There's "medical grade" and there's "good enough." And there's "we're going to make a ton of money off of this in the consumer market because medical people are slow adopters."
Unfortunately that is so true. I can vouch for that...I market it as cynical, but trying to change.
Yea everyone talks about Glucose levels but that is really only important for about 10% of the population. A continual trend line of blood pressure would be so much more important for everybody. Blood pressure changes can indicate so many other issues and to constantly monitor it would be a game changer.
IMHO, I think that "wristwatches" as a time telling piece are already obsolete...other that a form of jewelry. "smartwatches" Apple watch, Samsung Gear, Fitbit, etc are more of pieces of technology that are many functioned and of yeah, they can give you the time too.
Constant glucose monitoring would be a big deal. Can you imagine seeing in real time what a Frappuccino does to your blood sugar? This feature could disrupt the food industry. There have been other constant glucose monitors but I haven't seen any get approved by the FDA in the US. SuperSapien has been trying for a couple years now, despite being available in many other countries.
Rockley Photonics, an Apple supplier, has today unveiled an advanced digital sensor system that is likely to come to the Apple Watch to enable a wide range of new health tracking features.
The company today revealed a full-stack, "clinic-on-the-wrist" digital health sensor system, enabling wearable devices to monitor multiple biomarkers, including core body temperature, blood pressure, body hydration, alcohol, lactate, and glucose trends, and more.
The technology uses a miniaturized chip solution with optical sensors that provide continuous, non-invasive monitoring of various biomarkers, in an attempt to overcome many of the challenges associated with wearable health monitoring and avoid the need for invasive sensors that must perforate the skin.
Many wearables use green LEDs to monitor heart rate, but Rockley's sensor uses infrared spectrophotometers that can detect and monitor a much wider range of biomarkers to dramatically increase the functionality of wearable devices. The sensor generates lasers to non-invasively probe beneath the skin to analyze blood, interstitial fluids, and layers of the dermis for specific constituents and physical phenomena.
Rockley is initially launching its full-stack sensing solution as a wristband that contains the sensor module and communicates with an app and it will be used in a number of human studies in the coming months, but the company suggested that its sensor module and associated reference designs, including hardware and application firmware, will be available for other consumer products.
Earlier this year, it was revealed that Apple is the largest customer of Rockley Photonics. The company's filings said that Apple accounted for the majority of its revenue over the last two years and that it has an ongoing "supply and development agreement" with the company, under which it expects to continue to heavily rely on Apple for most of its revenue.
Given the growth of Rockley Photonics and the scale of Apple's partnership with the company, it seems to be highly likely that the company's health sensor technology will be coming to the Apple Watch sooner rather than later, providing the technology lives up to expectations. Rockley has previously said that its sensors could be in consumer smartwatches and other electronics as soon as next year, which could align with the launch of Apple Watch Series 8 models.
Article Link: Apple Supplier Rockley Photonics Unveils Health Tracking Tech Likely to Come to Apple Watch
I don’t drink because I’ve been in recovery for 3 years, and I’m listed for a liver transplant. So abstinence is a requirement of the program.
None of your negative points apply to me. I would be very interested to have this on my Apple Watch.
Generally, I wear my Apple Watch for less than 12 hours a day. The rest of the time, it is charging. A shorter battery life for these functions that I want is okay with me. If there is a problem, I'll buy a second watch for the convenience.Translation: Even shorter battery life.
Invasive CGMs can't do this. There are too many factors involved to draw such conclusions. the useful aspect is exactly in what they describe - trending. Knowing that your BG levels are dropping or rising is helpful. For a type I diabetic (I am one) this will not replace your invasive Dexcom CGM. It will be in addition. To be honest, I'm not terribly excited about this. My Dexcom already tells me on (on my watch) whether I'm dropping or rising. I won't be able to replace my Dexcom with an apple watch monitor. This will be a tool that athletes or active people will use as mostly a novelty. Knowing that your BG rises after lunch or that it drops overnight will not be terribly useful to most people who are not diabetic. Also, it will not help you determine whether you're pre-diabetic because that would require trends over an extended period of time (similar to an a1c reading). This will not provide that.
https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom...rst-glucose-sport-biosensor-for-athletes.html 129 Euros a month. These I think are slightly cheaper than regular Libres, and I think possibly because they don't hit MARD targets for approved medical use?
I wear a Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) 24/7. It already does what you describe. The problem is that it doesn't work like everyone thinks. First, you rarely eat things in isolation. Usually you eat multiple items at a time, so you can't pinpoint, exactly which food is responsible for which result (although, we already know most of that information - carbohydrates make your blood sugar, or BG, rise. Fat can lower the pace of that rise, complex carbs will also rise more slowly than simple carbs). Secondly, your activity level has a major impact on your BG levels, so that will definitely skew the data. Finally, "real time" doesn't really mean what you think it does in this case. The impact of food, as mentioned above, can occur over several hours. With invasive monitors, the BG level you see as "current" is often about 20 minutes behind what a blood test would show. Who knows what it would be with an optical sensor? There is a reason why so many of us type I diabetics are so skeptical about these non-invasive CGMs.
Trends are most definitely use in treating diabetes. They permit the making of helpful choices -- exercise or stay seated; eat a salad or eat a pie; etc. or another etc. There is an entire market for Constant Glucose Monitors (CGM) that only detects trends. They are intrusive since the CGM device is attached to the skin and a probe is inserted into the body to detect changes in glucose under the skin. Please educate yourself before you start "authoritizing" a subject -- at least talk to someone with diabetes!
You know this how?
