glucose meter disturbing discovery

[kidsandliz]

I just, at my vet's insistence, checked my glucose meter against the cat lab. Vet drew blood from my cat. Used my meter. Used the lab. The lab, which measures glucose accurately, came back 123 points HIGHER than my ReliOn meter micro. Remember that these meters we are using give a different value than the lab anyway because the human meters are calibrated against human blood and not cat blood. So my meter isn't actually off 123 points - it is off less as I have to translate the cat lab value into human METER value OR translate human meter value into cat lab value (doing it either way should end up with the same results).

Now least you think the problem is old strips or what not, I tested myself. 101 on the human meter, which is about right.

That day at the vet my cat was 191 on my human meter. The cat lab came back at 314.

There is a 30 to 40% difference in measurements between a BG on a human meter and cat meter done at the same time because human meters don't read cat blood the same way they read human blood. The cat meters are closer to cat lab values than human meters are. The spreadsheet for recording BG values is using human meters and cat normal values NORMED ON HUMAN meters, NOT cat lab values/meters.

My human meter translates into cat meter levels (as cat meters are 30-40% higher) as:

191*1.3=248.3 (for 30% higher)
191*1.4=267.4 (for 40% higher)

Difference
314 - 248.3 = 57.3
314 - 267.4 = 76.4

This also means that my ability to catch hypoglycemia in my cat using this meter is limited as when it would read ZERO my cat would not yet be hypoglycemic (If 50 is the bottom end of normal).

This means I need to add somewhere between 57 to 77 points, on average 67 points to every reading I get to get the range of the approximate actual true HUMAN METER reading. In other words my cat's BG is actually higher than what my meter reads (at lower BG levels it will likely be closer to 57 points higher and at higher BG levels likely closer to 77 points higher).

Now technically since these meters can be licensed and be off plus or minus 20% the range is wider, but we are presuming that our meters are consistent with themselves (something I don't know if it is true or not) when we use the spreadsheet. It could be that with test, retest, retest, retest... using the same blood and the same meter there is a lot of variance in the reading we get or perhaps not. Unless we test our meter (on ourselves I guess using the same bleeding finger droplet, turning it on and off each time so it is forced to reset each time since it may recalibrate differently between each time you turn it on) a bunch of times we won't know how consistent our meter is.

It also means that I won't know if my cat is hypoglycemic using this particular human meter. If on a human meter below 50 is a danger zone and my meter reads at least 57 points too high, then it would need to register negative numbers to catch that which it does not do.

It is WORTH calibrating your meter against a quality cat lab for your cat. My vet actually uses human meters but calibrates each new one and each new box of testing strips (I would guess we could do that by either stabbing ourselves or our cat twice - once with the last old strip and once with the first new strip to see if they match) . I was told by my vet that they found the Acura Aviza the least "off" (eg fewest points off) over the other brands they have calibrated. But I am sure they only tested one meter at a time and a true test would require testing a bunch of each model at a time.

 

[BJM]

No, you don't to convert anything. You need to use feline-specific reference numbers for the human glucometer. These are in my signature link Glucometer Notes.
Why don't we convert? Because there is not a straight linear conversion from one meter type to another, plus ALL meters read +/- 20% from what a lab would get.

Tests at the vet may read from 100-180 mg/dL higher than at home.

 

[kidsandliz]

Vet lab results are always going to be higher especially with a stressed out cat. There is no reason to calibrate our monitors with that of a vet's other than to drain our pocketbooks.

We used the SAME blood that went to the lab to also see the values on my meter. Vet drew the blood. Put most of it in the vial, put a tiny bit on the meter. Because it was the same blood sample the values would be the same stressed or not. There is a reason to calibrate.

 

[kidsandliz]

No, you don't to convert anything. You need to use feline-specific reference numbers for the human glucometer. These are in my signature link Glucometer Notes.
Why don't we convert? Because there is not a straight linear conversion from one meter type to another, plus ALL meters read +/- 20% from what a lab would get.

Tests at the vet may read from 100-180 mg/dL higher than at home.

The meter and the lab used the SAME blood draw. We did the meter with the blood that was going to the lab. It was the SAME blood. So being stressed would affect both values the SAME because it was done at the same time with the blood drawn from the cat that was also going to the lab.

If you don't adjust for the lab value then this meter is off by 123 points.

 

[kidsandliz]

No, you don't to convert anything. You need to use feline-specific reference numbers for the human glucometer. These are in my signature link Glucometer Notes.
Why don't we convert? Because there is not a straight linear conversion from one meter type to another, plus ALL meters read +/- 20% from what a lab would get.

