Recent Posts
Search the DAFNE Online Forums
15,847 posts found
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Rounding up or rounding down Hallo again!Yes that's very true, I will just have to see how it goes. I knew you could get 0.5 pens, but in my case I've got insulin resistance so I think 0.5 units would have negligible effect on me. Thanks anyway Diane x |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! It helps with peace of mind doesn't it? However, it drives me mad when I've calculated correctly due to the packaging and my BG are way out afterwards.Sometimes I'm not so sure if they're always right. For instance, Eat claim that their baguettes are 60g carbs (or thereabouts) and I'm sure that they're closer to 80g! |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Oh yess I know, for example I had a sandwich the other day which gave a value for 100g but the pack weighed 176g - duh! Normally things will say "per pack" but there is always something to test you! 'm ok with maths and ratios I think. Yes i agree, it's normally clear enough. I've become quite addicted to checking, which is a good thing I suppose! |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Rounding up or rounding down Hi Diane,Me again! Depending on what insulin you're on - you can get 0.5 unit pens. I'm on Novorapid QA and I have the Novopen 3 Demi which allows me to do that. If that's no good then I would usually say that I would base it on what my blood sugar reading pre-eating was - so if I was eating 4.5 CPs then I would round it down to 4 if my blood sugar was 5.0 before eating and round it up to 5 if it was 8.0 say. With me, 0.5 units QA equates to around 1.5mmol BG so you can roughly work it out from there as to where it would bring you to. M xx |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! You don't necessarily need the sugar free version as, by using the DAFNE rules, so long as you can calculate the amount correctly then you should be able to eat either. That's from a DAFNE point of view obviously - the sugar free one will have less calories if you're counting those too! I usually try the sugar free options just to see what they're like - some are fine and some are disgusting. If you find one that's nice then it's a double bonus!It can be really confusing when they talk about portion size (not least because their idea of a portion is usually a lot less than mine is!) but, I usually find that when they do, there is something on the packaging somewhere that will tell you what percentage of the packet or what weight constitutes a portion - then you can work it out from there. |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! Oh thanks Melissa, you are clearly better at this than me! This really stumped me. I suppose I should eat the sugar free version I know but I was determined I was going to get this worked out somehow. I can usually do the working out from labels, sometimes with a calculator, but this stumped me. Now I shall be able to eat it with a clear conscience and hubby will be happy too!
|
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Hi, thanks for that, just wanted to be sure! |
|
May 1, 2012
meltow
78 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Rounding up or rounding down I'm on the same ratio as you...in the example you give I go for 7 units [4.5 x 1.5 = 6.75 units....rounded up to 7].Say the number of units had come to 6.5, I round up and would take 7 units |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! Nope that's fine - so there are 4 portions in a packet so the "carbohydrate per 92g portion" measure is per quarter of what you've made up. So, if you and your husband had 1/2 each then just double that reading to get your CP - so 28.8g or 3 portions (give or take). That will include the milk as well. Shouldn't make much difference to your CP amount whether you used whole milk or not, only to the fat content if you're measuring that as well. Does that make sense?The "as sold" measures I think are per 100g of powder which is pretty pointless really as who's going to eat the powder! M xx PS: Sainsbury's do their own sugar free version of the Butterscotch angel delight that's lower in CP as it has artificial sweeteners in it. It tastes lovely though - and sets better! |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! This is the most confusing info on a packet I have ever seen!It says the packet weighs 59g which seems irrelevant really. It says 4 portions per pack. Carbohydrate value "per 100g as sold" (what the heck does that mean?) = 73.1g so 7 or7.5 CP? Carbohydrate value per 92g portion prepared with semi skimmed milk = 14.4g so 1.5 CP So say my husband and I share a pack  then that is equivalent of 2 portions each, but made with full milk ..........aaargh!!!!Should I tell the husband Angel Delight is off? lol |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Questions for HCPs / Fluctuating BG levels Hi guys,Can