Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I could definitely see myself overanalyzing my BG readings to an unhealthy level and just getting frustrated because it's not clear cut. But perhaps if it just passively collected that data in the background and then notified me if anything appeared to be a concern or if there was a particular trend or good/bad period of time...

There is a reason that your doctor is using the A1C reading. What ultimately matters (at least for type II who don't use insulin) is the average over a long period of time.

Using meters is great for learning about how your body handles food. But I also think that it is not that important for a type II who is not using insulin to continually monitor their levels.

When I was first diagnosed, I would check my blood right before I ate, right after I finished, and again after 30 mins and 1hour.

Eventually, I got a good sense for how thing affected me and finally stopped measuring. I now use my A1C measurements from the doctor to tell me if I need to make modifications. Typically, now I get more benefit from upping my exercise than from worrying about specific meal compositions.

That being said, someone who uses insulin needs to know how much insulin to use, so monitoring will always be part of their life. If you can get to the point where you don't have to think about it all the time, diabetes can be only a minor inconvenience.
 
Yeah, my mistake was going to an AME, think that it would be "easy". I should have done an AME consultation first, collected the info, then gone in for my medical after that.

Not sure if there's a real way out of this paper chase other than allowing your medical to lapse and going Sport Pilot. I had an informal consult with an AME who told me he could not issue a medical, given my (at that time, recent) medical history. The message I got was because my condition was not in the Big Book of Diseases or whatever they use a reference I'd probably never get out of SI, and I'd be then ineligible for Sport Pilot. So I threw in the towel and let the medical lapse, which as you know, does not count as a denial. Weird system. Good you could make it work for you in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JeffyTheQuik
My guess is the roadmap for it to be commercially viable (after getting the testing done and the hardware accurate enough, which takes years) is still quite a ways out there.

Also, as someone who wears contacts occasionally, I can't imagine grandma being able to stick something in her eye to be able to monitor her sugar levels.
Even if the contacts are accurate, I have difficulty believing that measuring glucose through tears is timely. A measurement that's accurate but reflects state from half an hour ago isn't very useful.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
Non invasive? You need the actual blood to get accurate blood measurement.
A couple of companies get it to within about 5 points +/- with a lot more within 10 points +/- without actually taking blood, they have used a variety of methods over the years. In the end they all get shut down because the current blood monitoring companies want you to have to continue buying expensive test strips.

Would that mean it is perfect? No, but it could be an early warning system to do further testing, but then again if other companies have been able to get that close, how much closer could Apple get with the money they have? And you can bet they won't let the existing monitoring companies bully them into suppressing the technology.
 
Yes, being healthy myself, my first thought was wondering if access to this information could be useful to understand how my body responds to different foods. I'm not sure if there's really any benefit or not, but perhaps

There absolutely is. I'm the 2012 Colorado State Champion for Men's Physique (masters) and ranked 7th nationally (2014) men 35-40.

I bought glucose monitor just to record how different foods (and artificial sweeteners, and Diet Coke) affected my blood sugar levels.

If I could monitor that with my watch instead of pricking my finger if would be amazing.

If the general population could use it to be more aware and eat more healthy - it would be priceless.
 
As someone who studies diabetes, especially among tech-savvy millennials, I can tell you that this tech exists, but is in the clinical stages. Apple would have to follow the same procedures if they want FDA approval. Thus, I suspect they are working as 'blind' tech developers in conjunction with clinical researchers.

This would, indeed, be exceptional tech, if it came to market.

Clearly you don't study diabetes all that closely, because you'd know there are no non-invasive methods of measuring glucose in development that are worth their weight in poop.

You need blood or interstitial fluid to get a reasonable measure. Every attempt at optical methods, measuring sweat, etc. hasn't panned out. I doubt the contact lenses google is working on will be viable either.
[doublepost=1492129181][/doublepost]********.

Show me a glucose measuring technology with an MARD of even 10% that doesn't used blood or interstitial fluid.

Take your tinfoil hat off.


