FROM OUR EXPERTS
E veryone who's had diabetes for a while is aware that there's some sort of relationship between their blood glucose (BG) levels and the results of their hemoglobin A1c (A1C) test. If someone's BGs are completely normal for the last three months, it's probably safe to assume that the A1C, if measured today, would be normal. But the reverse is not true: a normal A1C doesn't mean all the BGs the past three months have been normal: that might have been the case, but it's also possible, and indeed likely, that the BGs were a mixed bag, some high, some low, and some normal. For whatever it's worth, the A1C has become the "gold standard" lab test for measuring diabetes control: the lower the better; the usual advice is to aim to get your number under 7 (per one organization's recommendation) or 6.5 (per the recommendations of some other organizations).
A recent publication ( Translating the A1C Assay Into Estimated Average Glucose Values ) examined the relationship of the A1C assay...
Reprinted with permission of Amy Tenderich of diabetesmine.com . Remember that little discussion about abandoning the established A1c for a new Average Glucose (AG) measurement? Well, guess what? This is pretty much the "dumbest idea ever floated" in diabetes, according to my favorite irreverent industry expert, David Kliff of Diabetic Investor . Indeed, the ADA and a number of other powerful health organizations -- the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), and International Diabetes Federation (IDF) -- now have an agreement in place to evaluate the accuracy of the A1c and potentially switch to the new AG units, contingent on results of an international study currently underway. The new standard apparently won't change the chemistry of the test itself, but only the "reference method," i.e. how the machines that conduct the tests are calibrated, and how the results ar...
The Food and Drug Administration surprised almost everyone on March 24 by approving the DexCom STS Continuous Glucose Monitoring System . Even DexCom’s President and CEO Andrew Rasdal seems to have been surprised.
He told analysts in a conference call on March 27 that he had expected an “approvable letter” requesting more information. I was surprised as anyone, even though a few months ago I bought stock in the company.
Even more surprising is that Rasdal says that they will start selling the STS system immediately and anywhere in the country. This is in marked contrast to the Medtronic Diabetes marketing strategy for the other continuous sensor, the Guardian RT. While it works out the reimbursement issue, Medtronic is limiting sales to just seven large cites .
Getting health insurance coverage is the big challenge for all continuous sensors simply because they are so expensive. Rasdal told analysts that those of us who can afford the out-of-pocket costs will be the company’s first ...
You should know
Answers to your question are meant to provide general health information but should not replace medical advice you receive from a doctor. No answers should be viewed as a diagnosis or recommended treatment for a condition. Content posted by community members does not necessarily reflect the views of Remedy Health Media, which also reserves the right to remove material deemed inappropriate.