[caseydurfee]

Continuous glucose monitors have been around for a while. I'm not sure who this would help.

The fundamental problem is that glucose levels in non-blood fluids do not exactly match blood glucose. The current monitor solutions use interstitial fluid in the skin. They still require the user to test themselves several times a day and recalibrate the monitor based on blood glucose, and they can't alert the user if their blood sugar is low until it's already a serious situation. They also frequently give false positives.

This is a new (but very clever!) way to do something that has been around for a while, not a revolution, unless tears track blood glucose much closer than interstitial fluid does. Simply based on first principles, that seems unlikely.

And there are basic hygiene problems wearing contacts while you're asleep, which is when monitoring would be most useful. If google has the technology to make contact lenses that you can wear 24*7 without getting ulcerative keratitis, that's more revolutionary than another way to monitor blood sugar.

[magicalist]

> And there are basic hygiene problems wearing contacts while you're asleep, which is when monitoring would be most useful. If google has the technology to make contact lenses that you can wear 24/7 without getting ulcerative keratitis, that's more revolutionary than another way to monitor blood sugar

overnight and extended-wear contacts (for up to a month, I believe) have been available for many years now.

[lhc-]

I have these, and they are indeed good for a month. To be honest, I sometimes dont even notice and wear them longer.

[joeconway]

There are severe drawbacks to CGM like scarring, infection and most importantly the expense. In the UK CGMs and even insulin pumps are almost impossible to get most places on the NHS.