FreeStyle Freedom Lite vs Bayer Contour USB vs ??

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chester's Masters

Member
I've long had the FreeStyle Freedom Lite. After familiarizing myself with this board, I understood that FDMB users have had troubles with it under-reporting / being inaccurate.
So I did a side-by-side trial with a new Bayer Contour USB meter, which I borrowed from a family member (with human diabetes). I read it was recommended by a user or two of this site, but also noticed it was NOT very well rated in Consumer's Reports.

Copied below are 19 tests performed over 9 days between May 9th & May 18th. They were all drawn from the same blood sample at the same time. There were other readings in between where I only used my old FreeStyle meter because I couldn't get enough blood for two meters.
I was hoping to see that perhaps the FreeStyle would be on average either a certain number or certain percentage off (e.g. lower but within the 20% tolerance), but as you can see, it was not.
On average the difference was 62, or 42%.
You could almost infer that the longer I tested the two meters side-by-side, the larger the discrepancy in readings I was getting. But I think it was that the higher the reading, the larger the difference.
Is it possible that the FreeStyle was a bit low, but the Bayer was a bit high? One reading in particular, the Bayer was nearly double the FreeStyle... started me doubting the Bayer as well?

I've now returned the Bayer Contour USB and would like to buy another meter for more comparisons / likely replacing my FreeStyle.
I've always trusted Consumer's Reports, but on the other hand, it seems the cat experience of FDMB users doesn't necessarily align with human testing?
For example, the ReliOn and One Touch Ultra meters seem to be highly recommended here, but are only mid-pack in the CR ratings. Since I am in Canada, I don't think the ReliOn is available, so I would consider the OTU.

I haven't read much on the boards about the top-2 CR-recommended meters by Accu-Chek (Compact Plus or Aviva). Any luck with cats out there? All I've got to go on is my family member's recollection that they didn't like that brand much for human testing (error-prone and didn't last long a few years ago).

The one thing I do like about my current FreeStyle Freedom Lite meter (which is rated in the top-5 as per CR), is that the latest batch of strips I bought required a much smaller blood sample than the Bayer (despite the Bayer's 'sipping' action), so it was easier to get a reading. Other than that, all I can say is at least the FreeStyle seems to be on the same page with the other meter when the BG's get down towards hypo territory.

Thoughts?

FreeStyle Freedom Lite vs Bayer Contour USB
79 vs 79 (+0, 0%)
158 vs 184 (+25, 16%)
194 vs >600 (>405, >210%, assumed this was an error reading by the Bayer)
40 vs 38 (-2, -5%)
34 vs 36 (+2, 5%)
274 vs 396 (+122, 45%)
194 vs 277 (+83, 43%)
115 vs 142 (+27, 23%)
243 vs 362 (+119, 49%)
124 vs 155 (+31, 25%)
160 vs 247 (+86, 54%)
162 vs 203 (+41, 26%)
83 vs 106 (+23, 28%)
223 vs 437 (+214, 96%)
223 vs 369 (+146, 65%)
184 vs 265 (+81, 44%)
49 vs 50 (+2, 4%)
65 vs 74 (+9, 14%)
229 vs 378 (+149, 65%)
 
Save the waste of strips in a comparison with various meters.
All the FreeStyle meters have been proven to give you numbers 299 and lower; never any of the actual higher numbers.
So many people have been horrified to find out that they had thought their cats were doing not too bad at all, then learn their cats have had much higher numbers all along. I believe it's been found that the problem is with the 'new technology' with their butterfly strips.... they don't work. People who still have the older strips are not having problems, but it's not worth it to take a chance of getting false results when it comes to your cats' health.

Others have had issues with meters that have 'TRUE' in the name.

You will be fine with the Relion meters, if you're in the US, but my all time favorite has been the Bayer Contour. I use the OneTouch meters as backups, but just love the Bayer meters.

I did contact Abbott awhile back to let them know that their meters were giving falsely lower readings, and that all people I knew were being advised to avoid their FreeStyle meters.

I compared the Bayer, OneTouch, Accu-Chek long ago. Bayer is by far the better with readings a bit lower on the whole when compared to the others, and I would rather have a lower reading when I am near 100, so the Bayer has always been my meter of choice.

Your own results prove that the FreeStyle gives false low numbers, never over 299.... why is that? It doesn't matter to me because those lows are not true. All those BG above 300 are most likely true numbers.
 
Thanks for the reply!
I also did ONE side-by-side test on the same FreeStyle Freedom Lite meter, between the older, thicker FreeStyle strips and the newer butterfly strips. Granted, I realized afterwards that the older ones had expired, but they did read higher: 261 for the old strips, 234 for the new butterfly strips (12% difference). I thought at the time that since it was within the 20% tolerance it was 'OK', however any difference on the same meter / same drop of blood is strange.

I'm not looking to do more comparisons with multiple meters, I'm hoping to chose a different one entirely and run with it (while finishing off my FreeStyle strips in tandem to see if the same pattern continues that I saw with the Bayer).
I'm hoping for one which requires as little blood as possible (unless of course the inaccuracy of the new FreeStyle strips is directly related to the sample being too small), and looking for people's experiences with OneTouch Ultra and Accu-Chek meters (as the FDMB and CR fore-runners, respectively, in my mind).

