I am seeing adds on social media for "watches" that measure blood sugar with infrared light. Bogus or not? I don't expect it to be as accurate as a serologic test but wonder if it is reasonably accurate? I am one of those lucky folks that is prone to infections so the CGM is contraindicated for me. I had an early one and suffered a MERSA infection where the sensor was installed. I don't want to go there again, dang neared killed me the last time. Anyway, any of the medical types here have any input for me, I don't plan to stop doing finger pokes before meals but it might be a good way to rough track in between.

quote:

watches" that measure blood sugar with infrared light

Interesting, be nice if the iWatch did this....

See a few examples on Amazon, from $30 to $60 might be worth getting one and measuring it against the stick, see how accurate it is...

I saw mention that iWatch blood sugar function was 3-7 years out. I understand being cautious of unproven technology but this seems to be a bit extreme. I really like my Ultra and would likely purchase whatever Apple comes up with to get the blood test function. As I said, I would not be relying on it for control, just monitoring.

This seems to be the Holy Grail of health functions that may be possible on a smart watch. I've also read Apple is working on it, and I'd trust their technology to go deeper than others--as their sleep cycle function seems to. A huge amount of money is to be made if this is developed and is both accurate and precise. Physicians are probably being bombarded with smart watch owners reporting A fib that is an artifact.

1.3 billion people could have diabetes by 2050.

My guess is it is complete nonsense but for $30 I am half tempted to buy one and put it on the boy to compare against his Libre.

I don't know of a watch that does infrared reporting of glucose.

I have a new Garmin Epix Pro watch with a sensor that will measure heart rate, pulse ox, and has the capability for EKG (will be able to detect A fib similar to the Garmin Venu 2+) when the FDA finishes the software testing.

If you wear a Dexcom 6 or 7 arm patch (there will be a needle in the back of the arm) it will report glucose readings every 15 minutes thru bluetooth to an App on watch for 2 weeks. This is not a cheap solution.

My brother who is an MD. Recently purchased one of these gadgets (in watch form) from Amazon or Ebay. He then compared it's readings to a finger stick glucose. His conclusion was that it was good enough to get a general idea of what your blood sugar is at any one time, but NOT accurate enough to make medical decisions with, i.e.: insulin or medicine dosages. YMMV, of course!

quote:

Originally posted by ibanda:
I don't know of a watch that does infrared reporting of glucose.

I have a new Garmin Epix Pro watch with a sensor that will measure heart rate, pulse ox, and has the capability for EKG (will be able to detect A fib similar to the Garmin Venu 2+) when the FDA finishes the software testing.

If you wear a Dexcom 6 or 7 arm patch (there will be a needle in the back of the arm) it will report glucose readings every 15 minutes thru bluetooth to an App on watch for 2 weeks. This is not a cheap solution.

They actually are starting to pop up (I don’t know the technology they use) and I question how accurate they are.

Blood Sugar Monitor Watch,Diabetic Blood Glucose Watch Bluetooth Fashion Non-invasive,Fitness Watch Smart Watches for Men Women (Black) https://a.co/d/1eQDttO

For the CGM we found the Libre 2 to be much more accurate than the Dexcom. When we put both on our 9 year old at the same time.
I am really hoping for something that is accurate to come along where the watch is all you need.

We use the Libre 2 now because it still has its stand alone meter but it is a pain making sure we swap it between whoever has the boy at the time.
Would love for him to just have to wear a watch or device just on his arm that does not need to be linked to another device.

Yes, it is expensive. Runs us $75 a month as insurance does not cover them for him.

The technology advancements in the last 2 years have beere amazing, but the $30 watch sounds too good to be true. Someone may crack the code with infrared GCM but I will bet the first reliable ones will be $1,000.

No but really, it works!



Interesting timing of the thread though as I just bought an iWatch. I never liked wearing watches. But because I'm improving my health I tried a small AmazFit band and liked it. But I decided the small size was a bit too feminine so I wanted a better watch sized band and it will work well with my phone. Anyhow, I would love if I could measure blood glucose and maybe ketones. But I do imagine that would be a while before it's truly accurate.

@mike22w

Could you ask your brother which brand of watch he has, it sounds like it might be good enough for me to monitor trends between finger sticks. Again will not be using for dosing but mostly just for "feel good" tracking. There are quite a few brands available and would prefer to purchase one that isn't totally wonky. Thank you!

quote:

Originally posted by ibanda:
The technology advancements in the last 2 years have beere amazing, but the $30 watch sounds too good to be true. Someone may crack the code with infrared GCM but I will bet the first reliable ones will be $1,000.

I have no doubt they are snake oil.
But for $30 I think I’ll pick one up just to slap on the boy for awhile and compare it to his Libre readings.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
This seems to be the Holy Grail of health functions that may be possible on a smart watch. I've also read Apple is working on it, and I'd trust their technology to go deeper than others--as their sleep cycle function seems to. A huge amount of money is to be made if this is developed and is both accurate and precise. Physicians are probably being bombarded with smart watch owners reporting A fib that is an artifact.

1.3 billion people could have diabetes by 2050.

My Apple Watch correctly alerted me I have AFib. I never would’ve known otherwise. I hope Apple perfects a blood glucose monitoring feature for the Apple Watch that would be game changing.

I've been using Garmin Fitness watches since the Forerunner 10, which required wearing a chest band for the heart rate monitoring. Still use a chest band because the wrist "heart rate monitor" is simply a computer algorithm. To be honest I don't think those fancy LEDS do anything. One thing that is an absolute certainty the oxygen sensing is not very good at all, it takes forever to get a reading and typically it's 5 points low or more.

If you don't believe it put the watch in Cardio, start the function and then just stand still in one place and swing your arm like you are walking. In about 5 minutes it will have your "heart rate" at 120 bpm or in that range. What you are seeing is the product of a computer algorithm based on the average American Male at age 40. An average male couch potato with a BMI of 30 and who cannot walk one single mile without stopping to rest.

BTW, I have Heart Disease and do exercise when the weather permits, so a 5 mile walk is a pleasant bit of walking. My BMI is currently 21.5 and I am currently on Beta Blockers to try and keep me out of Afib. Downside to beta blockers they limit the heart rate and that really limits exercise intensity.

Needless to say I have a very poor opinion of anything "infrared" or uses flashy LED's. If I want to check if I'm in Afib I get out my Kardiamobile and take my ECG electronically using what is claimed to be a hospital grade monitor.

Regarding the Cardio device, I don't think any device that only uses 2 measurement points could be considered "hospital grade" since they stick 8 to 10 contacts on me for an EKG. I don't doubt that they give useful readings, but they're not "hospital grade" no matter what they claim.

Years ago (1980s, maybe) there was a watch that used osmotic contact (?) to measure blood glucose through the skin. I've no idea how well that wowrked and I've not seen them advertised recently.

flashguy