6 ms·

Sounds exciting, but the fact their prototype is in a wristwatch form factor makes me wonder if it's aiming to be more of a media showpiece to hype investment v

Sounds exciting, but the fact their prototype is in a wristwatch form factor makes me wonder if it's aiming to be more of a media showpiece to hype investment valuation from those industry partners. Forward looking statements like "maybe we'll make it monitor blood pressure too" don't help. Even at the size of a brick, or without conveniently hiding the power supply off-camera, forgoing needles would still be a huge boon to diabetics. Why not get the concept working and demo some hard stats, then miniaturize?

nradov 2y ago
Type-2 diabetes is commonly comorbid with hypertension (similar root causes) so combining both sensors in a single wrist device would be useful for many patients. There are existing wrist blood pressure monitors such as Aktiia. Not as accurate as an arm cuff, but good enough for routine monitoring. https://aktiia.com/ https://aktiia.com/
- froil 2y ago
  Where can i buy?
hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
That's because it's bullshit. To clarify, the actual science they did is interesting (to me at least, as someone not in the field). The paper is linked here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00194-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00194-4 What is bullshit is the completely unwarranted conclusions in the title or in the quotes in the article. This is classic "science by press release". If you notice in the paper, they didn't do any testing, at all, with actual humans (or animals) and their blood sugar levels. The paper is mainly about the design of this "metasurface" which they claim allows higher resolution and sensitivity of a millimeter-wave radar system. The leap from what they've done to "no more needles for diabetics" is about 100x of "draw the rest of the owl". Again, to emphasize, I'm not denigrating the science they've done. I'm denigrating the hyping of it.
- sheepscreek 2y ago
  > they didn't do any testing, at all, with actual humans (or animals) They did mention in the article that clinical trials are on-going.
  - hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
    Correct, but I'm extremely skeptical, and that sentence had my bullshit detector alarms screaming even louder: > “We have a minimum viable product that’s already being used in clinical trials, and while there’s more work to be done, we’re much closer to a full marketable device,” Shaker said. Absolutely no information about what this "clinical trial" entails, or what phase it was. Most importantly, to get an initial assessment of the accuracy of the device, no clinical trials are necessary - you simply need to do a test that compares the blood sugar reading from the device against the current gold standard, most likely first in some animal model. If their device was really as far along as the title and quotes are implying, they would be showered with so much money it would make the Theranos peak valuation look small. The only evidence they've provided (which, again, I'm not saying is insignificant) is that the "metasurface" they have developed enhances the resolution and sensitivity of a radar system against a beaker of water.
    - azinman2 2y ago
      But they have a minimal viable product! It’s viable! /s
      - caseyy 2y ago
        Well… yes. Looking at the article, it satisfies the MVP requirements for getting grant funding. A bar GlucoWatch cleared more than two decades ago, though it could never quite clear the bar of clinical viability. Theranos also had an MVP in this sense :)
        cb321 2y ago
        I have probably seen "viable" overinterpreted 100s of times by now. Perhaps we need to re-interpret the 'V' in "MVP" as "VC-investable" or perhaps replace it with 'I' to be I)nvestible which gets you a more pronounceable "MIP" (and maybe, just maybe highlights uncertainty since all investment carries risk)? Happens to also abbreviate "Multum In Parvo" (Latin for "many/much in little") which is not even that far off from the semantic. ;-)
theendisney4 2y ago
If it fits in a watch a lot of nondiabetics will also buy it. It can be much cheaper that way.
- lukan 2y ago
  Why would I as a nondiabetic buy it? Out of general curiosity for my blood sugar levels?
  - stabbles 2y ago
    Endurance athletes already monitor this to figure out how to fuel best.
  - promiseofbeans 2y ago
    Because it's built-in as an extra feature to a watch that you were already gonna buy. Garmin watches can measure blood oxygen, but not many people use the feature because it drains the battery quickly. Samsung watches can do a single lead EKGs. Does that sell you the watch? Probably not. Is it yet another thing a company can add to the spec sheet and use to justify a price increase? Yes.
  - doxick 2y ago
    My garmin watch measures blood oxygen, heart-rare, breathing patterns, sleep patterns, stress-levels, etc Usefull? It is if you use it. I do triathlons and knowing exactly where my blood-sugar level is at would allow me to focus better on the type of nutrition and the impact of it while working out. It would also tell me if i was a bit down before a race, so i can take some food. Basically: this is a game-changer for amateur athletes, which would create a tremendous market for it. People i know already use the patches to measure as well, or lactate measurements, ketone measurements, etc. and that's just at the casual amateur level. Another application that springs to mind is knowing when to eat instead of just having lunch and sugar-crashing 2 hours later in the office.
    - stevage 2y ago
      I also wonder if monitoring your blood sugar is a potential way to avoid becoming a Type 2 diabetic.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

nradov 2y ago

Type-2 diabetes is commonly comorbid with hypertension (similar root causes) so combining both sensors in a single wrist device would be useful for many patients. There are existing wrist blood pressure monitors such as Aktiia. Not as accurate as an arm cuff, but good enough for routine monitoring. https://aktiia.com/ https://aktiia.com/

froil 2y ago
Where can i buy?

