Any chance this works?

Anyone in Denmark actually seen one of these?
I’m pretty skeptical of medical devices. But tech is improving all the time.
I LIKE that this is durable medical because it could save me a lot in medical expenses if it’s accurate.

Details here: Critical-depth Raman spectroscopy enables home-use non-invasive glucose monitoring


I have heard about these devices and I’m extremely interested! I hope someone will chime in with more info on it.

1 Like

I don’t think they have passed through regulatory yet. One of us needs to get one of these and report back.


Wow - that would be so great! Hope this company has some sponsorship from those countries with problematic diabetes rates.

1 Like

I was in a trial by a company called C8 MediSensor which made a CGM using the Raman Spectroscopy several years ago. The company went bankrupt before being ready for market, but it was very interesting. It was not ready for production when they had to end the company. The device was pretty large and was belted to the abdominal area. The trial referenced above states the device will sit on a table nearby? Not sure how that would work for most people, but for people confined to bed, I guess it would be okay. The only advantage I see is avoiding the skin puncture every ten days like for the Dexcom. In my mind, that’s the least of the annoyances with Dexcom. I hope it works out, though, and they can produce a new type of product that helps people manage their diabetes.

1 Like

Just about exactly ten years ago, I was on a flight sitting next to one of the executives. He saw me test my blood sugar and told me this should be available in the US in just a few months. I have wondered from time to time whatever happened to them. I am sure there will soon be a reliable breakthrough in non-invasive glucose testing because diabetes awareness proliferates globally and is no longer considered just a disease of “the rich” in Asia. The development will most likely come from a producer of medical devices outside the US.


There are several “non-invasive” meters.

They have been around for awhile.

I think those not using insulin would be the target audience.


Yes, there are several currently in the works being tested that have been around for a while, however, none are yet commercially available in the US.

1 Like

Just checked amazon reviews. Many commented them as not very accurate.

I use a fitbit watch and xDrip, which sends my dexcom cgm bg to watch. But not standalone, need phone nearby.


I don’t think you will find any that are FDA approved or have a Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) rating, let alone a MARD 0f <10-12%. The first units will most likely be developed and come from other countries, so not having a MARD rating should not be a deal breaker as long as the user does their own testing against fingerstick or rated CGM until they are comfortable their new non-invasive device works properly and is within an accuracy they can live with.

1 Like

If you watch/listen to the news article, it states two companies have joined forces to develop the technology, not they have it in hand. Several efforts for non-invasive tech…from RF to light to sweat…are under investigation and have been for a few years. I believe these efforts are fueled further by the mention of Apple, Garmin, and others being expected to include the tech in their watches. Here’s hoping someone succeeds, it’s accurate, and reasonably priced. It would be a game changer for the CGM market for T1’s/T2’s and hold a lot of promise for similar tech changing the medical industry. For now, it seems more “hope” than “reality”, but “hope” keeps us moving forward…

1 Like

If I had to guess, he would be in charge of sales. Those people tend to hyperbole, when they aren’t outright lying.

Yes I am more than a bit cynical.

Just to clarify, I think there’s a discrepancy between the research article and the Laser Focus World article in the OP. The Laser Focus World article has this quote:

“Our device will measure the single most important analyte (blood glucose) without piercing the skin and without being obtrusive,” says Anders Weber, CEO of RSP Systems. Essentially, it’s a scaled-down version of the company’s already-established glucose sensor that’s about the size of a paperback book.

That earlier, paperback-sized version seems to be the one being tested in the research paper.

1 Like

Yeesh—that article is a quintessential example of something I’ve been seeing more and more in the popular d-tech media, and it drives me nuts, to wit, the confusion/lack of distinction between BG “meters” and BG “monitors.” The terms are being used interchangeably and as we all know here they are TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS. This one makes a complete hash of it. Like this description of the KnowU, which is one of several devices listed under the heading “Who is developing non-invasive continuous glucose monitoring devices? Here are some tech companies currently making progress in the non-invasive CGM space”:

Just like traditional gingerstick [sic] glucose meters, Know you [sic] are small enough to fit in your purse or pocket. However, unlike traditional glucose monitors, it does not require test strips.

Last time I checked there was no CGM, traditional or otherwise, that used test strips. This thing is a glucometer, not a CGM. First sentence gets the term right, the second gets it wrong, and they compound the confusion by categorizing it under CGM when there’s nothing “continuous” about it.

Likewise, with the device in the featured image for the link, the Scanbo. It’s clearly a meter. The link-share title gets it right, but then the article puts it under the CGM heading:

[The device] uses a 60-second non-invasive finger measurement rather than the traditional finger prick. … The device requires users to place their fingers on a white sensor and the device uses a combination of algorithms to provide insight into blood glucose values.

Unless they’ve got some insanely wand-waving AI that can give you trend info off a single reading, this is a glucose METER, not a monitor. You don’t wear it, you have to get the thing out and stand there with your fingers pressed to it for a full minute. Which if finger poking is an issue for you, fine, but it’s just snapshot not the movie.


Cost aside, I am quite happy with my Dexcom G7. I completely forget where it is in one of my arms and it has very good accuracy plus integration with Tidepool loop. New 12 hour overlap is great. Put new sensor in before bed and then activate it the next morning. No 2-hour window of no readings.

The only company that I’m aware of that is open about what it is doing with noninvasive technology is Know Labs in Seattle. Their MARD is comparable to the G6, but their Phjase 1 prototype is the size of a hock puck. They need to make it smaller and are a couple years away from having a watch device,

1 Like

I will always be skeptical of non-invasive bG claims. As I understand, there are many molecules in the human body that overlap the spectum of glucose and have a much stronger/brighter signal. I heard it compared to looking for a flashlight in the sun.

There was a company in the mid-late 90s called Futrex developing the Dream Beam. They were just down the street from where I work, so I’d go in every time they called for volunteers. I accumulated enough % off coupons to get two free Dream Beams. I still have them around somewhere. The SEC sued them for investor fraud.

Plus, the standard used to be fingerstick. Now it’s CGM, which adds an whole other layer of problems.

I don’t believe for a second that Apple and Samsung are “closing in on the problem,” not even close. So, yeah. I’ll believe it when I see it… maybe.

1 Like

I agree with that. Glucose is actually a very low concentration compared to he rest of our blood, so the accuracy has to be real extreme. Passing through skin and fluid makes any kind of light signal really messy and also very different from person to person. I think it will happen one day though.

I remember one cgm that was advertised as non invasive that included you needing to sand down your skin. It had nothing I would have attempted to try. I can handle the insertion needle and that is ok for now.
The glucowatch was advertised as minimally invasive. I tried one because my doctor offered it to me and it felt like I was being electrocuted every time it took a reading, and I think I developed PTSD from the anxiety of the next shock.

It seems like it will take a similar rocky road to come up with one of these noninvasive cgms

1 Like

Jesus Timothy!

I worked with a guy who used to work for a Japanese company. He swears they built an extremely accurate BG sensor (although I believe it when I see it). He says they were ready for market when someone bought them out and the device disappeared. I think this happens a lot when people are successful. I think its more difficult to introduce competition in the medical markets than I might, otherwise, imagine. The guys at Abbott used to say that either your first to market or your nothing.

1 Like

Abbott was third to the market and they still have a viable competitive sensor.
I was just reading about the very first insulin pump worn as a backpack also had a closed loop system with some kind of glucose sensing technology.
After that there was an artificial pancreas system for in hospital use too big to carry, but that was quite successful.
I wonder why they moved away from the closed loop idea for decades and only now coming back to it.

1 Like