You have an odd way of showing that. Don't be so bloody
thin-skinned at criticism.

For what it's worth, here is some constructive criticism.
Others here may have better ideas, use what you will. But
expect skepticism if the questions are leading, as your 2,3
and 4 are, and expect confusion if you ask two questions in
one, as 5 is.

Your survey asks:   
Q1. What kind of Blood Sugar/Glucose monitor to you
currently use?
A: Text
   
2. Is your current monitor portable enough?
A: Y/N        

3. Would you prefer your monitor to be more discreet?
A: Y/N

4. Would you use a monitor which was smaller and gave
continuous readings, alerting you to possible hypos
immediately?
A: Y/N
   
5. Overall are you happy with your current monitor or would
you prefer more discretion and more hypo awareness?
A: Text (This is actually three different questions and led
to my answer of "Both. Happy with the present, happy to see
improvement.")

A better survey to achieve your aim may have been:

Q1. What kind of Blood Sugar/Glucose monitor to you
currently use?
A: Text

Q2. What do you like about your meter?
A: Text

Q3. What do you dislike about your meter?
A: Text

What features would you like to see in future meters?

o Better Accuracy
o Easier to use and carry
o Easier to read
o Smaller sample size
o Continuous readings
o No need for expensive strips
o memory organiser to classify tests as fasting, 1hr, 2hr

and so on. In other words, provide the full range of options
for the respondents to choose from, in the hope that the
responses will agree with your aim. Don't try to lead them
to your aim - or the survey is worthless and project
assessors will see that too.

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 2x500mg