Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Samsung Racing to Beat Apple to Non-Invasive Blood Glucose Monitoring Technology

danielchow said:
Sigh.

Such features have their uses when needed, but I think it is not a good idea for most people to persistently monitor and to “doctor” themselves. We are setting up ourselves to become like Felix Unger from The Odd Couple. One Felix Unger was enough and funny, but millions or billions of them could be a healthcare mess.

I think companies should promote devices that encourages users to meditate, be still, or be mindful. These activities could alleviate or fix many of the chronic ailments that burden us today.
Click to expand...

Meditation and mindfulness are great, but they don’t affect blood glucose levels.

There are numerous reports of lives being saved by Apple Watch alerts of a previously undiagnosed heart problem.

Monitoring blood glucose levels, on a device worn by seemingly healthy individuals, will undoubtedly save just as many lives (if not more) by giving individuals more understanding of how their body works.

Blood glucose levels can be affected by diet, medications, and health conditions leading to hyperglycemia (elevated glucose levels). Persistant hyperglycemia can lead to type 2 diabetes, vision loss, kidney disease, nerve damage, and heart attacks.

Maybe you think people should wait until they are suffering from the long term effects of hyperglycemia before seeking medical treatment, but fortunately most of us don’t share that view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect, Si Vis Pacem, pianophile and 2 others
moabal said:
Non-invasive glucose monitoring is the holy grail. If Apple can figure it out, everyone will get an Apple Watch.
Click to expand...
It is the holy grail - and no one has found it yet.

The tech has existed for almost a decade - and in that time, no one has managed to get it to be accurate - and by no-one - I mean medical device companies who have a level of expertise you won't find with Samsung or Apple.

Will be interesting to see how the FDA approaches reviews and approval as well - with them these days, who knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LlamaLarry and Stormshadow
danielchow said:
Sigh.

Such features have their uses when needed, but I think it is not a good idea for most people to persistently monitor and to “doctor” themselves. We are setting up ourselves to become like Felix Unger from The Odd Couple. One Felix Unger was enough and funny, but millions or billions of them could be a healthcare mess.

I think companies should promote devices that encourages users to meditate, be still, or be mindful. These activities could alleviate or fix many of the chronic ailments that burden us today.
Click to expand...
As a diabetic I consider your perspective to be ill-informed. Have you not understood how being able to self test has been a sea change for changed diabetic care. I'll add that these changes have been propelled by users demands not medical companies or clinicians...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Si Vis Pacem, pianophile, Allwrong and 2 others
MacAddict1978 said:
Will be interesting to see how the FDA approaches reviews and approval as well - with them these days, who knows.
Click to expand...
To deal with both the limitations of accuracy and the additional FDA approval hurdle, I’m going to guess Apple will position it as an informational feature rather than as a medical device. I imagine it might provide “elevated/normal/low” indications in the first few iterations rather than an actual mg/dL reading, with the suggestion a user follow up with a medical professional if readings fall out of “normal” for an extended time period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect, pianophile and deepspacecowboy
hard to think of taking five years as a race... but no doubt when this is accomplished there will be as many nay sayers as there are with O2 measurements. If something as obvious as changing color (depending on oxygenation) yields results that people question, then how do we expect this to be better?
 
moabal said:
Non-invasive glucose monitoring is the holy grail. If Apple can figure it out, everyone will get an Apple Watch.
Click to expand...
You mean those with diabetes. No one is buying a watch for diabetes monitoring if they do not have it. It is also highly unlikely it will be as accurate as devices that penetrate the skin and provide continuous monitoring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect and Rafterman
gsurf123 said:
You mean those with diabetes. No one is buying a watch for diabetes monitoring if they do not have it. It is also highly unlikely it will be as accurate as devices that penetrate the skin and provide continuous monitoring.
Click to expand...
I recently read a book, Outlive by Peter Attia, that made the case that there a lot of good reasons to monitor your glucose even without diabetes.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Like
Reactions: ss2cire and Si Vis Pacem
gsurf123 said:
You mean those with diabetes. No one is buying a watch for diabetes monitoring if they do not have it. It is also highly unlikely it will be as accurate as devices that penetrate the skin and provide continuous monitoring.
Click to expand...

