I have been using one touch products since I was dx in 2002. I was given a new Freestyle Lite and I tried it out right after the one touch. I noticed that the one touch was about 20mg/dl lower than the Freestyle. This morning I went to the endo and I tested with the one touch right before they tested me with their accucheck and again it was about 20mg/dl lower. Has anyone else had problems with lower readings from one touch meters?

Tags: glucose, meters

Views: 5211

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I used my freestyle mini for years... loved it. Was extremely accurate. then one day I kept getting errors and had to get a new one. now normally Id get the same, as I am used to it... but I tried a bayers..didnt really like this one.. readings felt off to me. Now I am on a clinical trial of an accu chek aviva nano...and LOVE IT!
I am using a One Touch Mini right now. I had a One Touch Ultra but it died last week.I also was using another One Touch Mini that I got in June but, I have been having problems with the lancet pen. So, I've gotten a whole new one. I was under the impression that One Touch was pretty good. It is the only meter that our drugstore has in stock.
I am a T2.

I use the Ultra One Touch Mini. I took it with me when I got my second A1c test, and the woman at the lab was kind enough to use their meter, which brand I did not recognize, but is one that seemed to take about a minute for the results. It came up with a 90, while mine, taken from the same blood spot on the finger, showed 89. I'll take that as a good sign.

In the range where my numbers are, even 20% is not any great concern to me, but I can see how those who are fighting much higher readings, would be interested in precision.

I use my meter for reading trends more than accuracy. There are too many variables to cope with to expect much more than that, although we can sure hope for better. You probably won't get a free meter, if the FDA forces accuracy under say, 5%, and strips would probably go even higher in cost. Lab costs will also skyrocket, as they are held to much the same standard. I think the whole BG reading issue is about following trends, knowing what food does what to you, and where you are, at any time of day. 140 is someone's idea of the max, but when I hit 147, I don't pay it much mind (unless it stays there for an hour )

I test often, and when I got my A1c, it was pretty close to what I would have expected, so I take that as meaning my meter is reasonable. Those who test numerous times per day should have a pretty good idea of what your average BG is. I don't mean dead on accurate, but a fair idea, and when you get the A1c test, just plug it into one of the online converters and it will tell you what your average really is. That should ballpark your meter pretty well.

To me, the solution is found at the other end, away from new meters and more expensive strips, and should be found in a small bottle of liquid, much like the control solution, only this liquid would emulate a precise glucose reading of known value. Make all of it equal to a BG of say 120. Then we use it the same way we do the control test, and if the meter says 120, yipee! If you are off by ten or fifteen in either direction, you know to make the correction when you get your daily testing, or you can try for another meter. The fluid would be costly, but no one would need much, as there is no reason to check the meter over and over again. Strips would be the variable.

Just seems like the easier way to go. I kind of obsessed over it for the first month, because I also got a Freestyle Light and a Bayer Contour that all came with some strips, and when I compared all my meters, using the same blood draw, they all came up different. Not a whole lot, not enough to make me worry about it anymore. Again, its really only good for recording trends.

I can understand some have a need for very accurate readings, but if I was to risk a guess, I would say most people can be off by 10 pts and not need to be to concerned. Of course, that is just my opinion, based only on what I have read, and done myself. :-)

Meters used to be a lot more accurate, took longer to register readings & needed larger blood samples. We've traded size & speed for accuracy.

Amazing that your meter was that close to the lab reading. I had four different meters (freebies) & tested them against a lab test. The results varied from 15-28 pts. Not a huge deal regarding trends, but it is a big deal for anyone basing insulin doses on meter readings for meals & correcting both highs & lows, as you said.

No doubt that greater accuracy would result in more expense, despite the billions already being made on test strips. The R&R expense has long been compensated many times over, yet strips still average $1 each when they cost a tenth of this to produce. If some company would lower the price, they'd make a fortune from all of us who would switch brands just to be able to afford strips!
Know this sounds silly, but have you washed your hands... pref with a little bit of soap.. Two things iv found with these more sensitive/shorter time meters... 1. If you try to force blood into the strip by "scooping" or pushing the strip against the skin, it can throw the meter off.. get a a tiny drop on your finger and just sort of dip the wick edge/or face (depends on strip technology) into it.... 2. Wash your hands before using.. they tend to be more sensitive to fiilm/gunk you might have gotten by handling stuff or touching.. Seriously...

Always if i think its too high, the first thing i do is go wash my hands, and retest. I have found i have thown it off, esp if im retesting after even handling a glucose tab!

Hope this helps
Just want to second the 'washing your hands' advice. I would think that residual food or anything else you might have on your hand could throw the readings way off.

