Advertisement

18 Responses

  1. Betty
    Betty November 7, 2012 at 4:57 am | | Reply

    I always wonder about the “you never have to stick yourself” statement. Isn’t the all annoying finger stick a way to validate everything that is a continuos monitor. We trust the monitor, but when it comes to health it is a good idea to double check technology. Also – the best thing to ever happen for the cgm that doesn’t need a needle? Sometimes you do scratch your head. Insulin is kind of a big deal – so are insulin pumps – then their is the Lantus and Levemir for people not on pump… let’s just say it’s hard to trust anything that has such a big ego.

  2. tmana
    tmana November 7, 2012 at 6:35 am | | Reply

    Amongst all this hype, what have been the preliminaries (if any) on an ingestible or injectable nanosensor that would float around in the bloodstream and report back to an external device?

  3. Mary Dexter
    Mary Dexter November 7, 2012 at 7:05 am | | Reply

    Accuracy and affordability.

    And an easy way to dispose of used lancets and test strips. Maybe just sharp boxes in public restrooms.

  4. John
    John November 7, 2012 at 7:07 am | | Reply

    In the end, it’s all just a headline for donor dollars. The list of tech that never comes to market for Diabetes (T1 or T2) is incredibly long.

    Until there is a paradigm shift in how we manage this illness, the headline mongers will continue to tempt us with great ideas but that’s all it is..

    Having T1 for over 30 years now I see no real progress in getting anything to the bedside for all T1′s. We continue to be tempted with islet transplants but at the same time reminded there is not enough SUPPLY and requires immunosuppresive drugs, but keep donating to the research!

    I no longer believe there will be any change in managing this illness. We will continue to use injections and fingersticks because the reality is that is the only proven and approved method for the management of diabetes. All the rest is a pipe dream and marketing scam.

  5. Denise
    Denise November 7, 2012 at 7:13 am | | Reply

    “Non-invasive” doesn’t mean that much to me. A finger stick is quick. A cgm gives good charts and data. A pump lets you regulate insulin and skip injections. All this stuff is getting better, smaller, more features, and that’s all good.

    The real issue is my daughter STILL HAS DIABETES!!!!! That is the problem. Find me a cure for that and you can have my house.

  6. Gretchen
    Gretchen November 7, 2012 at 8:16 am | | Reply

    Mike, Great blogpost! The sad thing is that all these developers don’t understand that pricking your finger is a minor annoyance. The popular press is worse, bleating that some new thing will spare patients from “painful fingersticks.”

    The difficult part of diabetes isn’t the fingersticks, it’s keeping your BG levels in good range despite so many variables, some of which you can’t control.

    We need some of these creative engineers to come up with solutions to the more serious problems in controlling BG. More physiologic ways of delivering insulin so peripheral insulin levels aren’t higher than liver insulin levels. Ways of delivering glucagon when needed. Good algorithms for closed loop systems. .

    (I once thought of using your own beta cells [most type 1s have a few left] to do the calculations and then transmitting that information to a pump, which would apply the proper magnification and tell the pump how much insulin to put out. Then I decided it was too “pie in the sky.” Later I read some student at Harvard Medical School had won $2000 for making the same suggestion. Dang!)

    And even better, figuring out how to prevent more kids (and adults) from getting this very inconvenient disease.

  7. diabetic survival kit
    diabetic survival kit November 8, 2012 at 2:47 am | | Reply

    Great post and comments. It would be great if there was a machine that would provide an accurate sugar without use of strips. This would enable people to check as many blood sugars as they need without having to deal with insurance companies that limit the number of tests in order to control costs. The main problem is accuracy, When meters first became available they were so much better than the urine tests. Now more and more accuracy is required. Right now the FDA requires meters to have 95% of their values within 20% of a reference number. Most meters do better than that and FDA guidelines will be stricter. Especially on the low end of the spectrum where inaccuracies can lead to hypoglycemia, accuracy is supremely important. It is impossible to correct what cannot be measured.

  8. MgRabbani
    MgRabbani November 10, 2012 at 2:20 am | | Reply

    Great post! Perfectly understandable about the ebook; definitely have to keep your priorities straight. I’ve learned so much from reading your blog — thank you for all your hard work!

  9. host
    host November 11, 2012 at 12:00 pm | | Reply

    I love this post! I think we should all realise how a non-invasive monitor is also going to affect the companies who sell the strips.. some are so big and make so much money that they would do anything in their power to create fake reports that x y z new non-invasive monitors are inaccurate. I pray that when one does come along one day with the right levels of accuracy that it will not be crushed by the big boys who would lose millions in selling those strips.

  10. One diabetic’s take on Google’s Smart Contact Lenses | Tech Auntie

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  11. Dustin Gurley – dustin.gurley (at) gmail.com , One diabetic’s take on Google’s Smart Contact Lenses

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  12. One diabetic’s take on Google’s Smart Contact Lenses | A Tech Website

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  13. Healthcare links 01/20/2014 | AB's Reflections

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  14. One diabetic’s take on Google’s Smart Contact Lenses | Developer Mode Lab

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  15. Two great big hurdles for Google’s glucose-reading contact lenses: Accuracy, cost : diabeticsglobal.com

    [...] the quest for a bloodless glucose meter, the diabetes community has seen one promising company after another fail to deliver a product to the market. Google has tech chops, but Amy Tenderich [...]

  16. Simon
    Simon January 21, 2014 at 5:10 pm | | Reply

    Don’t dismiss the Symphony CGM system that was developed by Echo Therapeutics. The FDA red tape creates very high regulatory barriers. Small companies with limited budgets and novel products find it difficult to afford the FDA approval process. That’s why they applied in Europe first. They expect approval in April, and will begin the FDA trial for U.S. approval later in 2014. http://echotx.com/press-detail.php?id=137

  17. One diabetic’s take on Google’s Smart Contact Lenses | Smart Contacts

    [...] a diabetic, the only solution I am looking for is non-invasive and one that keeps me in a state of constant alertness about my blood sugar levels while matching [...]

  18. David
    David July 12, 2014 at 1:14 pm | | Reply

    What do you think about Prometheon Pharma? http://www.prometheonpharma.com/technology.html

Leave a Reply