Tests at the vet may read from 100-180 mg/dL higher than at home.

PS I was looking at the NUMBER the cat lab got vs the NUMBER the human meter got on the SAME blood sample. A pet specific meter reads the same blood HIGHER than a human meter. Thus a cat value done in a "cat" specific way needs to be converted to the human meter way or vise versa. That is why the "normal range" you have to use is different on a pet meter than on a human meter. Even if you take into account plus or minus 20% that is only plus or minus 38 points (for this reading of 191) and the difference is far greater than that (191 vs 314).

 

[BJM]

No, it does NOT need to be converted. You need to use the reference numbers for the meter type.
Human meters read as much as 30-40% lower than lab tests.
It is like temperature in Celsius vs Fahrenheit - both are correct. So are both meter and lab values..
And home tests are not intended to replace lab work, either.

 

[kidsandliz]

No, it does NOT need to be converted. You need to use the reference numbers for the meter type.
Did you read the Glucometer Notes??? Now add that human meters read, on the average, 30-40% lower than lab tests.
It is like temperature in Celsius vs Fahrenheit - both are correct. So are both meter and lab values..

That is right they read lower. We are saying the same thing, just saying it in a different way. We agree on that. What we don't seem to agree on is then how to compare apples to apples if you want to see the accuracy of the human meter reading a kind of blood it was not designed for. (This is separate from making sure to use only cat norms designed for a human meter on a human meter vs cat norms designed only for cat labs/meters on cat labs/meters)

So if you ADD 30 to 40% to that HUMAN meter reading it SHOULD match the CAT LAB reading (so going HUMAN -> CAT). We would appear to agree on that.

OR (mathematically it gets you to the same place) you can reduce the CAT lab reading by 30-40% to make it match the HUMAN reading (which is what my math did in the first post and perhaps that is confusing since I went the other direction CAT -> HUMAN and usually people talk about it the other way around but I wanted to look at it in the human meter context so did it this direction).

In the case of this blood sample drawn from my cat and tested using both the meter and the lab, even when you adjusted for the differences we noted above (eg HUMAN VS CAT reading difference), the two different tests did not come up with the same number by quite a few points. Even AFTER adjusting for the plus or minus 20% of the meter readings. There in lies the problem and why you need to calibrate them. So you know how much your individual meter is off and can correct for that.

 

[BJM]

human meter +/- 20% )* [from 30 - 40 %] = Alpha Trak/lab estimate
human meter estimate / [from 60-70%] +/- 20% = AlphaTrak/lab value

As someone with a good chunk of graduate statistics including measurement science, a 1 or 2 time comparison of 2 measurement tools is insufficient to 'calibrate' anything, much less convert numbers.
You need several hundred tests, along a full range of values, using a split specimen, with the same pair of tools.

Check out this link, where I graphed the potential.

 

[kidsandliz]

No, it does NOT need to be converted. You need to use the reference numbers for the meter type.

It is like temperature in Celsius vs Fahrenheit - both are correct. So are both meter and lab values..
.

PS to try to be really clear - if cat labs are Fahrenheit and my human meter is Celsius, my Celsius meter is reading a temperature that is too low when I put them both in the same place in the freezer at the same time. Lets presume I know for sure my Fahrenheit thermometer is accurate (eg lab is accurate). So I run the formula to find out what my Celsius meter SHOULD read if it were correct. Mine read lower than it should have. So I have to add Celsius degrees to whatever I get to correct for my Celsius meter (eg human meter) being too low so it now reads what it should read. That is what I learned when I calibrated the human meter with the cat lab.

 

[BJM]

See the graph and table in the link above.

 

[kidsandliz]

human meter +/- 20% )* [from 30 - 40 %] = Alpha Trak/lab estimate
human meter estimate / [from 60-70%] +/- 20% = AlphaTrak/lab value

Yes I agree there are two different things going on

1) the meter varies itself (within meter variation, not between meter variation is what this is about) plus or minus 20%.

2) The human meter to the cat lab is going to be different by a certain percentage. This is the math I did in my first post. Also I am not sure what Alpha Track is - is it a meter and this is their test calibration where they found a 60-70% difference (instead of 30-40%?) between the cat levels and human levels on a human meter?

Even if you factor in #1% to the #2% it is still too low in the case of this particular meter with the sample drawn with my cat. We are testing for his renal issues next week, which will, also get a glucose level and I plan to have them pop a bit of that blood on the human meter again to see if what kind of consistency, or not, there is.

