Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jan on December 17, 2011 at 10:08am

No. But they have had success with the AP overnight. If it could be demonstrated it was safer, I would use it as an aide to control but still get up and do the nightly checks. And would not use it during the day. So doubt if that will be an option. Don't like the idea of wearing two sites all the time either and have heard talk of possibly three sites needed!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bug74 on December 17, 2011 at 1:22pm

I've trusted myself for almost 40 years. Trusting an artifical pancreas can't be any riskier.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stoyan on December 19, 2011 at 3:43pm

As far as the conspiracy argument goes: I think that there are legitimate questions that can be asked about how money gets used from government grants and other sources, but money donated for type 1 cure research by people at fundraisers should be straight forwards. The foundations do an excellent job of promoting all the fundraisers for a cure, they rejuvenate the community, and enjoy big turnouts and support. Where they falter is when it's time to report where exactly this cure-research money is going - and a lot of it is not going to anything related to cure research, while the money that does go into the labs - is not really focused on time-sensitive goals.

That is what we need to work on changing. Regardless of why the money is not being used properly - the people need to be made aware that the resources they are putting in are not being used in the way they want to.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by acidrock23 on December 19, 2011 at 4:34pm

That pretty much goes without saying anytime you are dealing with business/ lawyers/ educational institutions. You can't implement any sort of "research" without "running it by your lawyer" for a big piece of the pie that was given to the researcher with the intent of funding research. Of course, if you pay the lawyer, and maybe the administrator who decides which lawyer would most appropriately represent the researcher enough $$$, and which insurance company to insure them from the "crash test dummies" trying the "product" out, they can all have a nice round of golf to toast their success.

I don't mean to say that researchers and lawyers and administrators don't do work but I think that it may not really be realistic to launch an initiative to get all the $$$ donated funneled to *only* research the way the organization seems to be marketing itself?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by veterandiabetic on December 21, 2011 at 6:52pm

Eh...don't get me wrong, I am very excited about the ap. We (those of us with the D) have waited a LONG time for something like this. But, my concern is this: say I get the ap, and I am on it and when I exercise for 30 minutes my bg drops to a 50 mg/dl. Suspending insulin on that 50 is not going to bring the sugar up as quickly as a 1/2 cup of juice will...my body will go higher later (like 1-3 hours later) because of the suspension in insulin. My question is how the system can be customized for MY specific needs. If this concern is diminished, I am fine with the system.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard157 on December 21, 2011 at 7:25pm

I have a Facebook friend who recently participated in an AP trial in Boston. She wrote about it, extensively. She also sent me pictures of the equipment and showing how she was attached to so much apparatus. She spent an afternoon and a night hooked up to the AP equipment. It was supposed to be a 24 hour participation, but she had a few lows in the 40s that were not handled well by the glucagon dispenser in the AP. They discontinued the experiment after the night was over.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by acidrock23 on December 21, 2011 at 7:39pm

Yikes!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott E on December 21, 2011 at 7:41pm

Richard, this is very interesting, and it must have been fascinating to read what she wrote and see the pictures. (for the sake of privacy, I don't expect you to post it here). But I've always been under the impression that the AP/Closed-Loop-System isn't quite ready for prime-time yet. Our current CGM's aren't accurate enough and our current insulin doesn't work fast enough. That's not to say that we shouldn't keep trying, but with today's technology, I wouldn't really expect the system to work.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiuri on December 22, 2011 at 7:23am

I'll trust it when my 'Diabetes-Team' tells me it's safe. But I have great control at the moment, so I'm not in a hurry.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard157 on December 22, 2011 at 11:42am

I agree with Jen. I have some good friends who are T2, and they are insulin dependent. They have insulin resistance which is partially handled by Metformin, but they still use much more insulin than I do. I am T1 and have some insulin resistance, and use 34 units of insulin per day. A type 2 friend in SD with excellent control is using about twice as much as I do. A couple of his friends are using more than he does. I think this is typical of T2 diabetics who are insulin dependent, and have a lot of insulin resistance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by acidrock23 on December 22, 2011 at 3:37pm

I think that the AP could be useful providing data, if you are running up a lot, you could see that as a "hint" to change that you might not get if you were running along at random? If it communicated it helpfully, I think that it could be a tool that could help people make progress towards a better understanding of how their body is working. When I was MDIing, I had a lot of swings, probably rebounds abounded and overeating to fix lows, all sorts of "wrong" things that worked "ok"? An AP might've helped that?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by S Woodward on December 26, 2011 at 8:15pm

Given that All of the APs in clinical testing DO NOT use current CGMs and the insulin that will be used will be ultra fast (start in 5 min and be done in 60 min) the comparison w/ current is not correct at all.  The clinical testing has shown an extremely high level of accuracy and performance, I have no problem with using the AP when released. The real problem is the FDA and their treating T1D devices like pharma products. The are the products available outside of the US that are NOW saving lives any showing more accurate CGM Bg numbers, my bead is with the FDA!!!!!!!
Even the dec 1 announcent does not acknowledge that the need to look at getting non-AP product to market in the US to improve life quality and save lives. 

There needs to more pressure put on the FDA the get T1D products that have been proven and available outside of the US for 1-2+ years. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page