17 ms·

Know Labs unveils glucose monitor that swaps fingersticks for RF sensors

143 points by coatta 5y ago

monkey88 5y ago
Can't wait until it is bought by an existing company and then discarded, like its previous competitors.
- KMnO4 5y ago
  Test strips are $1 x 5 times per day x 30M diabetic Americans. How can this even compete? You can’t sell RF “per-use”.
  - max-ibel 5y ago
    CVS sells their strips at $0.20 once you buy 200+. I'm sure you can get lower. And why shouldn't this compete ? Their costs will be lower than test strips, their profits could be very significant. They probably monetize with the device itself and then a monthly subscription for their tracking portal. Sounds quite reasonable to me. As a patient, I'd love it. Edit: As a startup, it's not your job to match existing offerings - it's to disrupt. Ask Space-X, they can't compete with Boeing either ;)
tronicdude 5y ago
“We know that not all people with diabetes are looking for a wearable continuous glucose monitoring device to manage their diabetes." Okay that's pretty bogus. Some people can't afford it, but everyone with diabetes would benefit from a CGM. There's much more to be gained from trends in CGM data than singular data points. (I was diagnosed with Type 1 at 16, been on a CGM for most of that time).
- Talanes 5y ago
  Are you looking to transition from your current CGM to a wearable one at the first opportunity?
- tempdiabetic 5y ago
  The Dexcom G6 is the best CGM on the market, but its sensor filtering (Kalman or particle?) has smoothness and/or continuity priors that cause persistent inaccuracies. I observe these persistent inaccurate states on the fifth or sixth day using a sensor. Calibration doesn't help. The reading goes wrong and stays wrong. It probably happens to you, too, but anyone who doesn't test with a glucometer will likely not notice the failure. You will be harmed by these inaccuracies. Persistent inaccuracy is different than the Gaussian (normal) error of a glucometer, which is far more benign. Also, CGMs are slow. The reading is based on interstitial fluid and lags direct blood glucose test by 15 minutes or more. I have completely abandoned the Dexcom G6 and have gone back to 16x daily finger stick blood testing. I am also on a low-carb/high-fat diet, which makes it easy to maintain normal human blood glucose. My HbA1c has been 4.9 for a decade. I was overjoyed to use the CGM at first, but it turned out to be a net loss. If you want to control your diabetes, use a glucometer and adhere to a strict low-carb/high-fat (ketogenic) diet.
  - jcims 5y ago
    Is there a good source for info on ketogenic diets for type 1 diabetics? My youngest has been on pump therapy for the past 5 years and is completely burnt out from all of the alerts and scares (some of it is self inflicted). She was on a medtronic closed loop system for 4 years and that was the source of most of her frustration. She's on g6+tslim now which has been much better, but she still falls off the wagon regularly. I just think a keto diet would make it easier for her, but I'm seeing all sorts of conflicting info on it and her doctors don't support it. I've done it a few times in the past and getting started is the hardest part. I'd like for her to try but I'm getting no support on the idea. ?
    - rpmisms 5y ago
      Keto is generally best once you've finished developing. If she's under 18, I wouldn't do Keto.
      - jcims 5y ago
        She's right on the bubble, but something tells me I've got some time.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
georgebarnett 5y ago
The device claims to have 97% of reading within 15% of the Freestyle Libre, which itself is then not as accurate as blood glucose. Put another way, it’s less accurate than a device that’s already less accurate than finger sticks. Given this info, I’m not sure this version is practically useful yet in terms of accuracy.
- paxys 5y ago
  A completely non-invasive device even getting close to the accuracy of finger stick or implanted devices is a big deal.
  - guywhocodes 5y ago
    Agreed, as a diabetic and climber I've used a lot of the libre pucks but honestly, there is no spot on my body I wont use while practicing my sport. Still the libre was miles better than always pricking my fingers and arms. I've been thinking about what kind of EM-signal could be used for this for a long time, IR-spectroscopy never seemed possible. But this has real potential.
    - john_yaya 5y ago
      I worked on the Freestyle Libre, I’m thrilled to hear it’s at least a workable solution for you. When I was working at Abbott, I often volunteered for testing finger-stick devices, which made me appreciate a small part of what people with diabetes have to endure.
      - rstupek 5y ago
        I've used them and they're great just pricey
        inetsee 5y ago
        I use a Freestyle Libre sensor and I like it better than finger sticks. When I was doing finger sticks I was averaging 4 tests a day; before each meal and at bedtime. With the Freestyle Libre I'm checking my glucose an average of 20 times a day. But the Freestyle Libre sensors are quite expensive. I have insurance so my out of pocket expenses are very low, but my provider bills $1074 for 2 sensors, which last for 4 weeks. I have read comments from other posts that buyers without insurance can get sensors for substantially less, but they are still quite expensive. When I was doing finger sticks I could get enough test strips for a month for about $30.
bdcravens 5y ago
"...the radiofrequency sensor technology was able to measure glucose levels with accuracy comparable to that of Abbott’s Freestyle Libre continuous glucose monitor..." Then this means it won't eliminate fingersticks 100%. I've never used the Libre, but I use Medtronic's Guardian sensor, which requires calibration twice a day via fingersticks.
- btowngar 5y ago
  Neither the Libre nor the G6 require calibration.
browningstreet 5y ago
I just started testing glucose this last week, for health and training purposes. Of course, it just started to get cold in the mornings, and I wake early, so I’m dehydrated, cold and stiff. It takes a bit of water drinking and bodyweight-squatting and arm rubbing to get vigorous circulation for a good drop of blood. I haven’t figured out how to store and dispose of the lances yet, and the bother of it all makes me very sympathetic to those who aren’t doing it for fun and gains.
- btowngar 5y ago
  For disposing of lances - if you're in San Francisco at least, Walgreens provide a free sharps disposal service. They provide a sharps container at no cost, and will take in your full (used) sharps containers.
pacman2 5y ago
I find some of the this vague in this announcement. Non invasive BGM is the "holy grail" in this field. Tons of companies have failed after big investments. Some scammers are out there they claim since decades they solved the problem. I would be curious about peer reviewed publications of their technology. A friend of mine is working on this too. Close to market. He is the only one that regularly published peer reviewed publications on this topic. In fact, I remember I have written an SBIR grant proposal on the technology that was evaluated by an idiot who googled one of the components, realized a single unit (as compared to 10000 units) would cost 50 grant and rejected it based on the claim that the technology would be too expensive in practice. I had written in the proposal that, produced in quantities, the cost of this item is in the mid 3 dollar digits per unit. An idiot and google are a very dangerous combination, even at the NIH.
- RileyJames 5y ago
  I’ve re-read your last paragraph a few times but I’m still confused (tho intrigued). Fancy re-wording it?
  - xenadu02 5y ago
    I think they mean the NIH grant reviewer dismissed the grant request on the basis that the technology was too expensive - ignoring that the research was intended to catalyze mass production which would have made the technology economical. Thus missing the point of the grant proposal.
    - pacman2 5y ago
      Yes. Basically. This item is available for a lab setting with many fancy options. Cost: 50.000 USD If 10.000 units of a customized simple version are ordered, the cost is 500 USD, give or take a few hundred dollars. This was not my estimate, this was the quote given by a company.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- 5y ago
pacman2 5y ago
non-invasive. Any investors here? I could offer non-invasive blood pressure monitoring (no, not based on pulse wave velocity).