 

[kidsandliz]

See the graph and table in the link above.

Graph and table? I see links to things in your signature line but none are graphs and tables. Maybe I missed it?

 

[BJM]

"Check out this link, where I graphed the potential."

We've been using human meters successfully for quite a number of years.
International feline diabetes researcher Dr Rand, of the University of Queensland, has done extensive research with folks using human glucometers and they are adequate to the task of home monitoring. She provides reference ranges for them in her research papers, which I incorporated in my Glucometer Notes.
The idea is NOT to replicate the lab. The idea is to see what is happening with the glucose - up, down, or stable.

It is, of course, possible to have a defective meter and/or test strips. Many of us use the WalMart Confirm or Confirm Micro, aka the Arkray USA Glucocard 01 or 01 Mini which seems to function as needed for folks here.

 

[Jill & Alex (GA)]

International feline diabetes researcher Dr Rand, of the University of Queensland, has done extensive research with folks using human glucometers and they are adequate to the task of home monitoring. She provides reference ranges for them in her research papers, which I incorporated in my Glucometer Notes.

Actually, the reference range Rand provides applies to numbers at the low range only. See the "Edited to add" section in this post.

For more information, see this post. Please check out the "real" comparisons @Marje and Gracie did between the AlphaTrak 2 and the ReliOn Micro meters (see tab on Gracie's spreadsheet). Applying a 30 - 40% difference across all ranges is not predictable.

That said, the protocols used on the FDMB have been used successfully when using human meters and taking the difference in the low range into consideration. Human meters are adequate for home monitoring.

 

[kidsandliz]

"Check out this link, where I graphed the potential."

We've been using human meters successfully for quite a number of years.
International feline diabetes researcher Dr Rand, of the University of Queensland, has done extensive research with folks using human glucometers and they are adequate to the task of home monitoring. She provides reference ranges for them in her research papers, which I incorporated in my Glucometer Notes.
The idea is NOT to replicate the lab. The idea is to see what is happening with the glucose - up, down, or stable.

It is, of course, possible to have a defective meter and/or test strips. Many of us use the WalMart Confirm or Confirm Micro, aka the Arkray USA Glucocard 01 or 01 Mini which seems to function as needed for folks here.

I am not saying it isn't possible to use human meters. My vet uses them. Obviously they are useful and "good enough" (compared to labs) that we can tell a lot. ALL I was saying that it might be worth checking the human meter against a lab value at some time a lab value is going to be drawn anyway since we make decisions based on those readings. Since they are drawing blood anyway, putting a drop on the meter strip before then send it off is certainly easy enough. If an individual meter is way off it would be worth knowing. That was the point of my comment - not attacking using one. The fact that this particular one is as far off as it is makes it worth correcting for so that it is closer to "good enough". That was my only point.

 

[Jill & Alex (GA)]

I am not saying it isn't possible to use human meters. My vet uses them. Obviously they are useful and "good enough" (compared to labs) that we can tell a lot. ALL I was saying that it might be worth checking the human meter against a lab value at some time a lab value is going to be drawn anyway since we make decisions based on those readings. Since they are drawing blood anyway, putting a drop on the meter strip before then send it off is certainly easy enough. If an individual meter is way off it would be worth knowing. That was the point of my comment - not attacking using one. The fact that this particular one is as far off as it is makes it worth correcting for so that it is closer to "good enough". That was my only point.

I agree it's worth knowing that generally speaking, a human meter will run higher than a pet-specific meter. However it's also important to know that *usually* the differences (points and/or percentages) between the two kinds of meters are far less at lower numbers than they are at higher numbers. For example, when Alex would drop into the 20s or 30s I never stopped to add a percentage or a specific number of points to figure out where she was on a pet-specific meter or the equivalent to a lab value. As far as I was concerned, she was too low and I needed to bring her BG numbers up ASAP to keep her safe.

 

[MrWorfMen's Mom]

As a person who wrestled with this conversion too (I use a pet meter only because I don't want to confuse my vet ho uses a pet meter) I think I can ease your mind a bit.

Your calculations are quite correct however if your meter were to give you a reading of 50 (bottom limit of normal on human meter) then the lowest reading one would expect on a pet meter would be

50 X 1.3 = 65
or
50 X 1.4 = 70
68 is the bottom end of normal on the pet meter.

so at the lower numbers that difference between the human meter readings and pet meter readings is significantly smaller so you would still be able to ward off any hypo situation.

