Have been in a situation where my BP is measured as a requirement. At one time I took medication, but after stopping drinking and loosing weight, my BP measured normal consistently with the "regular" manual measurement for may years. I am 53 years old. Now, in a situation where BP is, as a rule, measured electronically, it always registers high, even very high. Much higher than it can possibly be. They then measure it manually and it's normal. But others in the group are normal with the electronic monitor, though there are always several examples of high BP in the group of even youngsters when using the electronic version. Also, this can't be operator error in the case where it's measured manually. The technician has varied when this discrepancy has occurred, so I feel, most likely,they're reading correctly. They tell me this is not unusual with the electronic monitors which is why they go ahead and test again manually if showing high electronically. However, it seems to work for most.
Searching the web, I see little information on the inconsistency of readings by electronic monitors. Do you have any input on this? Hope this makes sense! This is of concern to me and should be to others as I've read where the mercury dependent equipment is going away. How can one be assured one is getting a correct reading in the case of an office that does not have both types of measurement equipment? Seems like a possible additional boon to the drug companies!