This is tangential, but a friend of mine did a kind-of (but not really, obviously) similar exercise with her classmates in her MFA program. I think they called

This is tangential, but a friend of mine did a kind-of (but not really, obviously) similar exercise with her classmates in her MFA program. I think they called it an empathy exercise or whatever. I don't recall but it seemed like they had good intentions. My friend suggested people try a schoolday as simulated type 1 diabetics. The prompt was pretty simple: Simulate blood glucose checks, generate a random blood glucose number (within reasonable range and adjusted for food intake), make a note of it, keep track of nutritional facts of the foods they intended to eat, pretend to take some insulin by just making a note about their "dose" and base their food intake decisions based on BG value and timing concerns. Literally, just limit what you eat and when based on a number that you can't directly and instantly control. The whole exercise was designed (by a diabetic!) to be as incredibly easy and approachable as possible. It was the absolutely training-wheels version of an experiment that intentionally left out a lot of the more difficult problems when it comes to managing T1D. Their program did all of their work in one classroom all day, and my friend was there to help with number generation and to help in general, the whole time. The whole thing fell apart by lunch for literally every student other than the only other T1D in class. I think 1. People probably aren't great at designing these things for themselves. And 2. Even when somebody else can give them a tiny actual approximation of constraints, it tends to break down because people don't actually want to stray too far from their baseline state of comfort, no matter what.