I agree there is the concern of the +/- 20% difference allowed on all meters but that applies to the pet meters too.
I have seen slightly higher levels (1-2% ) with a different vial of strips with my pet meter so I always check with test solution when I open a new vial just so I have a reference point.

I hope this helps ease your mind.
.

 

[Squeaky and KT (GA)]

My meter reads about 30% lower than the vet's bloodwork machine. The higher the number, the greater the difference BUT the lower the number the less difference.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

I agree it's worth knowing that generally speaking, a human meter will run higher than a pet-specific meter. However it's also important to know that *usually* the differences (points and/or percentages) between the two kinds of meters are far less at lower numbers than they are at higher numbers. For example, when Alex would drop into the 20s or 30s I never stopped to add a percentage or a specific number of points to figure out where she was on a pet-specific meter or the equivalent to a lab value. As far as I was concerned, she was too low and I needed to bring her BG numbers up ASAP to keep her safe.

Jill's point is excellent but if you do look at Gracie's SS, you'll note that when she was low on the Relion indicating the need for a reduction, she was also generally in the reduction range on the AT2. Also, once numbers get higher out of normal range, than I am looking at the need for an increase. It doesn't matter to me how far apart the meters might be because I've also found that if Gracie is in the high end of normal on the Micro, she's in the high end of normal on the AT2. Anything above that tells me she needs more insulin.

I am not saying it isn't possible to use human meters. My vet uses them. Obviously they are useful and "good enough" (compared to labs) that we can tell a lot. ALL I was saying that it might be worth checking the human meter against a lab value at some time a lab value is going to be drawn anyway since we make decisions based on those readings. Since they are drawing blood anyway, putting a drop on the meter strip before then send it off is certainly easy enough. If an individual meter is way off it would be worth knowing. That was the point of my comment - not attacking using one. The fact that this particular one is as far off as it is makes it worth correcting for so that it is closer to "good enough". That was my only point.

I've checked several of my meters against the lab using the same sample as you did. I haven't seen that kind of variance that you got. For example, on the last labs, the lab value was 299 and my Micro was 254 for the same drop of blood. Keep in mind, though, that even if you and I have the same kind of meter, the differences between those meters and the lab might be very different because the lab equipment may differ. As an example, the readings I get on my AT2 and Micro won't be the same as what someone might get on theirs so I never look at anyone else's comparisons. I just look at my meters.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

Sorry...forgot one other quick point.

You can also get incorrect meter readings if the strip fills too much or too little. It doesn't always give an error if there isn't enough sample in the strip. The old Relion Micro strips were really bad about starting to fill, pausing, and then starting again. I always knew if it did this, the number was going to be wrong and I would retest with my backup Micro. So one test run against the lab isn't conclusive.

 

[kidsandliz]

Actually, the reference range Rand provides applies to numbers at the low range only. See the "Edited to add" section in this post.

For more information, see this post. Please check out the "real" comparisons @Marje and Gracie did between the AlphaTrak 2 and the ReliOn Micro meters (see tab on Gracie's spreadsheet). Applying a 30 - 40% difference across all ranges is not predictable.

That said, the protocols used on the FDMB have been used successfully when using human meters and taking the difference in the low range into consideration. Human meters are adequate for home monitoring.

Ran some interesting stats on the differences between the use of the two different meters. Correlation between the two is quite high 99.4% that they are tracking the same trends. The mean difference was 39.6, the median split difference was 38. The graph of the two trends show close tracking (see uploaded screen shot of an excel spreadsheet).

 

[kidsandliz]

Sorry...forgot one other quick point.

You can also get incorrect meter readings if the strip fills too much or too little. It doesn't always give an error if there isn't enough sample in the strip. The old Relion Micro strips were really bad about starting to fill, pausing, and then starting again. I always knew if it did this, the number was going to be wrong and I would retest with my backup Micro. So one test run against the lab isn't conclusive.

I get an E-7 error if there is not enough blood. So far no error if there is too much but then it may not give an error message for that. The vet sample may have been more on there than I usually get from Max's ear. Do you know how too much blood affects the results? I will have a chance next Wed to run another test against the lab since the lab work for his kidney issues also gives a glucose back anyway.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

Ran some interesting stats on the differences between the use of the two different meters. Correlation between the two is quite high 99.4% that they are tracking the same trends. The mean difference was 39.6, the median split difference was 38. The graph of the two trends show close tracking (see uploaded screen shot of an excel spreadsheet).