143 points by coatta 5y ago

monkey88 5y ago

Can't wait until it is bought by an existing company and then discarded, like its previous competitors.

KMnO4 5y ago
Test strips are $1 x 5 times per day x 30M diabetic Americans. How can this even compete? You can’t sell RF “per-use”.
- max-ibel 5y ago
  CVS sells their strips at $0.20 once you buy 200+. I'm sure you can get lower. And why shouldn't this compete ? Their costs will be lower than test strips, their profits could be very significant. They probably monetize with the device itself and then a monthly subscription for their tracking portal. Sounds quite reasonable to me. As a patient, I'd love it. Edit: As a startup, it's not your job to match existing offerings - it's to disrupt. Ask Space-X, they can't compete with Boeing either ;)

tronicdude 5y ago

“We know that not all people with diabetes are looking for a wearable continuous glucose monitoring device to manage their diabetes." Okay that's pretty bogus. Some people can't afford it, but everyone with diabetes would benefit from a CGM. There's much more to be gained from trends in CGM data than singular data points. (I was diagnosed with Type 1 at 16, been on a CGM for most of that time).

Talanes 5y ago
Are you looking to transition from your current CGM to a wearable one at the first opportunity?
tempdiabetic 5y ago
The Dexcom G6 is the best CGM on the market, but its sensor filtering (Kalman or particle?) has smoothness and/or continuity priors that cause persistent inaccuracies. I observe these persistent inaccurate states on the fifth or sixth day using a sensor. Calibration doesn't help. The reading goes wrong and stays wrong. It probably happens to you, too, but anyone who doesn't test with a glucometer will likely not notice the failure. You will be harmed by these inaccuracies. Persistent inaccuracy is different than the Gaussian (normal) error of a glucometer, which is far more benign. Also, CGMs are slow. The reading is based on interstitial fluid and lags direct blood glucose test by 15 minutes or more. I have completely abandoned the Dexcom G6 and have gone back to 16x daily finger stick blood testing. I am also on a low-carb/high-fat diet, which makes it easy to maintain normal human blood glucose. My HbA1c has been 4.9 for a decade. I was overjoyed to use the CGM at first, but it turned out to be a net loss. If you want to control your diabetes, use a glucometer and adhere to a strict low-carb/high-fat (ketogenic) diet.
- jcims 5y ago
  Is there a good source for info on ketogenic diets for type 1 diabetics? My youngest has been on pump therapy for the past 5 years and is completely burnt out from all of the alerts and scares (some of it is self inflicted). She was on a medtronic closed loop system for 4 years and that was the source of most of her frustration. She's on g6+tslim now which has been much better, but she still falls off the wagon regularly. I just think a keto diet would make it easier for her, but I'm seeing all sorts of conflicting info on it and her doctors don't support it. I've done it a few times in the past and getting started is the hardest part. I'd like for her to try but I'm getting no support on the idea. ?
  - rpmisms 5y ago
    Keto is generally best once you've finished developing. If she's under 18, I wouldn't do Keto.
    - jcims 5y ago
      She's right on the bubble, but something tells me I've got some time.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