As with everything else that I do so compulsively :-) I test exactly the same way, every time, unless I am out and about, but that hasn't happened more than a few times.

I put the strip into the meter and check the code because its that kind of meter, then I withdraw the strip just enough to turn it off. Wash with soap and hot water, all the while sort of 'milking' my hand and then working towards whichever finger I plan to abuse. I only use my pinkie or ring finger. Read that somewhere, and they do seem to be the least painful of all the digits. When I dry my hands, I keep them down low, and then stab myself, and push the strip in to activate the meter. Sometimes I have to break the 'rules' and sort of 'milk' the finger tip to get the blood I need, and then I slide the strip into the spot of blood. I hate it when the pokey goes in far enough to actually hurt, but I don't bleed..... I try but nothing comes out, so I stick myself on the other side of the finger and get it done, but invariably, the first stick starts to work a bit, and it looks like I was bitten by a snake

If you don't do things like this the same way every time, when things go wrong, you have no idea where you messed up. Same applies to how you take your blood pressure, as well as most all other things that are repetitive in life. Its how I have learned to live. Makes things easier to fix when they go wrong. :-)

The meter that the lab used to test my BG was beige, but it had red paint on the edges and the sides. The brand name never showed. It took longer than the five seconds my One Touch does, and I imagine that helps with the accuracy.

Plus, as you said, it took a lot more blood. She let me know ahead of time that it would hurt more than the lancets I use, because they needed to get more blood for that meter.

We have traded precision for speed and blood qty, but I think the variables are in the strips, not the meters. The method of building the meters pretty much insures that they will be accurate if they are properly tested at the factory, and are not likely to change over time, since they are all just integrated ckts. They may be off by ten points, but they will always be off by ten points. The strips look to me like the place to look for repeatability and consistent readings.

Im curious. was the lab meter you didnt reconize bright red? If so its a Hemocue... I used one for a study... great but takes a HELL of a lot of blood... Wish they became a consumer item like they were aiming to do before Quest Diagnostics bought them
I was just comparing a Walgreens monitor to a Bayer contour and the number difference is huge. Testing the 2 always with the same drop of blood, I have differences of 230,104 and 315, to mention only a few. No 2 readings have even come close. I am new to this and am I crazy to think this could be very dangerous?
I've had the same problem! So which one do you believe?!!!
Yes, thank you....I am looking for the same answer. I am talking about a dangerous level of differences(see above)....anyone?
I don't know if this will help the dilemma, but I took five or six different meters (freebies) to measure against a lab test to figure out which one was closest. My doctor wrote a prescription so I didn't have to pay for the test. None were hugely off, but the Accu-Chek Aviva was closest to the lab result. The lab tech explained that their test measured venous blood, but it should be fairly close to a finger stick, so not sure that my experiment was valid.

Really is enough to drive a person crazy!
@Amber: The same meter and the same test stripe will produce different results. The expected difference is mentioned in the description of the stripes. Thus you can not compare two devices with one test. You need many tests under lab conditions to be able to make an assumption about the accuracy of meters.




From the Diabetes Hands Foundation blog...

DHF Joins Diabetes Advocacy Alliance

Diabetes Hands Foundation is incredibly honored to join the Diabetes Advocacy Alliance, an organization with the drive and potential to affect a powerful, positive impact on diabetes and healthcare policy. Diabetes Advocacy Alliance is a 20-member coalition of leading professional Read on! →

Helmsley Charitable Trust Renews Support for DHF

HELMSLEY CHARITABLE TRUST GRANTS SUPPORT TO DIABETES HANDS FOUNDATION FOR FOURTH YEAR  Funding in 2015 to support major transitions in programs and leadership at Diabetes Hands Foundation BERKELEY, CA: February 18, 2015 – The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Read on! →

Diabetes Hands Foundation Team


Melissa Lee
(Interim Executive Director, Editor, has type 1)

Manny Hernandez
(Co-Founder, has LADA)

Emily Coles (Head of Communities, has type 1)

Mila Ferrer
(EsTuDiabetes Community Manager, mother of a child with type 1)

Mike Lawson
(Head of Experience, has type 1)

Corinna Cornejo
(Director of Operations and Development, has type 2)

Desiree Johnson  (Administrative and Programs Assistant, has type 1)


Lead Administrator

Brian (bsc) (has type 2)


Lorraine (mother of type 1)
Marie B (has type 1)

DanP (has Type 1)

Gary (has type 2)

David (has type 2)


LIKE us on Facebook

Spread the word


This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.

© 2015   A community of people touched by diabetes, run by the Diabetes Hands Foundation.

Badges  |  Contact Us  |  Terms of Service