hn_throwaway_99 2y ago

That's because it's bullshit. To clarify, the actual science they did is interesting (to me at least, as someone not in the field). The paper is linked here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00194-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00194-4 What is bullshit is the completely unwarranted conclusions in the title or in the quotes in the article. This is classic "science by press release". If you notice in the paper, they didn't do any testing, at all, with actual humans (or animals) and their blood sugar levels. The paper is mainly about the design of this "metasurface" which they claim allows higher resolution and sensitivity of a millimeter-wave radar system. The leap from what they've done to "no more needles for diabetics" is about 100x of "draw the rest of the owl". Again, to emphasize, I'm not denigrating the science they've done. I'm denigrating the hyping of it.

sheepscreek 2y ago
> they didn't do any testing, at all, with actual humans (or animals) They did mention in the article that clinical trials are on-going.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  Correct, but I'm extremely skeptical, and that sentence had my bullshit detector alarms screaming even louder: > “We have a minimum viable product that’s already being used in clinical trials, and while there’s more work to be done, we’re much closer to a full marketable device,” Shaker said. Absolutely no information about what this "clinical trial" entails, or what phase it was. Most importantly, to get an initial assessment of the accuracy of the device, no clinical trials are necessary - you simply need to do a test that compares the blood sugar reading from the device against the current gold standard, most likely first in some animal model. If their device was really as far along as the title and quotes are implying, they would be showered with so much money it would make the Theranos peak valuation look small. The only evidence they've provided (which, again, I'm not saying is insignificant) is that the "metasurface" they have developed enhances the resolution and sensitivity of a radar system against a beaker of water.
  - azinman2 2y ago
    But they have a minimal viable product! It’s viable! /s
    - caseyy 2y ago
      Well… yes. Looking at the article, it satisfies the MVP requirements for getting grant funding. A bar GlucoWatch cleared more than two decades ago, though it could never quite clear the bar of clinical viability. Theranos also had an MVP in this sense :)
      - cb321 2y ago
        I have probably seen "viable" overinterpreted 100s of times by now. Perhaps we need to re-interpret the 'V' in "MVP" as "VC-investable" or perhaps replace it with 'I' to be I)nvestible which gets you a more pronounceable "MIP" (and maybe, just maybe highlights uncertainty since all investment carries risk)? Happens to also abbreviate "Multum In Parvo" (Latin for "many/much in little") which is not even that far off from the semantic. ;-)

theendisney4 2y ago

If it fits in a watch a lot of nondiabetics will also buy it. It can be much cheaper that way.

lukan 2y ago
Why would I as a nondiabetic buy it? Out of general curiosity for my blood sugar levels?
- stabbles 2y ago
  Endurance athletes already monitor this to figure out how to fuel best.
- promiseofbeans 2y ago
  Because it's built-in as an extra feature to a watch that you were already gonna buy. Garmin watches can measure blood oxygen, but not many people use the feature because it drains the battery quickly. Samsung watches can do a single lead EKGs. Does that sell you the watch? Probably not. Is it yet another thing a company can add to the spec sheet and use to justify a price increase? Yes.
- doxick 2y ago
  My garmin watch measures blood oxygen, heart-rare, breathing patterns, sleep patterns, stress-levels, etc Usefull? It is if you use it. I do triathlons and knowing exactly where my blood-sugar level is at would allow me to focus better on the type of nutrition and the impact of it while working out. It would also tell me if i was a bit down before a race, so i can take some food. Basically: this is a game-changer for amateur athletes, which would create a tremendous market for it. People i know already use the patches to measure as well, or lactate measurements, ketone measurements, etc. and that's just at the casual amateur level. Another application that springs to mind is knowing when to eat instead of just having lunch and sugar-crashing 2 hours later in the office.
  - stevage 2y ago
    I also wonder if monitoring your blood sugar is a potential way to avoid becoming a Type 2 diabetic.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]