5/19/17Sprocket, AMPS/333.+3.75/252.+7.25/263.PMPS/237.+2.5/270.Another reduction earned

Status
Not open for further replies.
Congrats on the reduction. But, I am a little confused as to why last night you gave Sprocket a reduction last night to 2.5 ? The lower number you got last night was no doubt from the higher depot of 3 units. With giving another reduction this close this AM , you could see the reduction fail.
 
Bobbie And Bubba said:
Congrats on the reduction. But, I am a little confused as to why last night you gave Sprocket a reduction last night to 2.5 ? The lower number you got last night was no doubt from the higher depot of 3 units. With giving another reduction this close this AM , you could see the reduction fail.
Click to expand...
Because the protocol said under 150 no shot but I felt that was not good since he just had no shot and he was higher than last time.
We were getting storms coming and Sprocket normally hides.
I did not feel comfy shooting a full amount so since storms(being scared) can increase their bg I choose 2.5 instead.
I probably should of done a 2u or 2.25u.
He went down to 55.
Chris & Jenna were unavailable so had a few people to discuss with so we decided upon that dose.
So even with reduction he still went down.
Do u disagree?
What do u think we should if done?
Remember not doing TR.
Thanks
 
Hi Bobbie--

Just to clarify, the 2.5 was a one-time reduction (as Darnell describes), but the shot this morning is 2.75-- reducing from the "regular" dose of 3.0 due to the sub-90 reading last night (which, yes, probably depot talking). So I think it's a legit dose right now, just possibly a little wonky for a couple days as the depot resettles with all the changes.
 
Nan & Amber said:
Hi Bobbie--

Just to clarify, the 2.5 was a one-time reduction (as Darnell describes), but the shot this morning is 2.75-- reducing from the "regular" dose of 3.0 due to the sub-90 reading last night (which, yes, probably depot talking). So I think it's a legit dose right now, just possibly a little wonky for a couple days as the depot resettles with all the changes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarafication. I am still tired with no coffee yet...lol.
 
Nan & Amber said:
Hi Bobbie--

Just to clarify, the 2.5 was a one-time reduction (as Darnell describes), but the shot this morning is 2.75-- reducing from the "regular" dose of 3.0 due to the sub-90 reading last night (which, yes, probably depot talking). So I think it's a legit dose right now, just possibly a little wonky for a couple days as the depot resettles with all the changes.
Click to expand...
Thanks Nan! I only just started my coffee when I read Darnell's post. Thanks for clarifying, now it make sense.
 
Darnell & Sprocket said:
Because the protocol said under 150 no shot but I felt that was not good since he just had no shot and he was higher than last time.
We were getting storms coming and Sprocket normally hides.
I did not feel comfy shooting a full amount so since storms(being scared) can increase their bg I choose 2.5 instead.
I probably should of done a 2u or 2.25u.
He went down to 55.
Chris & Jenna were unavailable so had a few people to discuss with so we decided upon that dose.
So even with reduction he still went down.
Do u disagree?
What do u think we should if done?
Remember not doing TR.
Thanks
Click to expand...
All's good, I didn't have enough coffee when I read your post and I should have read yesterday's post and it would have made sense to me. :rolleyes: Thanks to Nan for explaining .
 
Congrats on the reduction and good job handling those numbers last night. You are starting to look like a pro.:)
Darnell & Sprocket said:
Because the protocol said under 150 no shot
Click to expand...
Two things. First the protocol is TR, but you are following the SLGS method. Second, the part of the Sticky for SLGS that says no shot under 150 is prefaced by "in the beginning". You and Sprocket are no longer newbies and you have been gathering a lot of good data on Sprocket. Read further down on the Stcky Note part on lower preshot numbers and start at the part that says "with experience". Over time you want to lower that no shot number, though it is suggested not to shoot if under 90. Cycles are typically much flatter if you shoot lower. Take a look at the numbers for some other cats when people shoot lower.
 
Wendy&Neko said:
Congrats on the reduction and good job handling those numbers last night. You are starting to look like a pro.:)

Two things. First the protocol is TR, but you are following the SLGS method. Second, the part of the Sticky for SLGS that says no shot under 150 is prefaced by "in the beginning". You and Sprocket are no longer newbies and you have been gathering a lot of good data on Sprocket. Read further down on the Stcky Note part on lower preshot numbers and start at the part that says "with experience". Over time you want to lower that no shot number, though it is suggested not to shoot if under 90. Cycles are typically much flatter if you shoot lower. Take a look at the numbers for some other cats when people shoot lower.
Click to expand...


Opps....i will reread that.
Everytime i have done a shot at a lower bg it seems to take him down instead of being flat.
Sprockets body likes to do its own thing....rule book doesnt apply...lol.
So thats another reason why I am hesitiant to give a full shot.
 
I agree that you can lower that No Shot number now because you have plenty of data and are not a newbie to which the SLGS method is referring to with the 150 number. Reading through your thread last night I see there were storms in your area and that was a concern to be shooting a number that is lower than you are used to. You'll get more and more comfy with shooting lower and believe it or not, you will actually start to get bummed that you don't have a blue or green to shoot at.
 
I agree, with the storms and possible power outage making it potentially difficult to monitor, that can impact what you do. Though there is something rather special about testing by candle and flashlight. :rolleyes: Been there, done that. Next time you see a little bit lower number, maybe 130 ish, and you can monitor, try shooting.
 
Ok...just reread the protocol i misses before.

Alot says to wait to feed...lol.
With his reduction in food down to 12oz a day he knows the time he should eat and waiting is not an option for him....lol...he will get quite persistant to give him food.
Therefore waiting to eat is not really an option.
Decision making I usually do while he is eating and then I shoot insulin and any meds at same time shortly after his meal.

Also. My bf has to help with meds in am & he goes to work for 7am so I have no time usually to wait.

So therefore...again...decision made fast again...any advice??
 
I would suggest using a +11 (or thereabouts) test to help guide the shot decision-- that will tell you whether he is going up or down at pre-shot (whatever the pre-shot number is). That's usually the reason to do the "stall, don't feed" when you get a surprise low at pre-shot-- we want to get an idea of where the BGs are heading.
 
Nan & Amber said:
I would suggest using a +11 (or thereabouts) test to help guide the shot decision-- that will tell you whether he is going up or down at pre-shot (whatever the pre-shot number is). That's usually the reason to do the "stall, don't feed" when you get a surprise low at pre-shot-- we want to get an idea of where the BGs are heading.
Click to expand...

But I cant always get a +11.
I am trying to test less when i dont need to. He will only let me test in one ear and its looking rough. I have been getting a test before his 2pm meal.
Then usually wait till 6pm for preshot time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top