John,
Thank you for the correction. I was being lazy in not checking it (I am diabetic). The use of mg/dL (which the Germans also use) uses the dL (an odd unit) ensures that there are no decimal points within the number and no superfluous zeros after the number. I agree fully with the need for a leading zero in front of a decimal point, but in such cases, I ask the question Why did you not use a different prefix to your units. I accept of course that at times there might be a sound reason for doing so. _____ From: John M. Steele [mailto:jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net] Sent: 09 October 2011 11:47 To: U.S. Metric Association; vliets...@btinternet.com Subject: Re: [USMA:51206] RE: Damned Decimals? Martin, The glucose units are actually mmol/L (millimoles per liter). The US uses mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter) and the numbers are 18 X higher (molar mass of glucose divided by 10). The alternate symbol L for liter is approved and part of the SI. It is preferred in the US, perhaps the UK should "prefer" it too and require it in the health field. Although I question whether it is really clearer, the US medical profession uses mcg rather than µg for microgram. For numbers less than unity, a leading zero must be REQUIRED before the decimal. Certainly an alternate prefix can be considered. For sub 1 mL doses, should microliters be used? It is true that some fonts have a very small period/decimal. Should a "heavier" decimal point be defined (and a slightly greater width in proportional fonts)? --- On Sun, 10/9/11, Martin Vlietstra <vliets...@btinternet.com> wrote: From: Martin Vlietstra <vliets...@btinternet.com> Subject: [USMA:51206] RE: Damned Decimals? To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu> Date: Sunday, October 9, 2011, 4:34 AM I agree with Michael decimals should be avoided. I know that sugar levels in blood are quoted in mols/L in the UK - typical values range between 4.0 and 7.0. A dropped decimal could make 1.7 (very low) look like 17 (very high. In contrast, other countries tune the units so that readings are in the range 60 to 120 (if I remember correctly). Regarding the milli/micro problem - the micro symbol (µ) is on the Latin-0 character set, so its use should not present problems from a computer point of view (other than non-German keyboards). However, there should be checks on the pharmacist's software regarding safe limits for drugs - I do not believe that there is any drug for which the minimum dose is 0.001 of the maximum dose (I am of course willing to bow to superior knowledge on this matter as I am sure that some who are more knowledgeable than me on this topic will be reading this). -----Original Message----- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu <http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-u...@colostate.edu> [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu <http://us.mc824.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-u...@colostate.edu> ] On Behalf Of Michael GLASS Sent: 09 October 2011 05:23 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:51205] Damned Decimals? I was reading the November 2010 edition of "The Yardstick" the Journal of the British Weights and Measures Association , no. 43. See http://www.bwmaonline.com/ An article in this issue highlighted the problem caused by the use of decimals in prescriptions. They can result in patients receiving 10 or even 100 times the dose of the medicine prescribed. Here are some of the accounts quoted in the article: * Building a safer NHS for patients "Errors in prescribing for children frequently arise because of poor handwriting, misinterpretation of decimal points and calculation errors. Misplaced decimal points can result in 10- or 100-fold dosing errors. Despite widespread awareness of the risk, decimal point errors involving potent druge, notably digoxin and poiates, continue to occur. These can be fatal." * Confusion between the si unit for litre and the number 1. The Greek symbol for micro is often misread as m (milli) particularly if the handwriting is poor. (University of Nottingham) * A four month old baby killed because a doctor's receptionist made out the baby's prescription as a dosage of 5 ml twice a day instead of 0.5ml.(Report in the Daily Mail, 30 January 2010) * An emergency Asthma Care Pack recalled because of a misprint of the dosage of IV Salbutamol as 250 milligrams instead of 250 micrograms. Administering the incorrect dose could result in serious and possibly fatal consequences for some patients. (Asthma UK, 16 May 2007) * Following the death of a 2-week old baby who was given a dose of digoxin of 0.8mg instead of 0.08mg, the coroner said: "I feel very strongly that in calculating drugs it would be much simpler to use small denominations when one can deal in full numbers." I believe that the coroner was right. Decimals should not be used. Medicine should be manipulated with whole numbers. Perhaps micrograms could be used for all medicines. What do others think? Best wishes, Michael GlassIt contained an article which condemned the
