9 ms·
This sounds a lot like a Theranos idea, here is why. There are physical constraints concerning continuous glucose monitoring, you cannot simply replace the cap
by MrBuddyCasino 7y ago
This sounds a lot like a Theranos idea, here is why.
There are physical constraints concerning continuous glucose monitoring, you cannot simply replace the capillary blood with something drawn from skin tissues depth. It significantly lags the real blood glucose level and the water content screws up the measurement. Even the continuous glucose monitors that are implanted under the skin and that are significantly larger than anything a watch would do have issues with precision and lag compared to the blood prick method. It is worth it because of the better control loop, but its not a simple topic.
- James_Henry 7y agoContinuous glucose monitors are not significantly larger than a watch. See pictures here https://www.dexcom.com/g6-cgm-system https://www.dexcom.com/g6-cgm-system and here https://www.freestylelibre.us/ https://www.freestylelibre.us/ They are also more precise than it sounds like you think they are. I think that all current models require some calibration every once in a way (maybe every few days). Also, there is a lag, but it is fairly predictable and for a lot of potential use cases the lag is not an issue. Continuous glucose (and lactate and maybe cortisol) monitors are not like Theranos.