3 ms·
This comment is just wrong. This isn't a 'questionable benefit', it's a major change to the fundamental technology. This has nothing to do with price or profits
by hooande 5y ago
This comment is just wrong. This isn't a 'questionable benefit', it's a major change to the fundamental technology. This has nothing to do with price or profits at all. Comparing this theoretical advance to existing insulin is like comparing electric vehicles to gas powered cars. It's a difference in kind, not degree.
To explain, currently your pancreas is measuring your blood sugar and producing more or less insulin to keep it at a safe level (let's call that level "100"). A type 1 diabetic has to do that process manually, measuring their blood sugar with a device and taking enough insulin via needle to keep it at 100. It's possible to overshoot and have blood sugar go far below 100, which can do real damage to cells that need sugar as an energy source. Obviously if you have to measure and adjust several times a day, every day, even a 1% human error rate is going to come up often.
This theoretical insulin would stop working if there wasn't sufficient sugar already in the blood. As another comment said, it would basically stop working if your blood sugar was below 75 or 80. Right now diabetics are at risk from blood sugar being too high OR too low. This would cut out half of that risk, and be life changing for millions of people.
Has nothing to do with price, and as always I must mention that generic insulin is abundant and readily available at low prices to anyone. I don't expect everyone to follow the details of insulin and having diabetes. But it would be nice if medical advancements could be discussed without people conflating the topics with their pet political issues.