2 ms·
There’s a problem with non-invasive glucose monitoring and Type 2 diabetes. There’s very limited evidence that providing a Type 2 diabetic with more informatio
by paulcole 5y ago
There’s a problem with non-invasive glucose monitoring and Type 2 diabetes.
There’s very limited evidence that providing a Type 2 diabetic with more information about their blood glucose level does anything at all.
A full-scale change in approach to food, exercise, etc. is what is needed, not easier access to a number on a smart watch.
https://www.aafp.org/afp/2020/0601/p646.html https://www.aafp.org/afp/2020/0601/p646.html
- snowwrestler 5y agoApple has already launched apps and services to improve exercise using their watch (complete your circles etc). A blood glucose monitor on the watch would likely not just print a number, it would be integrated with the existing exercise programs. Adding an option to track food would not be hard. In other words the headline would likely not be “Apple adds glucose sensor,” it would be “Apple launches comprehensive diabetes management service” likely in partnership with some academic or healthcare name you’ve heard of. Imagine if people could buy an Apple Watch and online service with their health insurance, or Medicare.
- paulcole 5y ago> Adding an option to track food would not be hard. This would actually be very hard to do accurately! > online service An online service isn’t what is needed for the vast majority of people who live with diabetes to improve their management of the disease. It’s either: access to more affordable medication or the desire to manage the disease more effectively. Yes, Apple entering the space would help the subset of people who are motivated to manage their diabetes (I am one of them, albeit a Type 1). But it would do very little for the overall population of people with diabetes.
- jonfw 5y agoIs the subset of people who are motivated to manage their diabetes static? There are probably ways to increase that number. Making it more convenient, more social, and applying game theory (the same thing fitness trackers can do for excercise) can get more people to care
- 015a 5y agoBluntly; it doesn't matter. Apple Watch providing human beings with more information about how much physical activity they're getting each day may not actually substantively impact exercise, on the long run, for most users. I don't have the data to prove this, but I'd believe it. Its a tool which people who are already active love, and it probably fools inactive people into closing their rings for a few weeks after buying it, but then everyone regresses to the norm; it always takes more effort than just spending a few hundred bucks to positively change your life. That doesn't mean people don't buy it for the Hope. I'll never forget a tagline Apple used to sell a previous version of the Apple Watch, one of their best yet: Anything You Can Do, You Can Do Better. The biggest advantage to non-invasive glucose monitoring isn't the glucose monitoring part; its the non-invasive part. Diabetics stab themselves every day to draw blood and get these numbers. Noninvasive monitoring is a big win. It doesn't really help diabetics improve their lot in life, from a disease management angle; what it does do is immediately improve their day-to-day life.
- tonyedgecombe 5y agoQuite a large proportion of people with type 2 diabetes don't know they have it. Just giving an advanced warning could make a huge difference.