Eyes_and_teeth t1_jckdeby wrote
I just hope such useful medical technology doesn't remain permanently anchored to a platform that many can't afford and insurance is unlikely to cover (iPhone + Apple Watch or comparable Android/Samsung implementations).
Edit: updated to include other mobile platforms which have/are probably developing similar functionality.
DreamMaster8 t1_jckgrt1 wrote
Don't the new smasung watch do the same thing?
Reeeeeeener t1_jckhxvi wrote
For the same price, yeah
Eyes_and_teeth t1_jcl666f wrote
Edited my comment to reflect that.
Landon1m t1_jcm9mwf wrote
They’re a lot more affordable than most medical devices. The fact they’re mass produced to the numbers they are likely helps in making them more affordable. Classifying them as medical devices for certain diseases should be considered if they can reduce the costs of other treatments and lead to better lifestyles for patients.
Eyes_and_teeth t1_jcmbxjz wrote
Agreed.
velifer t1_jckiyko wrote
Still gonna be orders of magnitude cheaper than this:
https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/experimental-gene-therapy-reverses-sickle-cell-disease-years
Eyes_and_teeth t1_jcl5gjz wrote
Assuming it's no longer considered experimental, I would expect private insurance and/or Medicare/Medicaid to provide coverage for that, even if it is more expensive.
The problem with asking private or public insurance to cover an iPhone/Apple Watch or comparable Android/Samsung implementation is that those devices are not limited to only the "fit for covered purpose" functionality.
esp211 t1_jcosdfl wrote
As opposed to dying? Or more expensive dedicated equipment?
Eyes_and_teeth t1_jcpwvkm wrote
Or less expensive dedicated equipment.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments