Someone posted on another forum that her MM rep had said that they are waiting on FDA approval for an integrated sensor and infusion site. Anyone else even heard of anything like this? I would think that having the sensor and the infusion set in the same space would make it pretty inaccurate. But hey, who knows?

Justin

Besides that, kiss goodbye to running your sensor for more than 3 days!

ah, it's inaccurate as it is! That's why I returned my transmitter for refund. If it gets any worse, who will be able to use it??

Yes, I heard the same thing. But it won't be any time soon. I don't think it will work with the Paradigm. I think it will be with the next generation (at least a year from now). And the big trade off is that we won't be able to use it more than 3 days. So I'm not sure it's worth it. Guess we'll have to wait and see about the cost.
Linda



Just because it didn't work for you, doesn't mean it's inaccurate for everyone. I had a sensor going last week that was within 5 points of every fingerstick for the entire time between day 2 - 6.
Linda

There is that too. Especially considering I'm on day 14 for this sensor.

Justin

By the same token, because it works for you, that doesn't extrapolate to it working for everyone. The internet has plenty of complaints floating around about how poorly the CGMS performs, as well as some success stories. Geez, even MM is willing to admit the problems!! They are WELL aware of the limitations, and how it doesn't work for some folks. In fact, MANY folks. ANd even the most vocal proponents, when they are suffering from a bout of honesty, will freely admit they too have had their share of issues with the CGMS. It's not all roses.

Many people use Apidra with great success but it doesn't work for me. That doesn't mean it's an ineffective insulin. Similarly, many people use the MMM RTS with great success (and find it accurate) but it didn't work for you. That doesn't mean it's inaccurate. You are generalizing based on your own personal experience.

Sorry, but I've read TONS of posts all over the internet of people having issues with accuracy, so stop with the "personal experience" thing, will ya? It's not just me. CGMS accuracy is very, very iffy, when looked at across all of those who have tried it. That's a FACT. Even MM acknowledges that. I've been online since 1996 and I've read just about every forum and blog there is on the subject. I'm glad it works for you, and it also seems to work for my wife, in the short time she tried it.

1996? It wasn't available until 2006. Back in 1992 when I started as a sysop on the CompuServe diabetes forum the big thing was the Dream Beam by Futrex, the failed non-invasive blood glucose meter. (I was in the trial for this device.) There was a lot of research being conducted for that type of device. I don't recall anything about CGMS.

I said i have been online since 1996. I didn't mean I was reading about CGMS in 1996, for gawd's sakes--that's idiotic.

I'm not sure why you are being so argumentative, but I'm getting really tired of this, so you'll be arguing with yourself after this post, as I'm D-O-N-E.

CGMS has it limitations, especially accuracy during rapid rises & falls in BS. It's not for everyone (so I understand where you're coming from Spike), and obviously there's a long learning curve. The #1 greatest value for me is the trending info which has allowed me to tweak my basal rates (especially during the night/sleep) and refinement of my bolus wizard calculations...which has resulted in being hypoglycemic less. The early warning aspect of the trending info combined with high/low glucose alarms has prevented many lows in dangerous situations, like driving.

I agree that it has its limitations and I certainly agree that it's not for everyone. Similarly, pumps are not for everyone. My point was that saying it (the RTS) is inaccurate is a generalization. I guess I am too caught up in semantics.





Sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent.