10113r114m4 t1_j1f2nn9 wrote
Honestly, diabetic technology hasnt improved all that much in the last 30 years. Yea, we have CGM and the pump, which is nice, but honestly I would have thought some automated pancreas would have been invented by now. Like technology flew off to space and diabetic technology seemed to slowly invent new stuff. Comparing the first introduction of the pump to now, it hasnt even changed all that much. There's now a new pod pump with no tubes but that literally just got FDA approved last year. It's ridiculous how slow these innovations come out. As an engineer with diabetes, it just blows my mind how slow innovation is for this disease.
uraniumEmpire t1_j1fvlea wrote
Gonna be a lot harder to sell premium insulin if you give your patients a single-payment pancreas.
KevlarUnicorn t1_j1glzod wrote
Don't worry, I'm sure our healthcare system would just install the pancreas, and you'd pay a monthly fee to keep using it. I guarantee this has come up as an option in at least one board meeting.
Scary-Owl2365 t1_j1hc0wi wrote
A subscription service for your pancreas. I wouldn't even be surprised at this point.
DarkestDusk t1_j1g64ue wrote
Which is literally the only reason that the medical industry does not fund the research and pay for the proponents necessary to make such things a possibility. The Love Of Money Is The Root of All Kinds of Evil.
FourDimensionalTaco t1_j1hrvf7 wrote
No. Diabetes is just extremely complicated to fix. Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease and requires fixing the immune response (which is several Nobel prizes away) and restoring the destroyed beta cells. Type 2 diabetes is more of an umbrella term for various types of insulin resistance and associated metabolic problems, and thus also extremely complex. A cure for either type would be immediately be sought after by health care insurance companies, since for them, this would be far more economical than the ongoing expenses for insulin and anticipated diabetic medication.
DarkestDusk t1_j1hvvpv wrote
>A cure for either type would be immediately be sought after by health care insurance companies, since for them, this would be far more economical than the ongoing expenses for insulin and anticipated diabetic medication.
Which do you think a business would rather have? A subscription model of making money, or a One Time Payment? As someone who went and studied business at University, I know they almost ALL would prefer subscription, unless the One Time Payment Option was enough to keep them afloat by itself, because as soon as everyone has made their One Time Payment, they no longer require your services, and will no longer have a need to pay for it.
FourDimensionalTaco t1_j1jhhii wrote
All it takes is for one business to come up with a cure to disrupt the market. If there's a cure, why opt for the ongoing treatment? Such a company will sell the cure for a very high price. Insurers still go for that cure. Maybe not in all cases, but at least the more problematic patients will get it. That company then has a big ace up their sleeve with that cure, and of course patents the hell out of it. Other companies try to come up with their cures so they get picked by insurers. In the meantime, the first company has its monopoly. Once that has run its course, and competitors are coming up with their cures, the first company drops their price massively to undercut the competition.
Diabetes treatment is very expensive for health insurance providers. A cure would be cheaper for them even if it costs 500k once.
And yes, cures are being made for diseases. See this for example. Another example is the ongoing research into growing islets out of stem cells and transplanting said islets. See the Vertex VX-880 trial for example.
DarkestDusk t1_j1jzdm9 wrote
Thank you for your dissertation, and I will agree it has Some Merit, though I can only speculate when I do not have all the information available to determine whether or not it is all truth. Have an amazing Day, and Merry Christmas Four Dimensional Taco.
FourDimensionalTaco t1_j1hrjcx wrote
Disagree. I myself have type 1 diabetes, and CGMs are total game changers. Maybe they are not as useful for many type 2 diabetics, but for type 1, CGMs are essential. Also, I would never trade my pump and ultra rapid Lyumjev insulin for syringes and R. And what closed loop systems can already do is amazing.
10113r114m4 t1_j1iqnf8 wrote
I wasnt saying CGM was a huge improvement to diabetic life, it is. However, to engineer something like a CGM, especially in the mid 2000s wasnt difficult. Im an engineer not related to this field, but I feel like in 2 years, I could make a CGM machine, and that's me being generous with the time. All Im saying is there should be more innovation in this field, but yet, things crawl at a snails pace.
FourDimensionalTaco t1_j1jgc9z wrote
Hell no. You completely miss the physiological aspect of this. The sensor filament that has all kinds of special coating to ward off filament degradation and to deal with other phenomena like what happens in the insertion site immediately post-insertion (which is a micro trauma, and the body reacts accordingly). You also miss how electronics in the mid 2000s was far less sophisticated. Creating a CGM transmitter that filters out sensor errors, performs extrapolations, temperature compensation (since the glucose-oxidase enzyme in sensor filaments is highly temperature sensitive), regularly communicates over radio the last N data points, AND can run off a small coin battery for over 90 days was just not doable. I also highly doubt that your makeshift CGM would have anywhere near the same MARD that a G6 has. And with bad MARD your CGM is near useless.
The one area where I agree is the combination of CGM and pump. That's why the WeAreNotWaiting movement exists. That is why projects like AndroidAPS and iOS loop exist. But your own CGM? Not going to happen. No way.
Illusive_Man t1_j1i0jyc wrote
closed loop systems, where the pump communicates with a CGM to automatically adjust your insulin, are very now.
ViaCyte is doing human trials with stem cell research
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments