4 ms·

It would be very desirable, but all of the many companies who have tried to get accurate results non-invasively have failed. With Apple's resources, perhaps the

It would be very desirable, but all of the many companies who have tried to get accurate results non-invasively have failed. With Apple's resources, perhaps they'll lick the problem, but I wouldn't bet on it. So to answer your question: Probably because if a Type 1 Diabetic uses a non-invasive glucose monitor to determine their insulin dosage, much of the time they will overdose, and possibly fall into a coma or die.

Balgair 9y ago
A co-worker of mine is doing a similar kinda thing but with circulating tumor cells, so I have some 3rd hand knowledge of these kinda tests. Fact of the matter is that the human body is, chemically and pathologically speaking, fucking bulletproof. Our bodies are just super freaking good at maintaining homeostasis. This means that a lot of tests like blood-glucose, cancer diagnosis, etc that are trying for non-invasive blood testing just have a HUGE parameter space to contend with. Apple's idea may work with calm light-skinned office workers, but will it work with sweating dark-skinned day laborers? African Americans are the population most at risk for DM-II. How about if your blood pressure goes all wonky? What about someone going through a growth spurt? Does it work when you put your arm in motor oil? What about people without arms? Lives aren't 'edge cases'; your device MUST cover all those real people with families and children. I'll believe their device when it passes FDA approval and the clinical data is out there for us all to see and argue over.
- criddell 9y ago
  > your device MUST cover all those real people with families and children Are you talking from a regulatory standpoint? Why couldn't Apple (or anybody) make a device that works on a limited range of skin colors? If you can't help everybody, does that mean you shouldn't help anybody?
  - Balgair 9y ago
    Regardless of the soundness of the logic of your reply, the way that idea would be seen by darker-skinned communities (especially like the African-american community in the US that is highly affected by DM-II) would be something like "Apple made a racist product and wants black people to die". Additionally, if the device only works on non-sweating, not moving, healthy, white/asian office workers out of bright sunlight who have not recently eaten nor have gone more than 5 hours without eating, it's not really something that helps anyone who would need it.
    - criddell 9y ago
      People with darker skin aren't idiots. Current products like Fitbit trackers already work poorly on dark skinned people, so it's not anything new. I don't think that community is going to call Apple (or, more generally, physics) racist. Also, I think you underestimate the market size of light skinned office workers with significant disposable income that don't need blood glucose monitoring but want it anyway. I'm one of them. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple launched multiple devices. The $500-$600 watch would give blood glucose trends or some other derivative information. The $2000-$3000 watch would be the one that gives a medically useful measurement. They could iterate quickly on one and work through the ponderous regulation with the other. Maybe they would even license the technology to Medtronics or some other medical device company and let somebody else deal with the headaches.
      - Balgair 9y ago
        Wait, why would you want blood-glucose monitoring that is not medically proven to work or be reliable? Like, yeah, maybe it works in a very limited set of situations, but that's the same as a broken clock that only tells the right time twice a day; you'd never know when the monitoring device is working 'correctly'. It would be a random number generator, effectively, if it was not proofed. Besides, if you aren't a diabetic, why would you care? The human body is highly variable, from person to person, and even inside of a person after meals. All it would do, if it were accurate 'enough', is say some number that you can't control. Like, you aren't gonna take any insulin shots to mess with it, that would likely kill a normal person. I can't see any actual use for a healthy person. Trying to 'game' that (assumed reliable) number would just put you into a coma; we're supposed to have spikes in the concentration, that's how vertebrates work. Playing 'what-if' games with number would be like Russian Roulette, each experiment may kill you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_sugar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_sugar http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/daily-control-17/slideshow-blood-sugar-swings http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/daily-control-17/slideshow-blo... http://www.everydayhealth.com/type-2-diabetes/symptoms/surprising-causes-of-blood-sugar-swings/#02 http://www.everydayhealth.com/type-2-diabetes/symptoms/surpr... Also, I'm not saying that people with dark skin are idiots. I'm saying that the 'optics' of Apple releasing that thing aren't 'good' as a large percentage of their 'customers' that have DM-II are dark-skinned, though not all by any means.

