4 ms·

This seems neither new nor groundbreaking, however. http://dst.sagepub.com/content/8/1/54.short http://dst.sagepub.com/content/8/1/54.short ETA: a 2011 review

This seems neither new nor groundbreaking, however. http://dst.sagepub.com/content/8/1/54.short http://dst.sagepub.com/content/8/1/54.short ETA: a 2011 review of the state of the art: http://knowledgetranslation.ca/sysrev/articles/project21/Ref%20ID%207984-20090628225926.pdf http://knowledgetranslation.ca/sysrev/articles/project21/Ref...

morganherlocker 12y ago
There was even a glucose watch available on the market for several years in the US. It was pulled a few years ago, but the basic idea was sound. I do remember the device causing semi-serious skin irritation in many people though.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
ricardobeat 12y ago
We've had ways to measure glicose non-invasively since the 90s, but since we're dealing with human lives - glucose monitoring is a matter of life and death for people with diabetes - such a device must be at least as accurate as finger-stick meters. None has come close so far.
- fancy_betta 12y ago
  This thing doesn't need to be anywhere near that accurate to be useful to someone. Fitness monitors are already pretty inaccurate but they're useful to get a general idea of your activity levels from day to day. Trying to guess how many calories are in your food and adding them up each day isn't accurate, so a device that tries to measure it automatically based on your physiology only has to be that accurate. Maybe within 30% would still be useful to people tracking their fitness. Obviously someone who is tracking their glucose or caloric intake for medical reasons should use FDA-approved medical devices and techniques for that, but those people aren't the target audience for this device. I have no idea if this thing is legit or not, but calling it a scam because accurate non-invasive glucose measurement is a holy grail is completely missing the point of what the device is and what it's for.

morganherlocker 12y ago

There was even a glucose watch available on the market for several years in the US. It was pulled a few years ago, but the basic idea was sound. I do remember the device causing semi-serious skin irritation in many people though.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

ricardobeat 12y ago

We've had ways to measure glicose non-invasively since the 90s, but since we're dealing with human lives - glucose monitoring is a matter of life and death for people with diabetes - such a device must be at least as accurate as finger-stick meters. None has come close so far.

fancy_betta 12y ago
This thing doesn't need to be anywhere near that accurate to be useful to someone. Fitness monitors are already pretty inaccurate but they're useful to get a general idea of your activity levels from day to day. Trying to guess how many calories are in your food and adding them up each day isn't accurate, so a device that tries to measure it automatically based on your physiology only has to be that accurate. Maybe within 30% would still be useful to people tracking their fitness. Obviously someone who is tracking their glucose or caloric intake for medical reasons should use FDA-approved medical devices and techniques for that, but those people aren't the target audience for this device. I have no idea if this thing is legit or not, but calling it a scam because accurate non-invasive glucose measurement is a holy grail is completely missing the point of what the device is and what it's for.