Sweet subdermal sensors, Batman!
Interesting viewpoint from Karen Ellis of Planet Karen - for a diabetic, sugar is basically like poison.
I hadn't heard it put that way before, and it kind of makes sense - at least, for any amounts of sugar over and above the prescibed limits (a certain minimum blood sugar level is necessary).
Diabetes stops excess sugar being handled in a safer manner. So basically, if I chow down on something sugary, I'm inviting semi-immediate direct damage of kidneys and pancreas. Sure a lot of water will flush out some of the sugar, but it's being flushed out via the kidneys, and punching holes through the filter mechanisms on the way out.
Eek :(
Doubly irritating is that continual blood glucose monitors are still in the faffing-about stage. It's possible to get devices which measure your glucose level every five minutes indefinitely, but they all use consumable components which cost about ten bucks a day, and to the best of my knowledge, none of them let the wearers download archived data to a personal PC (although some of them will data-dump to a specialised unit at a diabetes clinic).
Honestly? Screw that. I want an injectable sensor which will embed itself under my skin and run for five years before needing replacement. Ideally, it would power itself through body motion or even (hah) blood glucose, although wearing an external wireless power supply (like a watch or armband which itself got charged up every couple of days) would be acceptable. And it should be able to data-dump via Bluetooth (with a range of about half an inch). That way I can download the information to my mobile phone or PC, and the watch-device can also be the warning beeper or whatever.
I don't mind attending a clinic to have it inserted, tested and (eventually) replaced. What I do want is the following:
* Set and forget. I don't want to have to fiddle with the sensor every couple of hours or days to reinsert, recalibrate, or replace anything.
* Having the most valuable components implantable and any external items cheap, easily replaceable, widely available and trivially compatible. That way, the only parts which can be stolen, damaged, misplaced etc can be (a) cheaply pre-bought as emergency replacements, (b) quickly and cheaply replaced in any major city, and (c) much more likely to be covered on assorted medical plans.
* A variety of external warning options. Shrill beeping is all very fine, but I'd like to be able to go to a movie or the theatre without having to leave my medical warning system at home. A cellphone-style vibration option will be just fine, thankyou.
* Completely waterproof. Again, easier to do if the main sensors etc are implanted. The fewer functions the external component needs to have, the easier it is to make it rugged enough to survive the beach, the gym, or a shower.
* Cheap and simple to run. This not only means no expensive consumables, but ideally being self-powered - cutting out the cost of electricity and a charger runs second to not having to remember to recharge, replace, or refresh anything.
One of the advantages of marketing a cheap, bulletproof, zero-maintenance, recording glucose sensor is that diabetes is a large (and potentially profitable) market these days. People will buy the sensors, sure, but it's the diabetes data which they'll collect which will be the real money-spinner and give a major advantage to anyone trying to develop medications or cures. If a glucose meter can be made simple and cheap enough so that ten million people wear them, instead of only ten thousand, a company could start doing studies like asking several thousand non-diabetic people to wear them 24/7 to provide a control group.
I hadn't heard it put that way before, and it kind of makes sense - at least, for any amounts of sugar over and above the prescibed limits (a certain minimum blood sugar level is necessary).
Diabetes stops excess sugar being handled in a safer manner. So basically, if I chow down on something sugary, I'm inviting semi-immediate direct damage of kidneys and pancreas. Sure a lot of water will flush out some of the sugar, but it's being flushed out via the kidneys, and punching holes through the filter mechanisms on the way out.
Eek :(
Doubly irritating is that continual blood glucose monitors are still in the faffing-about stage. It's possible to get devices which measure your glucose level every five minutes indefinitely, but they all use consumable components which cost about ten bucks a day, and to the best of my knowledge, none of them let the wearers download archived data to a personal PC (although some of them will data-dump to a specialised unit at a diabetes clinic).
Honestly? Screw that. I want an injectable sensor which will embed itself under my skin and run for five years before needing replacement. Ideally, it would power itself through body motion or even (hah) blood glucose, although wearing an external wireless power supply (like a watch or armband which itself got charged up every couple of days) would be acceptable. And it should be able to data-dump via Bluetooth (with a range of about half an inch). That way I can download the information to my mobile phone or PC, and the watch-device can also be the warning beeper or whatever.
I don't mind attending a clinic to have it inserted, tested and (eventually) replaced. What I do want is the following:
* Set and forget. I don't want to have to fiddle with the sensor every couple of hours or days to reinsert, recalibrate, or replace anything.
* Having the most valuable components implantable and any external items cheap, easily replaceable, widely available and trivially compatible. That way, the only parts which can be stolen, damaged, misplaced etc can be (a) cheaply pre-bought as emergency replacements, (b) quickly and cheaply replaced in any major city, and (c) much more likely to be covered on assorted medical plans.
* A variety of external warning options. Shrill beeping is all very fine, but I'd like to be able to go to a movie or the theatre without having to leave my medical warning system at home. A cellphone-style vibration option will be just fine, thankyou.
* Completely waterproof. Again, easier to do if the main sensors etc are implanted. The fewer functions the external component needs to have, the easier it is to make it rugged enough to survive the beach, the gym, or a shower.
* Cheap and simple to run. This not only means no expensive consumables, but ideally being self-powered - cutting out the cost of electricity and a charger runs second to not having to remember to recharge, replace, or refresh anything.
One of the advantages of marketing a cheap, bulletproof, zero-maintenance, recording glucose sensor is that diabetes is a large (and potentially profitable) market these days. People will buy the sensors, sure, but it's the diabetes data which they'll collect which will be the real money-spinner and give a major advantage to anyone trying to develop medications or cures. If a glucose meter can be made simple and cheap enough so that ten million people wear them, instead of only ten thousand, a company could start doing studies like asking several thousand non-diabetic people to wear them 24/7 to provide a control group.