Balgair 9y ago

A co-worker of mine is doing a similar kinda thing but with circulating tumor cells, so I have some 3rd hand knowledge of these kinda tests. Fact of the matter is that the human body is, chemically and pathologically speaking, fucking bulletproof. Our bodies are just super freaking good at maintaining homeostasis. This means that a lot of tests like blood-glucose, cancer diagnosis, etc that are trying for non-invasive blood testing just have a HUGE parameter space to contend with. Apple's idea may work with calm light-skinned office workers, but will it work with sweating dark-skinned day laborers? African Americans are the population most at risk for DM-II. How about if your blood pressure goes all wonky? What about someone going through a growth spurt? Does it work when you put your arm in motor oil? What about people without arms? Lives aren't 'edge cases'; your device MUST cover all those real people with families and children. I'll believe their device when it passes FDA approval and the clinical data is out there for us all to see and argue over.

criddell 9y ago
> your device MUST cover all those real people with families and children Are you talking from a regulatory standpoint? Why couldn't Apple (or anybody) make a device that works on a limited range of skin colors? If you can't help everybody, does that mean you shouldn't help anybody?
- Balgair 9y ago
  Regardless of the soundness of the logic of your reply, the way that idea would be seen by darker-skinned communities (especially like the African-american community in the US that is highly affected by DM-II) would be something like "Apple made a racist product and wants black people to die". Additionally, if the device only works on non-sweating, not moving, healthy, white/asian office workers out of bright sunlight who have not recently eaten nor have gone more than 5 hours without eating, it's not really something that helps anyone who would need it.
  - criddell 9y ago
    People with darker skin aren't idiots. Current products like Fitbit trackers already work poorly on dark skinned people, so it's not anything new. I don't think that community is going to call Apple (or, more generally, physics) racist. Also, I think you underestimate the market size of light skinned office workers with significant disposable income that don't need blood glucose monitoring but want it anyway. I'm one of them. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple launched multiple devices. The $500-$600 watch would give blood glucose trends or some other derivative information. The $2000-$3000 watch would be the one that gives a medically useful measurement. They could iterate quickly on one and work through the ponderous regulation with the other. Maybe they would even license the technology to Medtronics or some other medical device company and let somebody else deal with the headaches.
    - Balgair 9y ago
      Wait, why would you want blood-glucose monitoring that is not medically proven to work or be reliable? Like, yeah, maybe it works in a very limited set of situations, but that's the same as a broken clock that only tells the right time twice a day; you'd never know when the monitoring device is working 'correctly'. It would be a random number generator, effectively, if it was not proofed. Besides, if you aren't a diabetic, why would you care? The human body is highly variable, from person to person, and even inside of a person after meals. All it would do, if it were accurate 'enough', is say some number that you can't control. Like, you aren't gonna take any insulin shots to mess with it, that would likely kill a normal person. I can't see any actual use for a healthy person. Trying to 'game' that (assumed reliable) number would just put you into a coma; we're supposed to have spikes in the concentration, that's how vertebrates work. Playing 'what-if' games with number would be like Russian Roulette, each experiment may kill you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_sugar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_sugar http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/daily-control-17/slideshow-blood-sugar-swings http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/daily-control-17/slideshow-blo... http://www.everydayhealth.com/type-2-diabetes/symptoms/surprising-causes-of-blood-sugar-swings/#02 http://www.everydayhealth.com/type-2-diabetes/symptoms/surpr... Also, I'm not saying that people with dark skin are idiots. I'm saying that the 'optics' of Apple releasing that thing aren't 'good' as a large percentage of their 'customers' that have DM-II are dark-skinned, though not all by any means.