What Google announced at I/O for Android - and how it compares to iOS



  • Reply 21 of 21
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,256member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Beats said:
    Google and “privacy” are an oxymoron.

    This is embarrassing.

    I would love for Apple to add glucose monitoring to Watch and launch a gigantic ad campaign showing testimonies of Apple Watch saving people’s lives and helping improve people’s heath. A nail in the coffin strategy for Android Wear/WearOS/Whatever. I want Watch to be the new iPod where no one gives a sh** about alternatives or knockoffs. 
    Glucose monitoring will possibly arrive on non-Apple devices first. It's a coming feature that is already being spoken of in almost 'real' terms so I would imagine it's not far off at all. The entire health sensor industry is trying to crack this problem. How well it works will be the real question though. 
    I don’t know about that. 

    Apple Watch is being marketed as a health device now. So Apple has motivation to be first on some things. 

    Beyond that, Apple has been rumored to be working on glucose monitoring since the second iteration of the watch. 

    I imagine that’s a huge hurdle to figure out, but hugely important as is blood pressure monitoring. 

    If either or both of those are sorted… it would be a life changer for many. 

    I can see Apple being first on either or both. 
    There are a huge amount of health devices on the market and many players working towards continuous glucose monitoring. 

    CES this year saw a few companies making claims of varying kinds and other companies in the watch field have gone on record as saying they are working on the issue, too. They've all been working on it for years. The traditional monitoring players as well of course. 

    I think there is now enough information out there to think that we are near to seeing a breakthrough product.

    There is no reason why Apple can't be first with a watch solution. I just don't think that will be the case and whatever happens, I'm sure multiple solutions will come to market in a relatively short time frame. 
    Glucose monitoring makes it a medical device, which means that any builder of hardware will have to go through a long and grueling approval process. That Apple has been pursuing this for so many years is in fact an advantage. 

    But of course, many countries have lesser levels of approval for medical devices, so sure, there may be devices that are out first elsewhere, but I would expect that Apple will be first with FDA approval of non invasive glucose monitoring in a watch, which relates to sales in North America and ultimately the EU.


    An extensive list of companies working on non invasive glucose monitoring



    The tech giant considered including a non-invasive glucose sensor in the new Apple Watch Series 7, which unfortunately did not come to fruition. However, there is still reason for optimism. Reports came about as a result of the UK-based startup Rockley Photonics, one of Apple’s suppliers, releasing a “clinic-on-the-wrist” health watch including a non-invasive monitor. The technology is quite similar to that used by DiaMonTech and could represent a huge addition to Apple’s health monitoring features in the near future.

    It can be a non-medical grade glucose monitor without issue. That way the approval process is short and simple.

    In fact that is the route some recently announced non-invasive glucose monitors have already taken. 

    Rockley provides a platform (as I described above) which can be integrated into manufacturers' products. In the case of Rockley specifically, the last time I heard, they were working with six top-tier manufacturers for photonic glucose monitoring. One of them was rumoured to be Apple but that leaves five more. 


    As outlined here, the challenges are substantial to produce a device that provides clinically relevant results. Knowledge of the basis of measurement sensitivity and selective are paramount, as is the establishment of effective calibration protocols. An over-reliance on machine learning algorithms must be avoided. Candidate technologies must be tested over an array of environmental and physiological conditions, including over a range of glycemic concentrations during periods of stable glycemia and rapidly fluctuating glycemia in diverse populations of users.
    If Rockley does in fact produce sensors in 2023 for Apple, Samsung, et al, sales would still be impacted by the price to the consumer, and whether these have FDA Approval, which would make it easier for Healthcare Providers to prescribe, and Insurers to subsidize the cost of these.

    There may be "non medical grade glucose monitoring" devices available, but consumers will likely gravitate to FDA and EMA approved devices, even at higher costs. 
    The more qualified the product, the better (and more expensive). There is room for both, in line with how much the purchaser is able to pay. Then there is the device itself. Stand alone or integrated.

    Medical grade precision for many won't be the deciding factor. EYVA I believe is stating that its device offers 90% non-medical grade accuracy.

    Even today's 'invasive' CGM systems require a pin pick and traditional blood reading in case of strange readings. I doubt that will change any time soon. 

    As long as the device is calibrated and can mark a trend accurately (even if the numbers themselves are slightly off) it will be of enormous help on integrated devices. It could be a godsend for people with unstable mellitus 1 while they sleep for example. 

    AI is going to play a huge role in this but mostly a supporting role. I expect that devices will work without a cloud connection but then play off cloud based AI to improve the user experience by tying in with health data from other sensors, medication/insulin units and the food intake. 
Sign In or Register to comment.