Thanks for posting that on this condo. I was just going to let @Jill & Alex (GA) know about the other Condo on Meter Comparisons.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

I get an E-7 error if there is not enough blood. So far no error if there is too much but then it may not give an error message for that. The vet sample may have been more on there than I usually get from Max's ear. Do you know how too much blood affects the results? I will have a chance next Wed to run another test against the lab since the lab work for his kidney issues also gives a glucose back anyway.

I don't know how much more or less affects the results but if you use the meter as long as I've been using my Micro, you'll realize that you won't always get an error message if there is too little blood. Or, sometimes the strip seems to fill and you'll get an error that there isn't enough blood. If I ever question the results, I retest using a backup Micro.

The other thing you can do when you get the lab tests run is have a fructosamine done. @Jill & Alex (GA) has stated before that it would likely be something she would do occasionally considering the meter issues these days and I think it is an excellent idea.

 

[Jill & Alex (GA)]

Ran some interesting stats on the differences between the use of the two different meters. Correlation between the two is quite high 99.4% that they are tracking the same trends. The mean difference was 39.6, the median split difference was 38. The graph of the two trends show close tracking (see uploaded screen shot of an excel spreadsheet).

Thanks for posting that on this condo. I was just going to let @Jill & Alex (GA) know about the other Condo on Meter Comparisons.

Thank you everyone!

For those following along, I'd like to cross-post Marje's response on that thread because I think it's worth including here:

"Of course I would expect the curves to look similar. But it's interesting to note that on one day, I got a 38 on the Micro and a 76 on the AT2 and another day I got a 37 on the Micro and a 58 on the AT2. Thus my hesitation to ever equate numbers. If I want to know what she is on the AT2, I run both meters instead of assuming that a specific number on the Micro will always be even close to the same number on the AT2 that it was before."

Just sayin...

 

[kidsandliz]

human meter +/- 20% )* [from 30 - 40 %] = Alpha Trak/lab estimate
human meter estimate / [from 60-70%] +/- 20% = AlphaTrak/lab value

As someone with a good chunk of graduate statistics including measurement science, a 1 or 2 time comparison of 2 measurement tools is insufficient to 'calibrate' anything, much less convert numbers.
You need several hundred tests, along a full range of values, using a split specimen, with the same pair of tools.

Check out this link, where I graphed the potential.

Yeah I get that n=1 is not reliable for a comparison test. But since it is requirement that the meters are within tolerances of + or - 20% that reduces some of the problems. My understanding is that labs must be + or - a very small amount, although how small I do not know. That will reduce some of the variance. So we have already reduced some of the variability (excepting a defective meter) - how much could probably be figured out if I knew the formula to do so. I also have taken quite a bit of statistics and research methods classes at the graduate level (and taught them)... however even one score off that much points to a potential problem that at least needs looked into further. As someone else pointed out the volume of blood on the meter seems to affect the scores. My vet commented that blood from an ear tends to be a bit lower in glucose than blood from elsewhere. She suggested taking it from a claw (not I know for sure my cat would not tolerate that - that claw would end up elsewhere and it would be my blood that is drawn LOL) or a foot pad.

Someone else compared two meters with 40 readings and one meter was pretty consistently lower than the other by a mean difference of 39 points and the median difference was 38, although correlation trend between the two lines was better than r=.99. What that, and my result, tells me is that there could be some fairly large differences that might matter in some circumstances and knowing where your meter might stand with respect to that is likely sometimes going to be useful.

Certainly I am going to use each opportunity my vet draws blood to compare the two.

I had no intention of starting a freaking fight over this.

 

[Jill & Alex (GA)]

I had no intention of starting a freaking fight over this.

LOL! I wasn't aware that you had...

Discussion is and always has been good.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

LOL! I wasn't aware that you had...

Discussion is and always has been good.

I absolutely agree! I certainly didn't view it as any more than a healthy discussion that we all learn from!

 

[kidsandliz]

LOL! I wasn't aware that you had...

Discussion is and always has been good.

I sort thought I had maybe sort of pissed off one of the posters early on in the discussion and I hadn't meant to at all.

 

[Elizabeth and Bertie]

I sort thought I had maybe sort of pissed off one of the posters early on in the discussion

Please don't worry, Liz. I'm sure that's not the case at all.
.

 

[Mogmom and Goofus]

Make it really easy on yourself, use the Alphatrak2 meter, made by Abbott Labs and animal specific. BUT, use the Freestyle Lite test strips, also made by Abbott Labs, but for humans. They cost HALF what the AT strips cost and test much closer. I've tested two AT2 strips, back to back on the same blood sample and gotten two different readings. Just sayin.....

