Diabetes

[Fuddyduddy1952]

Glucose monitor you wear on your arm. Wife uses Libre 3+. No more test strips and check often as you like. She uses her phone app and alarm lets you know if too high or low.

 

[BackRoad]

Great to see your update Mr. Oosik! Very positive results on your weight management and reduced pharmaceuticals!!!

Diet is everything (plus a little exercise!)...

 

[txdon]

coming in 2026

Biolinq | Introducing Biolinq Shine

www.biolinq.com

 

[daugen]

Don, very interesting, looks like it still breaks the skin?
would be nice to have our own check engine light...

 

[txdon]

Don, very interesting, looks like it still breaks the skin?

Does it?
Unlike filament-based glucose sensors, Biolinq Shine eliminates the need for a subcutaneous introducer needle for sensor placement. Its microsensor array, manufactured using state-of-the-art semiconductor technology, is up to 20 times more shallow than conventional continuous glucose sensors. The simple user experience delivers a new level of user engagement and confidence in continuous glucose monitoring. Biolinq

To view the sensor;

Biolinq | Introducing Biolinq Shine

www.biolinq.com

 

[ponytug]

The thing about those microneedle arrays is that the short needles cut both ways. Yes, they are short, and generally less painful, but they sample much closer to the skin surface in the intracellular spaces. The history of glucose sensing is littered with failed companies that tried to do use the shallow sampling, and were not able to achieve an accurate correlation with blood values.

I'd keep an eye on Biolinq, but personally, I want to see their FDA trial data correlating their values with blood values to see how accurate it is before I would bet my life on it. There's a lot riding on getting glucose and insulin levels "on the money".

All the best,

Peter

 

[ArlyA]

The thing about those microneedle arrays is that the short needles cut both ways. Yes, they are short, and generally less painful, but they sample much closer to the skin surface in the intracellular spaces. The history of glucose sensing is littered with failed companies that tried to do use the shallow sampling, and were not able to achieve an accurate correlation with blood values.

I'd keep an eye on Biolinq, but personally, I wouldn't lose sleep want to see their FDA trial data correlating their values with blood values to see how accurate it is before I would bet my life on it. There's a lot riding on getting glucose and insulin levels "on the money".

All the best,

Peter

I agree.

 

[daugen]

I have been reading Heinlein and Bradbury since I was a teenager.
never was a Trekkie but always paid attention to the tech.
in the future one only has to use a gizmo that looks like a cross between an
electronic stud finder and a OBD probe, beeps and tells you all you need to know.
that's what we need.

no needles. Just have to wonder how to test the blood unless you
can get into the blood.

or do it some other way.
a breathalyzer that tests for sugar??
how about a mouth swab or spit?
something that doesn't poke holes in us...

 

[ponytug]

I have been reading Heinlein and Bradbury since I was a teenager.
never was a Trekkie but always paid attention to the tech.
in the future one only has to use a gizmo that looks like a cross between an
electronic stud finder and a OBD probe, beeps and tells you all you need to know.
that's what we need.

no needles. Just have to wonder how to test the blood unless you
can get into the blood.

or do it some other way.
a breathalyzer that tests for sugar??
how about a mouth swab or spit?
something that doesn't poke holes in us...

I think the short answer is that blood is really the only viable substance, for a few reasons. To make matters worse, the best blood sample is from an arterial sample, not a vein, and not a finger stick.

The difficulty that I have seen with other samples is that they don't reliably work, and often lag blood glucose by hours in most cases.

Some dogs can detect high and low blood sugar in some people, but it is a bit of an open question whether they do it by human behavior or smell. It turns out that a number of conditions besides high blood sugar can produce volatile chemicals like ketones. Plus things like individual idiosyncrasies like the microflora in a person's nose and mouth can alter odors, ditto skin.

Personally, I think the through skin optical methods are not likely to work, ever, since there are so many proteins that have glucose tacked on (glycosylated, e.g. HbA1c). One ends up with a spectral signal that looks like glucose, but it is not the blood glucose, it is the labeled proteins. I've seen smart folks give it a good try.

The microneedles or electro-osmotic methods, at least so far, seem to suffer from something like a diffusion effect, and can differ from blood values as the blood values seem to get smoothed out, missing highs, and lows, and lagging by long periods of time as the glucose diffuses into the outer layers of skin. So, glucose spikes and lows do not show up well.

Even the sampling site makes a difference;

That's an approval submission plot, and please note the permitted errors of +/-15% below 75mg/dL, and +/-20% over 75mg/dL, all of the values are just comparing stick locations.

Here's a CGM error plot (CGM vs arterial sample);

(From https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/dia.2024.0035)

I think the best bet for the foreseeable future is a CGM, but I do remind myself that even those aren't perfect. They are way better than not testing frequently in my opinion.

Sorry. I could of course be wrong, and I would love to see a non-invasive technology work, but personally, I am not backing that with money, and I would not bet my health and life on it.

All the best,

Peter

More here for the interested

https://www.fda.gov/media/113995/download

 

[NorTracNY]

Interesting device, but what is it solving? I am not aware of there being any significant portion of the population that's not using a CGM just because of the needle. I don't like the application of a CGM, but the temporary poke wouldn't prevent me from using one. They reference possibly being able to measure other things like ketones, but those devices already exist outside the US. I'd be shocked that the accuracy would be as good as a current CGM. They wouldn't have made the needle as long as it is, if they didn't need to. Even CGMs are not as accurate as a finger prick, so why make something even less accurate.