When people start getting told "we could have spotted your cancer earlier if you'd worn an (Apple Watch or similar device) to monitor your blood chemistry", it's a necessity in the most literal sense.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Future Apple Watch Rumored to Include Glucose Monitoring and Smart Bands
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When people start getting told "we could have spotted your cancer earlier if you'd worn an (Apple Watch or similar device) to monitor your blood chemistry", it's a necessity in the most literal sense.
"A standalone band would allow Apple to get the approval it needs without impacting the base device."
Not correct. The band requires the watch to function. The complete medical device (band + watch) would need approval from the FDA if it is used to make clinical decisions.
A non-invasive method for measuring glucose concentration in serum would be a big deal clinically. There is no chance that the FDA would allow it to be marketed with a weaselly disclaimer that it is to be used only for information/education.
Not correct. The band requires the watch to function. The complete medical device (band + watch) would need approval from the FDA if it is used to make clinical decisions.
A non-invasive method for measuring glucose concentration in serum would be a big deal clinically. There is no chance that the FDA would allow it to be marketed with a weaselly disclaimer that it is to be used only for information/education.
That's just the BOM and who even knows how accurate it is. Tim Cook has said on earnings calls several times that these cost estimates are not accurate.
I don't think you understand what he said.
If the gluocose function was part of the watch, apple would need FDA approval on the entire watch.
However, if it's only part of the band, they can keep selling their watches without FDA approval, then when the band/watch combo is finally approved, they can then sell these without ever impacting current apple watches.
I'm guessing you own neither an Apple Watch nor any fashion accessories. I and many others are very happy with the tech and the style.
I really don't understand the 'it's currently not possible or someone would have done it already' attitude from some.
• People can't speak to each other across the world. That's why we have letters! If we could all talk into a magic 'telephony' box and the other people could hear us everyone would be doing it!
• Humans currently can't fly. These 'airy-plane' contraptions are all doomed to fail. Don't bother.
• Humans can't reach the moon. Well, maybe in the distant future like the year 3000, but trying now is ridiculous, we should give up and ask Stanley Kubrick to make a fictional movie about it instead...
• Those computer things can be useful I've heard, but look, no-one is ever going to fit one of those massive tape reels in their pockets, and they use so much power and take up the whole room... I mean sure in Star Trek they can fit them in their pockets but that's just silly, that'll never happen... well not in William Shatner's lifetime...
etc.
The first step to anything happening is believing it could be possible. Giving up because no-one else has already done it guarantees you won't do it. Trying anyway gives you a chance! And sitting on a money mountain helps in the trying part.
• People can't speak to each other across the world. That's why we have letters! If we could all talk into a magic 'telephony' box and the other people could hear us everyone would be doing it!
• Humans currently can't fly. These 'airy-plane' contraptions are all doomed to fail. Don't bother.
• Humans can't reach the moon. Well, maybe in the distant future like the year 3000, but trying now is ridiculous, we should give up and ask Stanley Kubrick to make a fictional movie about it instead...
• Those computer things can be useful I've heard, but look, no-one is ever going to fit one of those massive tape reels in their pockets, and they use so much power and take up the whole room... I mean sure in Star Trek they can fit them in their pockets but that's just silly, that'll never happen... well not in William Shatner's lifetime...
etc.
The first step to anything happening is believing it could be possible. Giving up because no-one else has already done it guarantees you won't do it. Trying anyway gives you a chance! And sitting on a money mountain helps in the trying part.
Does it support oxygen levels yet? The feature has been in watch 1 but hasnt been turned on yet?
Is that true even if all of the analytics were in the band and the watch only acted as a radio or display? The analogy here would be something like USB connected equipment-- does it need to be qualified with every computer it is meant to connect to?
Continouos glucose monitoring would be awesome.
I don't have diabetes, but I like to track it since there is a strong correlation between high glucose level and shorter lifespan. People with diabetes that takes Metformin (which is a substance that lowers glucose level) live longer than people without diabetes!
People without diabetes may live years longer, if they can keep glucose levels in control. The Apple Watch could literally save millions of people from an early death!
I have looked at Dexcom G5, which is a CGM, but they want a doctor to get involved, the device is not cheap and you have to buy expensive sensors.
If Apple has something that could simplify this or reduce the cost, I woulde definitely buy the next Apple Watch, and the next, and the next ... for the rest of my life.
Biuggest problem is FDA. I wonder how many millions they kill every year.