 

[Marje and Gracie]

Make it really easy on yourself, use the Alphatrak2 meter, made by Abbott Labs and animal specific. BUT, use the Freestyle Lite test strips, also made by Abbott Labs, but for humans. They cost HALF what the AT strips cost and test much closer. I've tested two AT2 strips, back to back on the same blood sample and gotten two different readings. Just sayin.....

I would not ever do this. Would you use an AT2 strip in a human meter to check your glucose? I know several of you have run sample tests on this side by side but I, personally, think it is not a good idea. The AT2 test strips are designed to specifically pick up the amount of glucose in a cat's or dog's blood which is different than that in a human. And, in fact, differs even between cats and dogs....thus the difference in coding for the AT2. You don't have any way to code the FS Lite test strips.

I bet you 100% if you call Abbott, they will tell you not to do it. You can assume it's because of the cost. However, when I called Arkray (they make the Arkray meters and the identical meter for Relion), they told me to not use the Arkray strips in the equivalent Relion meter and vice versa. There is a slight difference in them.

 

[MrWorfMen's Mom]

I did call ABBOTT and they don't seem to want to share enough pertinent information to convince me to use the human strips in my pet meter. That said, I am 99% sure the strips are in fact one and the same. I cloaked my calls to avoid being told not to use the human strips in the pet meter as obviously for financial reasons they would never say it was OK. . I said I had a concern about the human and animal strips looking identical when I spoke with the human division. And quite frankly I truly believe this is inappropriate. I told the animal division I wanted to understand how the meter "knows" what animal blood is being tested since blood composition for all the species it's used for are not the same and the code on the test strips are not always the same.

Anyone who has used both the AlphaTrak and Freestyle strips knows they look identical. I checked the chemical used on the human vs animal strips...they appear to be the same . I checked where they are manufactured....both the same. I checked the patent numbers.....all the same however the animal strips have 4 extra patents filed in the US and Europe. Nothing extra for Canada. The Freestyle strips I bought to test had a code of 16 on the vial even though the current human Freestyle meters do not need to be coded.

I confirmed with ABBOTT human and animal divisions that neither strip has any computer chip in it.
I confirmed with ABBOTT animal division that the AlphaTrak meter adds to the actual strip reading to get the number displayed.

Then it got interesting.

The human strips will always have Code 16 on the vial. This is apparently for any folks still using one of their older meters.
The animal division was far more "undercover" in their responses and my questions were frequently met with "that's proprietary information". I did manage to discern that the differing codes on vials of AlphaTrak strips are based on batch testing.

My conclusion is that although the strips seem to be identical, without the right code, the resulting reading may or may not be relatively accurate. This may also explain why the comparison between human meters and pet meters is not a linear one but rather an approximation.

 

[Mogmom and Goofus]

I would not ever do this. Would you use an AT2 strip in a human meter to check your glucose? I know several of you have run sample tests on this side by side but I, personally, think it is not a good idea. The AT2 test strips are designed to specifically pick up the amount of glucose in a cat's or dog's blood which is different than that in a human. And, in fact, differs even between cats and dogs....thus the difference in coding for the AT2. You don't have any way to code the FS Lite test strips.

I bet you 100% if you call Abbott, they will tell you not to do it. You can assume it's because of the cost. However, when I called Arkray (they make the Arkray meters and the identical meter for Relion), they told me to not use the Arkray strips in the equivalent Relion meter and vice versa. There is a slight difference in them.

First, you can't use a human strip in an AT2, it'll only give you an error code. Second, I do believe you when you say that if I called Abbott that they would say absolutely not, and I also believe that this is because they'd like me buying strips that cost twice as much, after all, they ARE in the business to make money. I read a report on a comparison test that had been done many times. I've cross tested many times, and still do occasionally, sometimes the AT is higher, sometimes it's lower. I talked this over with my vet, he checked Goof and found his BG to be very close to my last test, a little higher due to the stressful trip to the vet. He told me to cross check on occasion, but that Goof, who hasn't needed insulin for a month now, is doing great.

 

[MrWorfMen's Mom]

I just used test solution tonight with a Freestyle strip in my AT2 meter out of curiosity. No error code at all and only a .2mmol higher reading than the test I did with the AT strips I am using using. I keep the Freestyles around just as a backup because AT strips are not locally available unless ordered through the vet.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

First, you can't use a human strip in an AT2, it'll only give you an error code. Second, I do believe you when you say that if I called Abbott that they would say absolutely not, and I also believe that this is because they'd like me buying strips that cost twice as much, after all, they ARE in the business to make money. I read a report on a comparison test that had been done many times. I've cross tested many times, and still do occasionally, sometimes the AT is higher, sometimes it's lower. I talked this over with my vet, he checked Goof and found his BG to be very close to my last test, a little higher due to the stressful trip to the vet. He told me to cross check on occasion, but that Goof, who hasn't needed insulin for a month now, is doing great.

