There are currently several companies advertising their 'no coding' blood sugar meters---they're free, but you have to sign up for regular delivery of and payment for supplies from them. That's where the companies make their money.
As for the maligned coding concept, these ads are misleading. I'm a diabetic, and I still use the meter I was issued several years ago. I think the retail cost at the time was around $60. My doctor and diabetes nurse both said it was more accurate than the new ones that permit you to use your arm or other non-finger areas. Coding consists of opening the test strip box, taking out the little plastic chip at the top, and sliding it into the pocket in the back of the meter. The meter takes it from there, and that's the extent of 'coding.' So, coding is no big deal. I'd take my Accu-Chek over any other meter I've seen or been told about. And for crying out loud: designer colors? "Fun" colors? And quicker? If you can't wait fifteen or twenty seconds for the reading, then you're not really serious about controlling your disease. They market these meters like color-coordinated cell phones.
As for the finger pricks? My opinion is that it is a side-effect of having a serious DISEASE! Life isn't a computer game, folks. Diabetics need to keep close tabs on blood sugar and diet. I've seen too many tragic cases of people who ignored their disease until they lost a limb or part of one, or had serious internal problems. A few pinpricks a day [I use four or five tests; and at last count, I still have ten fingers] reminds you that you have a disease that needs close control. So, don't be fooled into thinking you no longer have to spend time in recognition of a serious disease. Diabetes is not a matter of designer meters.
There are numerous companies these days---usually on the Food Channel or History Channel---that voice there claims about taking their production for a year and putting the units end to end for a number of turns about the world. At this point of weary listening, I think that if you took the spokesmen and spokeswomen claiming such things, and laid them end to end, you'd have a ring I could believe in.
Considering the modern vices created by photos, movies, television, the computer, the internet, the automobile, a large population of takers---well, I think Heaven is going to have more people from the nineteenth century than the twentieth or twenty-first. But then, I admire the modern concepts of photos, movies, television, the computer, the internet, the automobile, and well-financed medical research [please keep the government away from that]. So, making it to Heaven is a matter of personal behavior, and these inventions and others just test us. They can be good or bad, but the sad truth is that people are the ones who damage other people, not their assets or inventions. While being a liberal is a choice and not a sin, it leads to anti-human attitudes and nefarious schemes against religion and old fashioned common sense. Peace be with you.
I keep seeing these pleas for money to support animal care and rescue. I applaud the sentiment and efforts. But what about humans? Over the past decades, we've permitted baby murder of more than thirty million---and that's just in the US. I know some of you readers think that a woman has the 'right to choose', but I don't agree with such an all-encompassing concept. The right to choose your own medical treatment is one thing. Murdering an unborn child is another. No person can play God. So quit the whining about a right that doesn't exist with anyone. Life is paramount.