I think the thing to keep in mind is that the AP is just a way of automating current technology, although I agree with others that I would have a REALLY hard time turning over control to a machine. I always tell people that, with T1D, BG management is an art, not a science. There are so many things I have to factor in when administering insulin and there is no way that an algorithm could capture all those things. Sometimes, my dosing decisions are based more on intuition than science, mainly because of the running tab I keep in my head of what is occurring in my life at that moment (stress, hormones, exercise, weather, future exercise, etc).
I have concerns about the resources we are putting towards the AP and how it's being touted as a cure. The AP is NOT a cure. The AP will come with the same issues we currently experience now with both CGMs and pumps (failed infusion sites, insulin gone bad, inaccurate CGM readings, needing to calibrate, etc). Yes, if it works as intended it would make things easier, but it's not a cure. Not even close.
As Gerri points out, my other concern is cost. We know that the CGMs and pumps that are currently available do wonders for many people in terms of improving control. Yet so many folks cannot afford these technologies. Heck, even with an income that is way higher than the national average and excellent health insurance, I have, to some extent, had to make decisions about what technologies I use because of costs. If people are unable to access what is currently on the market simply because they cannot afford it, why aren't we putting the money towards that issue?
I guess I just have a hard time reconciling putting money towards the AP when there are so many T1s out there who can't access what is available now. Why isn't anyone addressing that problem??