[gorb314]

Just my two cents, but as a type 1 diabetic: I either want very accurate blood sugar readings, or none at all. And from what I know about people who don't suffer from diabetes: there is almost no reason to try and find out what your blood sugar is doing, because your body regulates it so well.

So I just don't see the point of this. Non-invasive glucose monitoring just doesn't seem feasible, the accuracy doesn't help diabetics and it certainly doesn't help non-diabetics.

I'm a naysayer on this, but I do hate having to continuously test my sugar and buy expensive CGM gear. Please prove me wrong?

[joshstrange]

I don’t understand this view point at all. Widely deployed tech that is not as accurate has a chance to uncover trends no one was monitoring for and to improve over time as they have more data and iterate on the tech.

If we took your approach with literally anything in the tech world we’d have nothing since the v1 wasn’t perfect.

How does it hurt you at all if people have access to a rough estimate of their blood sugar levels?

[jwagenet]

I’m not diabetic, but I can have intense energy/mood swings likely related to blood sugar. Non-invasive monitoring does sound nice to have a better understanding of what’s going on.

[gorb314]

If I were in your situation (which granted I am not) and mood swings related to blood sugar was a concern, I would pick up a simple finger-prick blood testing kit. It is fast, safe and most of all very accurate. That would then either put my mind at ease or convince me to see a doctor.

Again, having what might be very inaccurate measurements of blood sugar won't help in this case either, I fear.

[omnicognate]

I'd just go to the doctor.