georgebarnett 5y ago

The device claims to have 97% of reading within 15% of the Freestyle Libre, which itself is then not as accurate as blood glucose. Put another way, it’s less accurate than a device that’s already less accurate than finger sticks. Given this info, I’m not sure this version is practically useful yet in terms of accuracy.

paxys 5y ago
A completely non-invasive device even getting close to the accuracy of finger stick or implanted devices is a big deal.
- guywhocodes 5y ago
  Agreed, as a diabetic and climber I've used a lot of the libre pucks but honestly, there is no spot on my body I wont use while practicing my sport. Still the libre was miles better than always pricking my fingers and arms. I've been thinking about what kind of EM-signal could be used for this for a long time, IR-spectroscopy never seemed possible. But this has real potential.
  - john_yaya 5y ago
    I worked on the Freestyle Libre, I’m thrilled to hear it’s at least a workable solution for you. When I was working at Abbott, I often volunteered for testing finger-stick devices, which made me appreciate a small part of what people with diabetes have to endure.
    - rstupek 5y ago
      I've used them and they're great just pricey
      - inetsee 5y ago
        I use a Freestyle Libre sensor and I like it better than finger sticks. When I was doing finger sticks I was averaging 4 tests a day; before each meal and at bedtime. With the Freestyle Libre I'm checking my glucose an average of 20 times a day. But the Freestyle Libre sensors are quite expensive. I have insurance so my out of pocket expenses are very low, but my provider bills $1074 for 2 sensors, which last for 4 weeks. I have read comments from other posts that buyers without insurance can get sensors for substantially less, but they are still quite expensive. When I was doing finger sticks I could get enough test strips for a month for about $30.

bdcravens 5y ago

"...the radiofrequency sensor technology was able to measure glucose levels with accuracy comparable to that of Abbott’s Freestyle Libre continuous glucose monitor..." Then this means it won't eliminate fingersticks 100%. I've never used the Libre, but I use Medtronic's Guardian sensor, which requires calibration twice a day via fingersticks.

btowngar 5y ago
Neither the Libre nor the G6 require calibration.

browningstreet 5y ago

I just started testing glucose this last week, for health and training purposes. Of course, it just started to get cold in the mornings, and I wake early, so I’m dehydrated, cold and stiff. It takes a bit of water drinking and bodyweight-squatting and arm rubbing to get vigorous circulation for a good drop of blood. I haven’t figured out how to store and dispose of the lances yet, and the bother of it all makes me very sympathetic to those who aren’t doing it for fun and gains.

btowngar 5y ago
For disposing of lances - if you're in San Francisco at least, Walgreens provide a free sharps disposal service. They provide a sharps container at no cost, and will take in your full (used) sharps containers.

pacman2 5y ago

I find some of the this vague in this announcement. Non invasive BGM is the "holy grail" in this field. Tons of companies have failed after big investments. Some scammers are out there they claim since decades they solved the problem. I would be curious about peer reviewed publications of their technology. A friend of mine is working on this too. Close to market. He is the only one that regularly published peer reviewed publications on this topic. In fact, I remember I have written an SBIR grant proposal on the technology that was evaluated by an idiot who googled one of the components, realized a single unit (as compared to 10000 units) would cost 50 grant and rejected it based on the claim that the technology would be too expensive in practice. I had written in the proposal that, produced in quantities, the cost of this item is in the mid 3 dollar digits per unit. An idiot and google are a very dangerous combination, even at the NIH.

RileyJames 5y ago
I’ve re-read your last paragraph a few times but I’m still confused (tho intrigued). Fancy re-wording it?
- xenadu02 5y ago
  I think they mean the NIH grant reviewer dismissed the grant request on the basis that the technology was too expensive - ignoring that the research was intended to catalyze mass production which would have made the technology economical. Thus missing the point of the grant proposal.
  - pacman2 5y ago
    Yes. Basically. This item is available for a lab setting with many fancy options. Cost: 50.000 USD If 10.000 units of a customized simple version are ordered, the cost is 500 USD, give or take a few hundred dollars. This was not my estimate, this was the quote given by a company.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
5y ago

pacman2 5y ago

non-invasive. Any investors here? I could offer non-invasive blood pressure monitoring (no, not based on pulse wave velocity).