A batch of glucose test strips sold for €9.90 (about $11.50) has failed accuracy checks in 17 of 60 tests, after a Brussels shopper noticed her home meter gave a markedly different result from a pharmacy device. The National Medicines Inspectorate has urged customers to stop using strips from the affected batch and says 74,000 packs entered Belgian shops and online sales.
Ada Özkök, 58, bought the Mellivex HomeCheck strips during an early-November discount sale. At a pharmacy on 2 November, she tested the same finger sample on her own meter and a pharmacy unit: one read 6.8 millimoles per litre, the other 5.2. “I thought the cheap pack was a bargain. Then I wondered which number I was supposed to trust,” she said.
The mismatch behind the alert
The inspectorate began testing after Özkök reported the discrepancy. In laboratory checks of 60 paired readings using the affected batch, 17 fell outside the accuracy range used in a widely adopted international benchmark. The agency said the issue was limited to strips marked lot 26-41; it has not found evidence that other Mellivex products are affected.
For people who rely on home readings to guide care, a false result can lead them to delay contacting a clinician or make an unnecessary change to their treatment. Fatima F. Chidozie, a clinical measurement specialist at the Antwerp Institute for Patient Safety, called the result “a serious warning about how easily a cheap consumable can turn a trusted number into a gamble”.
A glucose reading is not a harmless figure on a screen when someone uses it to make a treatment decision.
Fatima F. Chidozie, clinical measurement specialist
The strips were imported by Arden Health Trading and sold through Flemish Value Market shops and two online retailers from 18 September. The company said the discount applied to a seasonal promotion and denied that price-cutting affected quality checks. Its voluntary recall began on Friday; retailers have been asked to remove the lot and refund customers.
A fragile link in home care
The episode exposes a weak point in the rapid shift towards home monitoring: the meter gets attention, but its disposable strips can be just as important. “A device can be well designed and still give a misleading result if the strip chemistry varies,” said Angelika Krajewska-Szymański, a biomedical engineer who advises Belgian clinics on testing equipment.
The inspectorate has received 27 complaints of readings that differed from results obtained at clinics, but said it has confirmed no injuries linked to the batch. Spokesperson Osvaldo Little said customers should check the lot number on the box, return affected packs to the seller and seek clinical advice if a reading does not fit how they feel. He cautioned against changing treatment on the basis of one unexpected result.
Arden Health Trading says it is checking retained samples from the same production run and expects to give regulators its findings next week. The inspectorate is also testing strips from earlier and later lots. That work will determine whether the problem is a single production fault or a broader failure in checks on low-cost monitoring supplies.