It's certainly your prerogative to use the FS lite strips in the AT2. But on the off chance that I could get a really incorrect reading when my Gracie is low, it isn't worth it to me.

 

[Rusty14]

OMG. I am new, and this baffles my mind! I was going to try diet, as Rusty isn't showing any signs of his illness yet. But a few of you have been so good to me, that I decided to go the insulin route.
But NOW, this is totally freaking me out! I haven't had my appt yet, for the educating of injections, which insulin, BG home testing, etc., and now I don't know if I want to! This is unreal. WTF?!!

 

[manxcat419]

That day at the vet my cat was 191 on my human meter. The cat lab came back at 314.

Actually, that does still fall within meter variances (just). 191 +20% is 229.2. Then if you adjust by 40% for the human to cat meter readings, so 229.2 +40%, you get 320.88. So, yes, even that big of a difference can be covered by the usual +/-20% accuracy on a home glucometer and the 30-40% difference between a human glucometer and a pet one.

OMG. I am new, and this baffles my mind! I was going to try diet, as Rusty isn't showing any signs of his illness yet. But a few of you have been so good to me, that I decided to go the insulin route.
But NOW, this is totally freaking me out! I haven't had my appt yet, for the educating of injections, which insulin, BG home testing, etc., and now I don't know if I want to! This is unreal. WTF?!!

Please don't be freaked out by the technicalities of different meter types. There are differences between readings from human meters, readings from pet-only meters and lab readings. But for home glucose testing, all you need to do is pick one type of meter and stick with it. It's the trying to make comparisons between one type and another that causes queries about accuracy, but you can see what direction numbers are trending in by using either a human meter (which is way cheaper and what the Lantus protocols we use are based on) or a pet-only meter. Knowing whether numbers are generally getting higher, lower or staying about the same is one of the main things you're looking for (other than numbers that are in the hypoglycemic range - and for those you treat whether or not you see symptoms or whether or not you think your meter has given you a perfect reading...always, always safety first).

 

[Cat Ma]

OMG. I am new, and this baffles my mind! I was going to try diet, as Rusty isn't showing any signs of his illness yet. But a few of you have been so good to me, that I decided to go the insulin route.
But NOW, this is totally freaking me out! I haven't had my appt yet, for the educating of injections, which insulin, BG home testing, etc., and now I don't know if I want to! This is unreal. WTF?!!

As manxcat419 says, don't worry about the technicalities here. A lot of us here use a ReliOn Confirm or Micro glucometer. I prefer the ReliOn Micro because it is the easiest for me to set up and use. They are available for under $15 plus their test strips for around $35, lowest price around, and you can get them at Walmart.

Diet is very important too, whether you are giving insulin or not. It's very important to slowly transition your cat off dry and high carb food to a low carb canned diet.
There's a lot of excellent information on doing this on the Home page (see Diet and Home Glucose testing under Education).

Also see BJM's link to Glucometer Notes above. It's an excellent guide to determining what level your cat's at when you home test. Yes, it's a lot of information to absorb and it's overwhelming at first but it does get easier.

My cat's been in remission after only being on insulin for a few weeks, thanks to home testing with the ReliOn glucometer, a change in diet and excellent guidance from members in this forum. Remission wouldn't have happened had I stuck to what the vet told me, like don't worry about home testing, and had I kept giving my cat insulin while her BG #'s were low and then normal.

I was freaking out in the beginning too. We have all been in your shoes. You're in the right place with this forum. It will get easier.

 

[Rusty14]

Yeah! That's great. I think I will use the ReliOn micro. Cause alot of you do. Thanx for your support! I am so tired, I gotta take a break. Perhaps we can talk more tomorrow...Night for now.

 

[Cat Ma]

You'll also need a lancet with or without the lancet pen that comes with the ReliOn glucometer. The glucometer comes with 30" lancets, I think, but starting out, I had the best luck with ReliOn's 26" lancets, also available at Walmart. A lot of people here use 28" lancets, some successfully use higher numbers. The higher the number, the thinner the lancet but also the harder to draw blood.

