Lab reports contain a perpetual tutorial of sorts.  To the right of the list of 
patient results is a list of ranges for the corresponding values. So, that 
felliw can work in Canada comfortably.



BTW, the US does use mmol/L for some levels, just not all if ghdn.

Paul Trusten, Reg. Pharmacist
Vice President
U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
Midland, Texas USA
www.metric.org 
+1(432)528-7724
[email protected]


On May 19, 2013, at 20:03, Remek Kocz <[email protected]> wrote:

> Apparently there were efforts to harmonize the lab values used in the US labs 
> with those used by the rest of the world.  Never worked out.  In medical 
> school, during the first two didactic years, both the "US" and "SI" are still 
> taught, but once medical students enter their clinical years, everything is 
> in "US" values.  Some European countries use these values as well, so this is 
> not just our problem here.  
> 
> This reminds me of one of the residents telling me why he wouldn't want to 
> work in Canada.  One of the major reasons was having to relearn all the lab 
> values, which are SI over there.
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 6:46 PM, James Frysinger <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> I'm inclined to agree with what you and John Steele are saying -- that the 
>> prefixed denominator is what causes the article's author(s) to deem the 
>> first example non-SI.
>> 
>> Of course, denominators with prefixed units are not banned in the SI, they 
>> just are not the preferred format.
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> 
>> On 2013-05-19 16:54, Paul Trusten wrote:
>>> Jim, it is weird. Call it an American affectation.   From what I can gather 
>>> from my brief study of medical laboratory science, there is a US use of 
>>> laboratory units that differs from those in the rest of the world. I think 
>>> the difference lies in the perception in the US that if SI *BASE* units are 
>>> used in expressing the concentration of the substance being measured, the 
>>> LABORATORY units are considered to be SI, while the units used in the US 
>>> are "not" SI.  I think that if they knew what they were talking about, they 
>>> would say "non-US," not "non-SI." Actually, I think (I could be wrong) that 
>>> the US units are called either "US" or "standard."
>>> 
>>> For example, the unit used  to measure blood glucose in American labs is 
>>> mg/dL, while outside the US, it is mmol/L. Blood glucose meters usually 
>>> have a switch on them to allow the patient to toggle betwee mg/dL and 
>>> mmol/L, presumably depending upon the country of usage.
>>> 
>>> So, it is SI to them only if they use an SI base unit (mol) in the 
>>> numerator of the concentration. Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.
>>> It just seems to me the keepers of the medical laboratory units may need to 
>>> brush up on how SI is applied.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Paul Trusten, Reg. Pharmacist
>>> Vice President
>>> U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
>>> Midland, Texas USA
>>> www.metric.org
>>> +1(432)528-7724
>>> [email protected]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On May 19, 2013, at 15:55, James Frysinger <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I was doing some research for my sister's use of vitamin B12 supplements 
>>>> and came to this page:
>>>>     http://www.webmd.com/diet/vitamin-b12-15239?page=2
>>>> 
>>>> It contains a small chart:
>>>>         Vitamin B12Normal:
>>>>     More than 200-835 picograms per milliliter (pg/mL)
>>>>     148-616 picomoles per liter (pmol/L) (SI units)
>>>> 
>>>> Interestingly, WebMD apparently considers picomoles per liter to be in SI 
>>>> units but picograms per milliliter not to be in SI units.
>>>> 
>>>> Of course, the non-SI unit is the liter (or milliliter) but that's 
>>>> acceptable for use with the SI. So, in my mind neither value statement is 
>>>> "more SI" than the other.
>>>> 
>>>> How do you view this, Paul Trusten?
>>>> 
>>>> Jim
> 

Reply via email to