The NHS answers (and why it falls flat)
1. There’s some (poor quality) evidence it causes anxiety - largely because the participants were not educated how and when to test and what to do about the numbers they saw. Also presumptive and patronising.
2. Eventually years of fingerpricking - especially if done any old how rather than with thought to specific location on the finger and rotation - can damage sensation. Much less likely done sensibly and the way a type 2 is likely to test. Very few nurses that have tested me do it the right way. They slap in it too hard, too deep, in the middle of a finger or right on the tip. They need better training to teach us better.
3. It won’t change the outcomes. As well as the points made above this is also because of the assumed progressive nature of type 2 and the assumption few of us will make any changes anyway and will rely on medication alone. Fortunately more and more are recognising the power of dietary change and the possibility of remission. Many still assume we are too fat and lazy to give up our sugar fuelled lives (sarcasm!). More patronising assumptions.
The real answers
A. They themselves don’t seem to get the education how to test in type 2 around diet choices (before and after eating. They see it as for hypo avoidance and insulin dosing purposes only. They fail to see its benefits.
B. Even if they acknowledge the benefits privately the nhs doesn’t have the education or resources to teach type 2 how to test effectively in a structured way, how to understand the results and what to do with them. So they see it as random testing without action to follow it, which is indeed pointless
C. If they acknowledge the benefits publicly they then have to fund it. Because of the numbers of type 2 and budget constraints they can’t afford to - even though long term it would reduce spending on diabetes complications but we don’t have a long term nhs spending plan.