Does anyone know if you run two receivers at the same time, receiving data from one transmitter, would it work? Has anyone tried doing this as well? I have two receivers after soaking one in water and getting it to come back with a hair dryer and bag of rice, but still bought a replacement. (Note - Mom + wine + one year old diabetic learning to walk + open glass of water = recipe for disaster.) There are times when I suspect that either receiver may have been giving bad data or has been damaged, and would like to warm up two and pick whichever one seems to be working best.
Yes, I have tried this ! I had 2 receivers and 1 transmitter. I did calibrations at the same time, and both receivers gave almost identical results.
p.s. Rice does wonders ! I know of a laptop that was recovered after a boat overturned, and it took a while but finally came back to life !
Excellent - thanks MegaMinx! You're the best. I am going to do that next time I suspect receiver issues. And good to know on the laptop - I unintentionally submersed a blackberry this week for about 30 seconds (is this a theme with me?!?) and got it back working in 24 hours with the rice trick.
This is an interesting experiment. I'm glad to see MegaMinx's results. I was thinking about this last night and was of the mind that the "brains" is in the transmitter and the receiver is just a screen to tell us what the transmitter is "thinking" and that the results should really be the same. But I wasn't sure of how the technology worked. It made me think of the artificial pancreas project and how they use two transmitters on subjects, thus two brains.
I know the receiver has software that is 'update-able', via the DM3 program. Check under the Tools menu.
Last time I had checked, it said no updates available. So from that I had concluded the transmitter was just sending data, and the receiver had the 'brains'. The transmitter takes readings continuously, and has enough smarts to send an 'average' reading for the past 5 minutes.
With MM CGMS, I think the MM transmitter is a bit more capable, in that it can store data during the time it loses connection with the 'receiver'. Once back in range, the MM transmitter can send the missing data, so there were fewer gaps. I think with Dexcom it's a one-shot send, and either the receiver gets it, or doesn't.
Wha?!? I read what you said and searched on the web about the artificial pancreas. It uses two sensors and two pods?!? (One for insulin and one for glucagon.) I am dumbfounded. The artificial pancreas idea is amazing, but FOUR devices?!? That have to be changed constantly?!? As you know, these devices are not as stable or as easy to kept stuck or maintained as you would hope. Four devices and we would be juggling constantly - like we do now - and it would mean a different problem. This is a bit disheartening.
I just don't know ..... http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01552603