Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

flyingh1 t1_j99s3l9 wrote

So they beat Apple to sugar monitoring to the mass market? Nobel Peace Prize level type of breakthrough

70

jbdi6984 t1_j9a0wwv wrote

As a type-1 diabetic, I’d buy the watch and keep the cgm to see how they compare at times. The cgm I know captures the broader strokes.

47

blankasfword t1_j9aahfm wrote

Not yet. The article says it “may arrive in 2025”.

Apple has been rumored to be working on this for ages too. Sounds like we’ve still got to wait a couple of years to see if it will become a reality.

45

Sueti_Bartox t1_j9cg4xn wrote

Approval for medical devices takes years in OECD countries. So even when they have the tech ready, add years for the approval process, even if it goes smoothly.

3

Fredasa t1_j9aj4x9 wrote

One of them is going to carry medical legitimacy in the US. And probably not necessarily both. I hope there are some strong patents tied to this.

−5

Not_TheMenInBlack t1_j99zd3i wrote

Not for medical purposes though, so there’s still room for a breakthrough after this major advancement.

I expect that Apple has been researching and developing a medical-grade glucose monitor since Apple Watch Series 3. A non-invasive glucose monitor would make smart watches a part of an insulin prescription

25

EnigmaHSV t1_j9a9c3y wrote

Yeah, if you, as a company, could get your smart watch to be part of a prescription you would have a TON of money on the table.

13

Not_TheMenInBlack t1_j9brtne wrote

I could see companies making budget versions that collect health data and do nothing else.

Whoever patents it could very well make billions from it, but here’s to hoping that the winner shares the breakthrough.

2

rosesandtherest t1_j9agcyh wrote

Yes they beat it the same way Apple beat everyone by inventing time travel, aka it doesn’t exist in the market and people can’t buy it

3

eMouse2k t1_j9b95wg wrote

Nof yet. Read the article. The new OLEDs they’re talking about aren’t out until 2025, and the only seemingly confirmed features are fingerprint scanning and blood pressure, though it’s probably more like pulse monitoring. Anything else is a statement about what it could “possibly do”

1

Turkeydunk t1_j9bfzce wrote

Neither will get it to work, this has been the holy grail of the field since at least the 90s so they’ve almost tried everything by now

1

EbagI t1_j9cgepu wrote

>Nobel Peace Prize

Nobel prize* ☺️

1

MomDoesntGetMe t1_j9ai9dp wrote

Let’s see it’s effectiveness first before making such calls. The blood oxygen sensors on all smartwatches are currently a joke despite it being advertised as revolutionary.

0

corgis_are_awesome t1_j9d0ee1 wrote

What we ACTUALLY need isn’t a glucose monitor. What we NEED is an insulin monitor.

When we measure diabetes by the glucose, we are measuring it indirectly.

The problem with this is that you can eat a bunch of sugar, and if your pancreas is working fine, it will produce a bunch of insulin to balance your sugar levels. This causes insulin resistance to build up in your body over time, even if your glucose levels look fine.

The more sugar you eat, the more insulin you produce to balance the sugar. The more insulin you produce, the more your body gets used to it, and the less effective it becomes.

0