A couple of companies get it to within about 5 points +/- with a lot more within 10 points +/- without actually taking blood, they have used a variety of methods over the years. In the end they all get shut down because the current blood monitoring companies want you to have to continue buying expensive test strips.

Would that mean it is perfect? No, but it could be an early warning system to do further testing, but then again if other companies have been able to get that close, how much closer could Apple get with the money they have? And you can bet they won't let the existing monitoring companies bully them into suppressing the technology.
llsh
 
Clearly you don't study diabetes all that closely, because you'd know there are no non-invasive methods of measuring glucose in development that are worth their weight in poop.

You need blood or interstitial fluid to get a reasonable measure. Every attempt at optical methods, measuring sweat, etc. hasn't panned out. I doubt the contact lenses google is working on will be viable either.
[doublepost=1492129181][/doublepost]********.

Show me a glucose measuring technology with an MARD of even 10% that doesn't used blood or interstitial fluid.

Take your tinfoil hat off.



llsh
Ouch! Damn. First, calm down. Sheesh. Second, Some are better than others, for sure, but all are innovative. Try to be a bit optimistic.
 
A couple of companies get it to within about 5 points +/- with a lot more within 10 points +/- without actually taking blood, they have used a variety of methods over the years.
+/- 5/10 is better than the FDA requirements for strip accuracy, which is an outrageous +/- 15%. If the sensors we're talking about really are that good they should have no problem with FDA approval.
 
Wouldn't it be cool if Apple had a secret team working on a system in the "Pro" line with a GPU that wasn't a joke? Dont worry though, in 2018 you will be blessed by Apple with the privledge of spending $3,000 on a system with a decent GPU that you could otherwise purchase with Windows for half the price.
 
I hope that AAPL is also investigating noninvasive measurement of β-Hydroxybutyrate (or BoHB to its friends) -- the ketone body produced by those on a LCHF diet. Noninvasive measurement would let individuals know how they are progressing on the metabolic adaptations to a ketogenic metabolism.

Display of blood glucose and blood BoHB simultaneously would be awesome.

After this report, I'd be surprised if they weren't still working on all kinds of sensors, just this one is further along than the others.
 
Try again. Many diabetics (even Type 2's) are not overweight and there are lots of people who don't realize they're diabetic because they think that's not something they need to worry about because they're in good shape.

Only T2D. T1D is caused by an immune system malfunction. Similar malfunctions cause thyroid problems and Celiacs disease. They now routinely test for all three one a child presents with one.

You present that as if the T1D numbers are huge. They are not. In the USA, 90-95% of all diabetes cases are T2D, and a lot of that is from eating too much. The remaining 5 to 10% of T1D cases comprise a lot of children who wouldn't be wearing an expensive Apple Watch anyway.

So my previous post stands:

Add a caloric intake sensor that alerts the wearer: "It's time to stop eating."

That's good advice even if Diabetes has nothing to do with it.
 
Add a caloric intake sensor that alerts the wearer: "It's time to stop eating."

That's good advice even if Diabetes has nothing to do with it.

Indeed, it's good advice to practice moderation in everything, but your logic is faulty if you're saying that because a lot of overweight people are diabetic, it must mean that most Type 2 diabetics only have themselves to blame because it's their own poor impulse control and lack of will that got them sick.

Being overweight and having a sedentary lifestyle are risk factors for developing type 2 diabetes, but are not the causes for becoming diabetic. If you do indeed live in Japan, then what I'm saying is even more relevant because Asians are far more likely to develop Type 2 diabetes regardless of weight or lifestyle.

None of my close friends or immediate family are overweight, but at least three of us are type 2 diabetics. One of them is a marathoner and I'm in my 40's and still have the body composition of a competitive athlete.

Besides all this, if you're diabetic, what you eat affects you more than how much food you eat and the right diet is different from one person to another. If you give me a measly 50 grams of cooked white rice or a single slice of white bread, I'll have to start an impromptu exercise session to get my blood glucose levels down. But how about a sizable bowl of ice cream? It may seem counterintuitive, but I can handle that much better and yet someone who wants to be judgemental without understanding how this works would look at me and think, "It's his own fault he's diabetic. If he just ate the rice instead of the ice cream, he'd be fine."

