffferent finger, usually on the other hand.
> The Flash has been much more consistant on retests then other meters. Don't get me wrong.
> *Everytime* I've retested with *any* meter, the original reading was confirmed. No meter I've
> used varied so much on a retest that it effected how I handled the situation. But the numbers on
> the Flash seemed to be a bit closer together.
>
> Finally, this is the only meter that has the strip area and screen illuminated. I find this very
> useful, as I often test in bed after my wife has fallen asleep. It is also useful at the movies.
> I do wish the strips has a window to watch the blood go in, but after using the Flash for a week,
> i have good confidence about getting a good sample without much trouble or mess.
>
> By no means should you use a meter with which you don't have full comfort and confidence, but to
> condem an entire line based on two tests with a single meter is a little harsh. I'm not trying to
> change your mind, but your experience may be a fluke.
>
> Good luck and take care.
>
> - Tere
>
> Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>My wife and I go though, on average, about 10,000 strips per year. That's right; 10,000 per year.
>>
>>We have tried nearly every meter on the market and currently use Ultras and UltraSmarts. I used
>>the Ultra since it was introduced. Before that the Lifescan Fast Take and before that the Lifescan
>>Profile.
>>
>>We have used Dex, Bd Logic, Accucheck Advantage, Accucheck Complete, Bayer Elite, Lifescan
>>SureStep, Precision QID, One Touch Basic and a couple older models of Precision.
>>
>>ALL of the OneTouch meters give good results, although the older meters were calibrated to give
>>lower readings (the ole plasma vs whole blood argument).
>>
>>Today we picked up a Flash and gave it a try. IT GETS A HUGE THUMBS DOWN! Readings from two people
>>were WAY higher than the consistent numbers obtained from our LifeScan UltraSmarts. 228 on the
>>Flash vs 164 on the UltraSmart. the other reading was 150 vs 125. The tests were repeated on the
>>Ultras to verify consistency (not that we had to second guess, but just wanted to be super sure).
>>No way can you control your bg if the meter reads so high. Glad I didn't push insulin to adjust
>>for the bogus 228 reading!
>>
>>Moral of the story: LifeScan meters are STILL the best. However, not ALL of the other meters I
>>listed in the 3rd paragraph are bad. The Bayer Elite was reasonably accurate. "Precision" is a
>>misnomer; all of their models gave the least accurate results.
>>
>>Think twice before loading up on insulin based on the readings from the Flash.
>>
>>Your health is more important that the few dollars you spent on a meter; I urge you to try a
>>LifeScan meter for YOUR improved DM control
>>
>>NO, I'm not affliated in any way, blah, blah, blah. I'm just trying to help my fellow diabetics
>>who've not had an opportunity to try the various meters out.
>>
>>dave
 
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:40:42 GMT, Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote:

>now that post of yours takes the cake!!! LOL!
>
>I use about 7K strips per year; not 10K. Guess you didn't read my earlier posts very carefully
>(that's ok-- I don't even TYPE them too carefully!) :)
>
>I pay $240 per year for my approx. 7K strips. Wadda think about that, nameless? Ever heard of
>insurance? You are from planet Earth, are you not? You crack me up with your weird assumptions and
>errors reading the posts.
>
>dave
>
I don't have insurance. I purchase sticks off ebay for $15 - $30 per 100 sticks. When you pay for
things yourself, you eliminate all the foolishness real quick. Diabetes gets real expensive.

_____________________________________________
http://www.tcainternet.com/retired/index.html
 
what brand do you get for $30? I anticipate that at some point in the
future I won't have insurance. Hope you can get Ultras for that! :)

dave

Hi_Therre wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:40:42 GMT, Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>now that post of yours takes the cake!!! LOL!
>>
>>I use about 7K strips per year; not 10K. Guess you didn't read my earlier posts very carefully
>>(that's ok-- I don't even TYPE them too carefully!) :)
>>
>>I pay $240 per year for my approx. 7K strips. Wadda think about that, nameless? Ever heard of
>>insurance? You are from planet Earth, are you not? You crack me up with your weird assumptions and
>>errors reading the posts.
>>
>>dave
>>
>
> I don't have insurance. I purchase sticks off ebay for $15 - $30 per 100 sticks. When you pay for
> things yourself, you eliminate all the foolishness real quick. Diabetes gets real expensive.
>
> _____________________________________________
> http://www.tcainternet.com/retired/index.html