You can also use other brands like Freestyle lancets sold at Walmart if you are "freehanding", meaning using a lancet but not a lancet pen. Don't worry, I didn't understand what freehanding or even what a lancet meant at first. A lot of people here will be happy to explain.

There are great threads here. Lots of good pictures and videos on how to find the "sweet spot" on a cat's ears and how to get an ear to warm up and do the BG reading. Even how to do insulin. I found the more I watched the videos and read advice on the threads, the less nervous I became.

Get your rest and remember, it will get easier.

 

[manxcat419]

I had the same problem with the lancets that came with the meter. I can use them now that Rosa's ears have "learned" to bleed, but to begin with I had to use the 26" lancets to have any hope at all of getting a good test done. It's a while since I've bought any as a box now lasts quite a long time with just one test a week, but I think they were under $5 for 100 the last time I bought any, so they don't add much to the cost.

 

[Rusty14]

Thanks, Cat Ma! I know manxcat, BJM , and Chris and China, as they and more people have been helping me. Now I have another one to add! Again, thanx. Talk tomorrow, everyone!

 

[Mogmom and Goofus]

It's certainly your prerogative to use the FS lite strips in the AT2. But on the off chance that I could get a really incorrect reading when my Gracie is low, it isn't worth it to me.

Did another cross check this morning, Goof's BG was as follows: AT meter with FS strip 128, AT meter with AT strip 126. All but two times of the many times I've checked, the numbers have been within a few points. So, yup, I guess I feel pretty comfortable using the FS strips with the AT meter. Besides, I know my cats behavior well enough to know if something is off.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

In almost five years on the board, I've seen just about every member in the L/L land forum (including me as a new member) ask "why is my cat's BG doing this?" with "this" being a variety of things from bouncing to diving to fizzling on a dose, etc. There are so many variables involved in FD...external changes (e.g. Weather) that affect the BG, absorption of shot, syringe inaccuracy, etc.

Why throw one more potential variable in the mix?

 

[Lori & Lulu]

OMG. I am new, and this baffles my mind! I was going to try diet, as Rusty isn't showing any signs of his illness yet. But a few of you have been so good to me, that I decided to go the insulin route.
But NOW, this is totally freaking me out! I haven't had my appt yet, for the educating of injections, which insulin, BG home testing, etc., and now I don't know if I want to! This is unreal. WTF?!!

@Rusty14 - I try not to get deep `into the weeds` of kitty diabetes. As Marje said, there are so many potential variables. I`d drive myself nuts if I worried about every little thing that someone brings up. You seem to have found some members you trust, please try not to let all the other stuff get to you. One day at a time; keep it simple, sweetie.

P.S. No offense intended to anyone.

 

[Jamye and Fred]

Fred's getting a headache

 

[Mogmom and Goofus]

In almost five years on the board, I've seen just about every member in the L/L land forum (including me as a new member) ask "why is my cat's BG doing this?" with "this" being a variety of things from bouncing to diving to fizzling on a dose, etc. There are so many variables involved in FD...external changes (e.g. Weather) that affect the BG, absorption of shot, syringe inaccuracy, etc.

Why throw one more potential variable in the mix?

I guess the "variable" that I had problems with was using a human meter and working from a "reference range". I always felt like I was guessing at what his numbers really were. My vet is very well educated regarding feline diabetes, when I showed him the research I'd found and what I'd done myself, he said it certainly gave him something to think about. If Goof ever seems too high or oddly low, I do a test with an AT strip in he same blood sample and as I stated earlier, the numbers are never more than a few points different.

 

[Marje and Gracie]

I guess the "variable" that I had problems with was using a human meter and working from a "reference range". I always felt like I was guessing at what his numbers really were. My vet is very well educated regarding feline diabetes, when I showed him the research I'd found and what I'd done myself, he said it certainly gave him something to think about. If Goof ever seems too high or oddly low, I do a test with an AT strip in he same blood sample and as I stated earlier, the numbers are never more than a few points different.

I hope I did not infer that I think human meters are better than using the AT2. I don't. My meter of choice would be the AT2 if the strips weren so costly....because we test much, much more than you do. So I use my AT in combo with the human meter to make sure Gracie actually is where I think she is.

 

[ellebane]

My cat just got diagnose a week ago. My vet is adamant that I canNot use a human glucometer. BUT, i got one for free with two boxes of strips. So...

Can anyone tell me in plain words with as little math as possible, what the actual difference might be in numbers? My first test read 382. If what the original poster said is true that would be over 500! (Although, honestly, I don't think that's accurate at all.)