http://www.felinediabetes.com/FDMB/...-128-pmps-31-1-182-4-281.197486/#post-2210026
Nasty start due to skipped shot yesterday. Reduced dose to 4u.
Nasty start due to skipped shot yesterday. Reduced dose to 4u.
6/27 Silver AMPS 302 PMPS 193
- Thread starter Juliet
- Start date
- Status
carfurby (GA)
Member Since 2012
I'd say it is probably a little bit of both. I hope Silver comes back down and surfs on the new dose.
Thanks. The pink was too high but better that than lime green. It's a shame a skipped shot rocketed him so high but there was no alternative to skipping right?
Tracey&Jones (GA)
Member Since 2016
No alternative really. Stalling is not a option for you with your schedule and that lime green was not shootable. What was the number on your other meter? Just out of curiosity.
Hope he clears that bounce quickly and the new dose works for him. At least the NS drained that depot a bit.
Hope he clears that bounce quickly and the new dose works for him. At least the NS drained that depot a bit.
My schedule has changed and evenings my schedule has always been open. I could have stalled. I'll do that next time. The other meter reading (which is also a human meter despite inference I was comparing pet and human meters) was 8.2 (147) hence me not being worried last night.
Skipped shot drained depot given the pink at AMPS. Hoping he comes down a bit today.
Tracey&Jones (GA)
Member Since 2016
It would be...as long as you don't move the shot too far the morning after. If you have an half an hour to play with now...stalling may help you with knowing if you can shoot or not versus skipping. That always disrupts the depot and then you have to wait for it to stabilize again.
I would say that was more of a bounce then a complete drain of the depot.
Really that far apart?
Looking at your notes:
5.3 = 9.7
5.3 = 10.6
3.2 = 8.5
4.9 = 8.4
1.7 = 8.2
I wasn't expecting that big of a range of differences in the lower numbers and the fact the accucheck has very little variance between the numbers you got.
I would say that was more of a bounce then a complete drain of the depot.
Really that far apart?
Looking at your notes:
5.3 = 9.7
5.3 = 10.6
3.2 = 8.5
4.9 = 8.4
1.7 = 8.2
I wasn't expecting that big of a range of differences in the lower numbers and the fact the accucheck has very little variance between the numbers you got.
Yeah it varies a lot. Despite what people think it's not always that close together at low numbers. I can get 3.5 freestyle reading 10.5 on accucheck one day and 8.3 another. That's why I do a double check when unexpected numbers show up. You have to allow for the variance as well.
Tracey&Jones (GA)
Member Since 2016
I think I would trust the lower numbers...for my own piece of mind, I would get too freaked out.
And they are both human meters? Interesting.
And they are both human meters? Interesting.
I don't freak that easily. And yes accucheck and freestyle are both human meters.
Tracey&Jones (GA)
Member Since 2016
Have you ever checked yourself on both to see the difference?
That would be a waste of very expensive strips. Signing off from the chit chat as I am at work.
Oh I meant to answer - re the trusting the lower m numbers - why? When the higher numbers line up with the numbers the vet gets? I go with the higher number every time. Experience with both meters have shown Accucheck is more accurate and more in line with the lab. With my vet anyway. So if I see a low green or lime green I take a second test with the accucheck meter to help make my dosing decision.
Heading home now so hoping he is at least come down to blue.
carfurby (GA)
Member Since 2012
PussCatPrince - GA
Member Since 2017
I know Juliet is not a fan of this but I actually like that idea. Although it would cost strips it would make for a benchmark reading.
I said no so that means no. Period. Not sure why people want to jump in Silver's condo to stir things up. @carfurby I do appreciate your continued ongoing regular support. Jumping in out of the blue to stir things up isn't helpful.
- Status