Skin thickness is an issue, as people have ever so slight skin thickness. But it's enough to disrupt "through the skin" sensors.
 
Timo_Existencia said:
I recently read a book, Outlive by Peter Attia, that made the case that there a lot of good reasons to monitor your glucose even without diabetes.
Click to expand...
Very true.
The real progress would be to detect pre-diabetes before it becomes diabetes.
Such diseases are silent killers. Prediabetes symptoms are not always obvious.
I'm not saying that we should monitor our blood glucose 24/7, but a reliable device could be a game changer. About 40% of adults in the US alone have pre diabetes, and at least 80% of them are not aware.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Like
Reactions: ss2cire and Si Vis Pacem
Killbill2 said:
danielchow said:
Sigh.

Such features have their uses when needed, but I think it is not a good idea for most people to persistently monitor and to “doctor” themselves. We are setting up ourselves to become like Felix Unger from The Odd Couple. One Felix Unger was enough and funny, but millions or billions of them could be a healthcare mess.

I think companies should promote devices that encourages users to meditate, be still, or be mindful. These activities could alleviate or fix many of the chronic ailments that burden us today.
Click to expand...
As a diabetic I consider your perspective to be ill-informed. Have you not understood how being able to self test has been a sea change for changed diabetic care. I'll add that these changes have been propelled by users demands not medical companies or clinicians...
Click to expand...

I am sorry, I thought that saying "such features have their uses when needed..." was sufficiently conveyed without using long paragraphs of words.

I was not refering to folks who were properly diagnosed by their doctors. Such consumer features to monitor specific conditions of the human body, if used under a doctor's guidance, are good. However, most users without understanding or knowing the underlying causes of their current conditions, they could misinterpret the readings and diagnose themselves and, for example, perhaps self-medicate without guidance from a doctor.

Meditation or mindfulness, is not a fix, but they play a critical part in how our minds and bodies respond to prescribed treatments that help the body physically heal or to cope with the ailment. Again, meditation or mindfulness practice is not a fix, but it could help us mentally face the proverbial elephant in the room operating as an aid in the healing or recovery process through medicine per a doctor's guidance.

When I was dignosed with cancer in my throat (my body is fine now), meditation/mindfulness played an important part in the treatments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect and Allwrong
PsykX said:
Competition is great ❤️

I don't care who does it first, I don't think I need this feature myself, but I know for sure it'll be a good thing for mankind.
Click to expand...
You might be surprised. Blood sugar monitoring is for more than diabetes. Feeling tired or hangry, your blood sugar can tell you when you need a wee snack or a quick walk around the block.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Si Vis Pacem, LlamaLarry and PsykX
gsurf123 said:
You mean those with diabetes. No one is buying a watch for diabetes monitoring if they do not have it. It is also highly unlikely it will be as accurate as devices that penetrate the skin and provide continuous monitoring.
Click to expand...
I dunno, you can't scroll social media without running into ads for CGM for health/fitness/training purposes. To be fair, I have a CGM for diabetes so the algorithms probably figure I am constantly in the market for one. I have several gym rat friends that use a CGM so they can preen about their bg going up at proof of how hard they are working out. It's weird.
 
If they (whoever) crack it, and it makes it into a consumer wearable device, it will still be a gimped informational tool only, not one calibrated to be accurate for actual CGM. Like with blood oxygen monitor (pushed out during the back end of COVID hmmm) and the rumoured BP monitor, it'll be marketed as a health innovation and drive sales among at-risk (and healthy hypochondriac) populations, but for those who already have hypertension or diabetes, this won't be accurate or reliable enough to be of much use or reassurance. As an MD, I really hope the tech companies will be ethical enough to make that distinction explicitly clear in their communications.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back