And they would be dangerously wrong.
 
Last edited:
Even if the contacts are accurate, I have difficulty believing that measuring glucose through tears is timely. An measurement that's accurate but reflects state from half an hour ago isn't very useful.
Oh don't get me wrong, I think it's a terrible concept. I was just commenting on the potential roadmap.
 
You present that as if the T1D numbers are huge. They are not. In the USA, 90-95% of all diabetes cases are T2D, and a lot of that is from eating too much. The remaining 5 to 10% of T1D cases comprise a lot of children who wouldn't be wearing an expensive Apple Watch anyway.

So my previous post stands:

Add a caloric intake sensor that alerts the wearer: "It's time to stop eating."

That's good advice even if Diabetes has nothing to do with it.
No, really, it doesn't.

A lot of those "T1D children who wouldn't be wearing an expensive Apple Watch anyway" grow up. Plus, they have parents and teachers that are really interested in their blood sugar as they go through their day.

I'll agree with you on the numbers, but your dismissal of the T1D's (I'm 48, btw, and if one of my kids or grandkids, when they come had it, I'd love this technology), but your assessment of it "being a bunch of kids" is baseless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smirking
Who cares!!! get these people temporarily reassigned to get the under glass fingerprint sensor to work so we don't have a rear touch ID....This is an all hands on deck emergency.
 
Type 1 Diabetic for 31 years now, many things have been promised to us over the years so much so that I rarely give any of them any interest until you actually see it getting through the FDA approval process. I can also remember non invasive blood sugar testing being worked on back in the early 90s, there was a diabetes forum on CompuServe (dates me a bit :) ) where it was being discussed. Keep in mind if there were easy fixes we would have them by now, the short and then long term success rates of the various "cures" are pretty bad, islet cell or pancreas transplants can work short term but then the body starts to reject them & back to square one.

The big deal with non invasive testing is that it should reduce the cost of ongoing treatment significantly, even if the device was to cost say $500 out of pocket you could still save money, let alone pain etc, over just a few years even with insurance coverage (USA). If Apple doesn't go to stupid on the proprietary connection stuff then something like this would be adopted quickly, guess that would be an interesting test to see if Apple really only wants to make money or truly make a difference in the world.

One problem with most systems is that you still need to do some regular tests every day to ensure the system is still accurate enough, IIRC the accuracy of the meters (home use) is still +/-10% or so, just improved accuracy would pretty awesome.

As an alternate, for type 1, the hybrid closed loop system Medtronic is about to release is of interest, but to be honest having the pump + another sensor attached isn't exactly exciting but I admit I am interested.

http://www.medtronicdiabetes.com/products/minimed-670g-insulin-pump-system
I certainly hope we see improvements, back in 86 a blood sugar test took 2 minutes and you had to wipe the blood off of the strip after 1 minute, the current meters are pretty nice in comparison.

I was going to write a reply but you beat me to it. Your post is spot on, both in getting hopes up for new devolvements that never pan out and with costs and drawbacks.
 
Also, as someone who wears contacts occasionally, I can't imagine grandma being able to stick something in her eye to be able to monitor her sugar levels.

Spoken like a youngster :cool:

Lots of us grandpas and grandmas have worn contacts at one time or another. Many of us started back when they were all hard lenses, too.

If wearing a contact was all it took to avoid having to stick yourself, I guarantee a lot would sign up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
I think this is why it would be a "breakthrough".
We'll soon see.
No, we won't. Breakthroughs take much longer than one or two years. And on top of that, non of the current Apple Watches will support the new technology, if it ever comes to market. We're in the era of wearable computing without useful body sensors. The industry is selling a sci-fi dream, like a personal robot butler serving drinks.

HACF-Robot-Butler.jpg


The robot butler in Halt and Catch Fire.​
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.