Serious question about the One-Touch Ultralink

hey guys! so i have been using a freestyle lite meter for the past few years...in that time i have had good control with my diabetes...better than ever! i recently switched to the one-touch ultra link because i have much cheaper co-pay, and because it automatically communicates with my pump. BUT in the past 2 days i have been using it, i have had some pretty crappy numbers...251, 166, 42, 294...these numbers are about 100 points higher than my usual readings!!!! i was feeling so proud of myself for hardly ever going above 200. now i feel so defeated and confused. has anybody had similar results with this meter? maybe i should switch back to my freestyle, i am mostly concerned that my "good control" over the past few years has maybe not been so good afterall. my a1cs are 6 and 7 ish. Anybody swear by their freestlye instead of their one-touch, despite the convenience factor?

I've always had a better experience with One-touch meters than the freestyle, they seem more accurate to me. However if your a1c is 6-7 you have probably been maintaining good control, sometimes BG run high, could be your stressed, lack of sleep... so many factors to consider.

Some meters just don't seem to work well on certain people. Your experience is not unique.

I have been there done that.

On me one touch can be very sensitive to water hydration. Drink a glass of water and retest.

I also use freestyle lite and according to fda data sheets has the better resistance against interferors( other man made sugars) and looks at only glucose D.

get back on the freestyle and retest.

The bs peddled about all meters work the same is a travesty, disgrace and non science.

Many folks body systems do a better job containing the man made sugars and stay trapped in gut/intestine/liver while folks like me I know within 2 hours after eating and a glucose meter is non specific on glucose D will see readings 40 to 100 points off.

The other issues are the oxygen content, water content, hematocratic amoints and ranges a meter responds to. ALL meters are not the same and one has to check to ensure proposed meter works on you.

Good luck and best wishes.

Here is some more scienec pulled from FDA web pages:

I found the following from an FDA report back on November 2005 and yanked a small but instructive comment about non glucose specific and glucose specific testing technology:
"In a patient who was receiving this maltose containing intravenous immune globulin product, when the blood glucose level was measured using a glucose non-specific methodology, the result was reported as 231 milligrams per deciliter. This represented a falsely increased value, due to the presence of maltose.
When the patient's blood glucose level was measured using a methodology that was specific for glucose, the result reported was 84 milligrams per deciliter, and this value represented the patient's actual blood glucose.
So, had a treatment decision been made on the basis of the first glucose result, the 231 milligrams per deciliter, insulin might have been indicated.
However, based on the glucose result obtained using a glucose specific methodology, which gave the patient's actual glucose level, insulin would not have been indicated."
The FDA has always assumed that these riots are caused by intravenous actions
and that the stomach/intestine/liver act as fire wall to prevent these sugars from getting into the blood system where metering is going on at fingertips.
For me they are wrong and dangerous. Every time I eat a substance with malto dextrose, galactose, zylotrol et all I routinely see the non specific glucose caveman meter fingerprick technology jump 40 to 100 points off reliably.
The only way to combat this is to use glucose specific technology in my case.
No real studies have been done to identify the leak rate on human bodies/livers to these man made sugars to balance of blood system and I object strenuously about the lack of science.
So far the assumption is that this is only an intravenous situation, and like frozen foam destroying refractory bricks on a space shuttle dooming its crew and destruction of the plane ; I say au contraire.
And here with the other shoe dropped is two reports right off FDA web site documenting two glucose meter strip technology and their capability:

1955-K0926021freestyle_lite_strips.pdf (147 KB) 1956-FOODANDDRUGADMINISTRATION_glucoseerrors.doc (279 KB) 1957-K0606201_aviva_test_strips.pdf (90.7 KB)

so, any new response - endgame etc?

i too use the OneTouch when I started on MM pump, then got the new Carelink Contour/Bayer Meter, which also talks to Revel pump. For me, the OneTouch is always lower then the Carelink Bayer or my CGM. Now, i'm going to go to a new one with the Omnipod. They're all different, drives me nuts. Next time you get your A1C drawn, check you BG's and see how on or off it is. It's so dang frustrating when every frickin meter reads a different number, especially when they're way off.

Sarah:

When testing with two meters, to compare; it is critical to have both meters loaded up and test the same fingerprick blood spot. Unfortunately the blood is not totally constant and really is a a bunch of packets stacked up behind each other and readings will in fact vary from one sample to another sample on samples on same fingertip.

This way I get good correspondance/compare between meters and find consistent calibration differences.

Organs like liver can really load some glucose on fast and cause peaks. AFter the heart pumps the stuff around the circuits a few times, one finally gets some honest averages.

Hello Andrea, I have used many different meters and have had similar situations, It's very frustrating. I think you should try the 'nano' by accucheck I've never been happier. It's always right on with my AIC's and most insurances cover it.