Things Are Changing!
The migration of TuDiabetes has begun
Content created between now and the launch of our new site on April 20th will NOT be moved to that new home, but our community values and Terms of Service still apply during this time.We are not accepting new members during this transition period. If you want to join the TuDiabetes community please send an e-mail to TuDiabetesAdmin@gmail.com. We will send you an invitation to join after the migration is completed.
So I am curious - many people are interested in seeing what the artificial pancreas can do, but are you ready to trust it with your well-being?
I wrote a short post about it on the JDCA blog:
But I wanted to get people's opinions on here as well. How do you feel about the AP, and to what degree are you ready to trust it?
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!
I've trusted myself for almost 40 years. Trusting an artifical pancreas can't be any riskier.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?