If the Bayer still is on the low side compared to Accu-Chek or OneTouch, then I'll really be in for an even bigger shock based on my FreeStyle readings... e.g. Accu-Check or OTU > Bayer, and: Bayer > FreeStyle
 
The closer the numbers are to normal range, ie. 80-120, the more accurate the meter is. It looks like the variation starts to get bigger in the higher/lower numbers. That is normal for all meters I think. But NOT to that extent. The FS DEFINITELY reads lower than it should.

I personally use the Bayer Contour USB and I think it is aimed at elderly folks/children/non tech savvy who cannot do their own spreadsheets and such. As someone heavily into computers, I find the USB function a gimmick and a nuisance more than anything lol. Google Docs more than covers my needs for a spreadsheet.

The meter components between the Contour and the Contour USB are the same. I compared them side by side for a while and all readings were identical or extremely close. (Just to make sure lol). I know the highs do read a bit lower than some meters, but they are accurate in the lows/normals which is nice. I quite like my Contours, even though the strips are super pricy.
 
OK thanks for the info on the Bayer Contour vs Bayer Contour USB. My mom's main meter is the Bayer Contour, and she was going to test it against the Contour USB for me to see how they compare for a human diabetic. Hasn't had the chance yet though.
Having just set up my own spreadsheet, I agree that's it's better to track yourself than have the gimmicky Contour USB software (wasn't playing that nice with my Mac anyways).
Haven't heard a non-endorsement for Bayer... so how is it that both the Contour and Contour USB are so poorly rated by CR?
Would still love to hear more about cat experiences with Accu-Check and OneTouch!
 
Probably because they are so pricy. The USB meter retails for $60-70 and strips are something like $70-80 for 100. I know they also use a bigger (but still tiny) amount of blood than some like the Relions. I have seen some folks say they get more errors with the Contours than other meters, but I have had maybe 1 or 2 errors in the past 5 months that weren't related to me trying to sip too small of a droplet lol ohmygod_smile so I think they may be user errors. Iunno. I would never buy or recommend someone buy the USB meter unless they have no clue how to use computers, it's just annoying lol. It's still a good meter in itself though, I just pretend the USB plug doesn't exist :lol: I got 2 of them for free from a coupon I found in a box of syringes, so what the heck, why not use it. I get to feel all fancy schmancy when I use it.
 
Looking at the manufacturer's websites, I would guess it is the small sample for the FreeStyle butterfly strips that are the problem.
They require only 0.3 microlitres.
The Bayer I'd been testing required 0.6, as does the Accu-Chek Aviva.
The Accu-Chek Comfort Plus requires even more, 1.5 microlitres.
Couldn't find on the OneTouch Ultra site how much blood their OTU 2 or OTU mini require though, if anyone knows and could also share their experience (and any input on the Accu-Chek meters still, too!).

Also looking a bit further at the CR ratings, the two Bayer Contour metres (w/ & w/o USB) both only scored 'good' for accuracy and repeatability (which seems contrary the experiences here).
The FreeStyle Freedom Lite also scored only a 'good' for repeatability, but 'excellent' for accuracy. I haven't seen CR's methodology (just the pinned spreadsheet on FDMB), but I'm having a hard time reconciling how your accuracy can be excellent but not your repeatability? You'd think they'd be one and the same; if you can't repeat a reading, how is it very accurate?
 
We use the Accu-chek Aviva, and haven't had any problems with it. You can see from Boo's spreadsheet (linked below in the signature) how little variation in his BG readings there is, but that whatever variation he does experience almost always fits the expected pattern. Based on that, I would say the metre is reliable or, at least, consistent. (The lancet pen that comes with it is not very useful for cats, however; the Accu-chek Softclix lancets, used freehand, are much better, and give a good-sized drop for the Aviva metre.) The test strips are cheaper if you buy them from sellers on eBay, by the way -- just be sure of the expiry date. Strips made for the US metres seem to work fine with the Canadian-sold metres, in spite of the different BG scales used in those countries.

As you say, Walmart's ReliOn metre isn't available in Canada, unfortunately. In fact, when I called the Walmart pharmacy to ask about it, they had never even heard of the brand. :roll:
 
If you want to see the stark difference between the Freestyle Freedom Lite and another meter, check out Neko's spreadsheet in my signature and notice the major difference in colours starting March 13th. It's like two different cats. I now have a Relion and use the Bayer Contour as a backup. The Relion is not available in Walmart in Canada, however, I live 45 minutes away from the Walmart in Bellingham WA and have a friend who has friends/family there and willing to buy strips for me when she visits. Another alternative for me is to use one of the border town US based mail drops and get strips sent there from American Diabetes Wholesale.

I did want to get a backup for which I could buy strips quickly/easily in Canada if I need them. I went with the Contour over the OneTouch Ultra that my vet uses, because it needs smaller drops of blood. Contour is .6 vs 1 for the Ultra. I agree the Freestyle had great wicking action, but I wasted a lot of time by using it. When I've done comparisons between the Contour and the Relion, the Contour is just a little bit lower at the high end and a little bit higher at the low end, but no more than 10% out.
 
I use the Bayer contour( the orange one) and am quite pleased with it. I compared it to my vets accu chek and it read only 0.6 lower then theirs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top