anyone help? I've been fairly good with my diet over the last few months and my BG results have been pretty stable (for me) and fairly predictable using the DAFNE guidelines. I've been using around 4-5 units of BI (Lantus) in the evening to get a good waking reading and stable daytime levels. This is working with a pretty controlled diet though. However, at the weekend, I had a bit of a blowout for 48 hours. I went to stay with friends and ended up eating an awful lot of "bad food". Predictably, my BG levels shot up and I haven't been able to bring them back down again as I can't work out what my BI levels should be. As my waking readings were shocking, I ended up raising BI from 5 to 7-8. They're currently on 8 and I've been waking with readings of around 13-18. I tested at 3am last night to try and work out if hypos were involved at all. I went to sleep on a reading of 11.5, took 1.5 units of QA to correct that and 8 units of BI and, at 3am, my reading was 7.1 which I was quite pleased with. However, when I woke it was 14.6. I wondered if this was because my BG levels had dropped from 3am and I had gone hypo and my body was reacting to that. However, when I tested mid morning, my levels after breakfast had gone to 7.8 which again I was happy with. But, testing before lunch, they had risen to 13.0, even though I hadn't had any carbs. This would imply to me that my background insulin levels are too low and my BG levels are only reacting to the QA. Can anyone help please? Novorapidboi - you're usually good on this sort of thing! Many thanks, Melissa |
|
May 1, 2012
MelissaF
56 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Angel Delight - help! Hi Diane,I had a vague memory that somewhere on the packet it says that a 92g serving is a quarter of a packet (made up) or 1/3 of a packet. Can you see anything like that at all? Melissa |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
I was wondering if I should get a new meter because I have had my existing one probably 5 years at least. It still works ok. I contacted Accu-Check and they said meters had no shelf life, and to contact them if something was wrong with mine and they would advise or exchange it. So I don't have to buy a new one? |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Topic: Carbohydrate Counting / Rounding up or rounding down I just need some clarification on this - if my lunch comes to 4.5 CPs, then do I round it up to 5? And if so and I am on 1:1.5 ratio, do I then take 7 units or 8? |
|
May 1, 2012
DianeW
115 posts
|
Wonder if someone could advise please, on the packet it says it weights 59g, in powder form. On the bit with all the values it says carbohydrate "per 100g" and "per 92g serving". I have no idea how much my serving weighs (how do you weigh it made up?) should I go by the picture in the carb counting book (under "strawberry delight"). |
|
May 1, 2012
novorapidboi26
1,819 posts
|
Topic: DAFNE Online Mobile / windows phone app What carb counting app are you talking about? The DAFNE app? If so, this is just the carb portion database and is available for download in PDF format, which I would assume would be extremely easy to use on a Windows OS, just use Adobe PDF reader.......Windows can run many programs with more compatibility that android or iPhone, so there is no real need for apps as such......... |
|
May 1, 2012
novorapidboi26
1,819 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Auto calculate QA from BG - let's get it right This would be a good to pursue, but as you say, everyone is different................The majority of folk in my experience will have different correction factors according to the time of day [ie. insulin resistance]....... However me, and probably a few others have changing correction factors depending on our BG levels.............. So to suit everyone, some way of entering in these correction factors both by time of day and by BG levels would be good. I suppose just one of these options should be used at a time, although some people may find that they need to consider both scenarios at the same time. But I think that is just getting too complicated...............as we all should be on or near our targets right...........?.........  I personally think the safest choice would be to use 1unit/2.5mmol/l, but maybe upping that to 1unit/2mmol/l might be more successful for some............ As you say, its a risky move, as I know some members here are not in as deep as me and others in terms of their diabetes management........ Maybe a clause in terms and conditions stating that the application calculation function is only to be used as a guide to accompany your own mental arithmetic..... |
|
May 1, 2012
novorapidboi26
1,819 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Have "amber" colour for just-over BG Sounds like an good idea to me............Even just the silly, small things can make a positive difference to the diary experience............ 
