There are enough issues with the data from our diabetes devices to make the average PWD's head spin.

First off, there's the sheer volume of it. Consider that the average glucometer burns through 1500 readings a year -- which hikes up somewhere closer to 6000 if you have type 1 diabetes and don't have a continuous monitor you can rely on. Then there are the carb counts, food data bases, multiple basal rates, special basal rates, bolus wizards, special bolus calculations, and the smartphone calendar alarm to manage them all. Those of us with type 2 diabetes may not have all the insulin data to collect, but we have instead the blood pressure data, and along with the caloric impact of the foods we eat, we have to capture the fat distribution and the sodium levels. For all of us who exercise regularly, there are the heart-rate monitor data, the treadmill, elliptical, and cyclocomputer statistics, and the rep charts for weights. (READ MORE)

I'm in the middle of preparing a presentation for my computer user group on "Connected Medical Devices" -- that is to say, durable medical equipment that has the ability to connect to a smartphone, a computer, or the Internet for the purpose of maintaining a log of data points, keeping track of one or more patients' health, or helping one manage his own health.

  (READ MORE)

"Freaking the 'danes": In fandom, the deliberate exhibition of extreme fannish behavior before "mundanes" (non-fans) for the specific purpose of eliciting incomprehension and social discomfort. (See: bear-baiting.)

With eight separate phone numbers registered to the two members of this household, it's not surprising that -- despite those numbers' presence on the National Do Not Call Registry -- we get more than our share of telephone solicitations. Most of the time, they're phishing scams telling us we can "lower your interest rates" if we give them our banking information immediately; the rest of the time, they're split between trying to get us to change our telephone, Internet, television, gas, and electricity providers.

Until yesterday.

  (READ MORE)

Yesterday, I discussed how I'd like diabetes healthcare providers and the healthcare industry to better use existing tests and technologies, and how I believe our current crop of devices and programs might be developed in the near-term future. Today I'm going to discuss items that will take a bit longer to develop and get through FDA approval, or which may take technological and medical breakthroughs to bring to fruition.

  (READ MORE)

Over the past few posts, you've seen me comment about diabetes technology -- mostly hardware and supplies -- in the context of a particular issue (hot weather or availability), but nothing really in terms of what I would like to see healthcare providers do in terms of better using existing technology, as well as what I should like to see pharmaceutical companies, software companies, and device manufacturers develop going forward. Because of the length of my wish list, I'm going to break this up into two posts.

  (READ MORE)

The topic for July's DSMA blog carnival is "diabetes technology", springing from a discussion in which we dissed the downsides of our Borgified selves and collated a wishlist of things we'd like the diabetes device industry to provide us with. Topping the list were more accurate glucometers, more reliable CGMs, sensors, and infusion sets, more accurate (smart?) insulins, and affordable (read: under ten cents each) glucose test strips. Somewhat further in dreamland were noninvasive testing methods (tattoos, retina scanners, "mood" watches, and so on).

The more interesting question is that of disillusioning those who think some of this technology wishlist is already here.

  (READ MORE)