Hello.

[ChrisWhittle]

Hi, as a new member of the forum ( type 1 ), I would like to ask if anyone has found that Fiasp is slower working than Novorapid? I was on Novorapid for about thirty years, but my specialist changed my prescription to Fiasp after explaining that it would work faster. I have found the opposite to be true. I actually find that works better for me, as it reduces the chances of an unexpected hypo. TIA.

 

[rebrascora]

Hi and welcome.

I find Fiasp slightly quicker than Novo(not so)Rapid 🙄 when levels are below 8 and a lot faster when my levels are in the 4-5s. it took a lot of getting used to for me and it can be a bit quirky. For instance, if my levels get above 10 you would think I was injecting water. It can take 2+ hours and 2 or 3 stacked corrections to bring me back down. I learned that I needed to become quite heavy handed with it to get the results I wanted and I would say I need significantly more for corrections than I did with NR. It is very responsive to exercise though so you have to be careful about exercise/activity with Fiasp on board... more so than NR.
It took me 2 trials of 3 months before I got to grips with it and learned how to make it work for me but it sounds like you are finding it suits you from the off.

Do you have Freestyle Libre or other CGM sensor system to monitor your levels? Just wondering if your consultant was hoping to reduce post meal spikes by suggesting the change to Fiasp and that is why they recommended it.

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

I found Fiasp faster initially (such that I needed to use split doses rather than taking insulin up front. But then I seemed to react to it and/or develop resistance. I needed more and more, sires became itchy, and it was only acting at NR speed - just less reliably.

So I switched back.

It works brilliantly for some people, but it wasn’t for me.