|
|
May 1, 2012
Phil Maskell
194 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Have "amber" colour for just-over BG Hi,I like the idea, but as a dev I'm guessing the database behind isn't geared up for this extra range/data, might be a bit of work. Amber/Yellow results, would they have their own section in the graphs etc.. I can see this being widespread and possibly alot of work, but I'm sure Simons up for the challenge This might be completely wrong and really easy to implement, just my 2p Phil P.S I even had colour scales like this on an Excel spreadsheet I used to use before this site was available, had Amber, then Red then Purple/Burgundy for really bad results, tried not to get these 
|
|
May 1, 2012
Phil Maskell
194 posts
|
Topic: DAFNE Online Mobile / windows phone app Hi,I'm not a windows phone dev, more Java/Android but a quick glance at the Microsoft website shows the latest versions of the os for the titan as 7 or 7.1 with no mention of 9, are you sure about this? Phil |
|
May 1, 2012
bangers
6 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Have "amber" colour for just-over BG This is a brilliant suggestion. It is difficult enough to maintain good levels with out having a system tell you whether you are good or bad, especially as you suggest, there can be a minute difference between the two. Maybe the amber level could also be used for levels between say 4.5 and 5.5. |
|
May 1, 2012
Podarcis
14 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Have "amber" colour for just-over BG In the Entries Diary (both in the app and online), BG values above the target are shown in red. Assuming a target range of 4.5 to 7.5, this means that a BG of 7.4 will be white/green but one of 7.6 will be red, whereas in reality these readings are approximately the same. Also, a BG of 7.6 will be red but so will one of 19.6 - but there's a huge difference in the severity of the situation. I suggest that there could be a yellow range immediately above the target range. The yellow range could reasonably be the same width as the target range (to save having too many more config parameters), so that with the default target range of 4.5 to 7.5, any value between 7.6 and 10.5 would be yellow while any value above 10.5 would be red.What do others think? Do you think this is a good or a bad idea? |
|
May 1, 2012
Podarcis
14 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Auto calculate QA from BG - let's get it right 1. For the manual corrections that I presently make I use a calculation baseline that is one third of the target range above the lower limit of the target range. So, if my target range is 4.5-7.5 and my BG 11.3, I would add (11.3 - 5.5) / 2.2 = 2.63 (rounded to 3) QA to the app's computed dose. The 5.5 is my baseline figure, one third of the 4.5-7.5 range above the lower limit, and 2.2 is my personal BG:QA estimate, ie 1 unit of QA lowers my BG by a bit more than 2 mmol/l.I would argue against setting the baseline figure towards the top end of the range for this reason: Everyone likes to be at the lower end of their target range (don't they?) so, if they find that the app will calculate a corrective adjustment that is smaller than the one they would themselves have calculated, they might be tempted to compensate by reducing the BG:QA setting. This would then lead to overly high correction calculations when the BG is well out of target range, and could promote that awful phenomonen of high-low-high-low swings from overcorrection that we all hate so much. We must encourage people to enter their true estimate of their own BG:QA ratio in order to get the best results possible. But I will accept the halfway point of the target range as a reasonable baseline, and it would be easy to understand if set there. Or it could be a configurable setting, but that is probably overkill. 2. For myself, I use the same BG:QA ratio at all times of the day and no matter how far out of range I am. Other people may be different - please tell us. |
|
May 1, 2012
Simon
578 posts
|
Topic: Site Development / Auto calculate QA from BG - let's get it right Theres been discussion and requests for an improved auto calculation of QA in the site and mbi,e apps, which take into account corrective dosages as well, and I'd like to get a consensus on how we should do it.The first thing I should say is that we don't have the ability to deal with any lawsuits, as we aren't part of the DAFNE program and are a group of graduates just like you who do this in our spare time; so my first diorite is ensuring we dont get sued for providing inaccurate medical advice or similar. That said , we also want to help graduates in any way possible, so I'd like to go ahead with this function and have created this forum post to ensure we get it right. So, the auto calculation of insulin dosage matched to CPs is simple - its just take the CP input and multiply by the ratio for that entry type. The tricky bit is how to calculate the corrective dosage. An initial first pass at this would require users to enter how much they expect their BG to lower after injecting 1 unit of insulin. The app could then calculate the difference between input BG and target BG, and use this to calculate the number of corrective units needed. That way it isn't giving medical advice, just crunching some numbers. However there are a couple of questions in my mind: 1. What would we aim for with the correction? Each entry type has a target range of mmol/l readings, would we aim for the middle of this, or err on the side of caution and aim towards the top end of the range? 2. Would we need to have different 'expected BG lowering values', for different times of day? Or for different levels of high BG? For me I find I can expect my BG to go down by 2 for each unit if. Or receive insulin, but as with everything diabetes related, everybody is different. Thanks in advance for your help! |