I don't have diabetes, but I like to track it since there is a strong correlation between high glucose level and shorter lifespan. People with diabetes that takes Metformin (which is a substance that lowers glucose level) live longer than people without diabetes!
People without diabetes may live years longer, if they can keep glucose levels in control. The Apple Watch could literally save millions of people from an early death!
I have looked at Dexcom G5, which is a CGM, but they want a doctor to get involved, the device is not cheap and you have to buy expensive sensors.
If Apple has something that could simplify this or reduce the cost, I woulde definitely buy the next Apple Watch, and the next, and the next ... for the rest of my life.
Biuggest problem is FDA. I wonder how many millions they kill every year.
Last edited:
This would be absolutely and utterly amazing if true. I don't have diabetes, but I do train a lot and can have blood glucose fluctuations, and it would be pretty cool to tell what my levels are with a minimally-invasive feature on the watch. This would be a game changer for millions of people and it would probably increase the sales of the Apple Watch 30 times over. If Apple succeeded at something like this, the Apple Watch could very well become as popular as the iPhone.
I don't think anyone's questioning the effort. It seems like there are some people who either work in the industry or are familiar with glucose level testing who don't think it's technically feasible to do something non-invasive that's also accurate. Again, that doesn't mean Apple isn't trying and that it'll forever be impossible. But I don't think that's what anyone is saying.
Cook stated the numbers were not accurate for manufacturing the Watch as a whole. I don't believe he commented on the Sports band, which is why I questioned the OP about where he was inclined to believe Cook may have stated the bands were the most profitable. (Which, they likely are in some respects.)
Also, Given Apple's mark up, I wouldn't doubt those numbers are to far off for the flueroastamer band, being those likely generate the most profit for Apple continually refreshes those bands the most it seems, being they are likely easiest to manufacture and are the cheapest for the consumer. (Aside from the Nylon bands).
Here is the article where Cook quoted/disputed regarding the numbers to manufacture the Watch as a whole, not the band itself.
http://qz.com/396073/the-350-apple-watch-reportedly-costs-only-84-to-manufacture/
Last edited:
BigPharma and BigDevice have a lot of $$ too, and they haven't cracked the code on non-invasive glucose monitoring. It's a question of getting access to blood or interstitial fluid... which means puncturing skin.
as much I hate to say this but now I see the necessity of having that wearable technology just for my sugar level sake
This Type 1 Diabetic is smiling at this news... rumor... of not having to have the Dexcom stuck in my stomach.
But, I already have BG on my wrist through the Dexcom/
Watch, so this is an incremental improvement for me.[doublepost=1494886941][/doublepost]
It'll be good for non-diabetics as well for weight control. My weight went up as soon as I got in better control, as I was using insulin (T1D here) to compensate for bad eating habits. Before good control, I was just peeing out the excess sugar.. Now, I'm storing it as fat.
I agree with most of your points. I was a quality manager for a global medical device company and I am very familiar with the FDA requirements to launch a new product. The FDA also requires medical device companies to have a "post market surveillance" infrastructure dedicated to monitoring and investigating customer complaints so the company can do a timely recall if a problem comes to their attention after the product is released (even if the original buyer has sold the device to someone else).
The only thing I would disagree with you about is whether Apple would want to go down that road. I actually think they would want to go down that road because 1) there is tremendous market potential for such a device and 2) it fits with Apple's overall company image / theme of making life better (healthier) for their customers. Whether it is 3 months or 10 years from now, someone will eventually create a viable non-invasive glucose meter and whoever does it will make a fortune and improve the quality of life for millions of people.
I'm glad Apple is still pushing their watch platform.
Meanwhile... many of the big players in Android Wear are getting out of the smartwatch market.
The Moto360 was one of the first and best Android Wear watches available... but Motorola/Lenovo don't think it's a good bet anymore.
I think I heard Asus is getting out as well.
And didn't something happen to Pebble? I thought they would do well since they are cheaper and can work on both iPhones and Android.
For once it looks like Apple is not doomed when it comes to watches
Meanwhile... many of the big players in Android Wear are getting out of the smartwatch market.
The Moto360 was one of the first and best Android Wear watches available... but Motorola/Lenovo don't think it's a good bet anymore.
I think I heard Asus is getting out as well.
And didn't something happen to Pebble? I thought they would do well since they are cheaper and can work on both iPhones and Android.
For once it looks like Apple is not doomed when it comes to watches
Last edited:
