The problem is not the cgm line. It is labeling it as the “ideal.”
That is the cgm line of a person without diabetes who has altered their diet to obtain that cgm line. As you said, Attis has been wearing a cgm for years.
It is not the cgm line that you get from someone without diabetes who is just eating relatively healthily and slapped a cgm on their arm just to see what their bg levels are throughout the day while eating that diet.
It is an extreme example. As far as I know, there’s no evidence that shows we should be striving for that trend line.
Here is a study that evaluated cgm profiles of people without diabetes:
*This is very good to educate everyone including medical professionals *
**It’s good for others to also understand people with all types of diabetes **
Your non -diabetic lows and highs are not the same as any diabetic even if numbers are “comparable”.
To feel a low or high with symptoms is so different than a non diabetic.
Some doctors I’ve talked to don’t even understand.despite they have degrees,education and knowledge. -what its like with emotions,discrimination overall life and it’s hardships people go through.
So through experience people also gain empathy along with sympathy.
I absolutely love the idea. The more awareness that can surround blood glucose control, the more investment that will be made in developing CGM’s. Mass awareness can lead to mass demand which leads to mass production which leads to dramatically reduced prices and options. I can easily see a company mass producing cgm’s somewhere around the world that last 30 days and cost just a few $ for combined transmitter and sensor and will talk to Android or IOS products. Many of course, will not be FDA approved, and many may not even be available in the US but anything within reason can be imported from pretty much anywhere around the world. The accuracy of such product will determine its success. This could be a huge boon for the un/under insured and less financially well healed individuals around the world.
I don’t consider that trend line the “perfect,” unachievable goal.
There’s nothing wrong with it, but it’d be just as healthy if it had some bumps toward 120 or 140- just as the study I referenced shows occurs in people without diabetes.
I am all for if anyone wants to use a cgm, to go ahead and use one. You never know if someone might catch a problem early, like I did using a meter. They might optimize a workout. Who knows, it’s a testing/monitoring device that should be available for all and I really wish a cgm didn’t require a prescription. Why should anybody have to ask a doctor and pander to a doctors whim to get blood tests, cgm’s etc. Just because it’s more of a necessity for us, doesn’t make it not useful for others.
I get getting it covered by insurance only if a doctor prescribes it for a necessary use. And there will always be someone that abuses or misuses something. But don’t penalize the ones who benefit because of a few. But I think people that consistently use it will do so only for a reason. And look at all the information so many will gain from more information thrown into the pot.
Really though the premise is flawed. If your glycemic control is in the normal range, I hardly see the point to have a cgm.
So you can watch your sugar go from 75 to 120 and back again? I don’t see how that helps someone lose weight.
I totally get it if you are prediabetic or trying to learn what foods spike you or how to dose meds based on a glycemic profile.
But if you are not diabetic, I just don’t see what advantage it gives you.
If you don’t eat carbs, it will stay pretty low. If you eat carbs it will move higher and then move low again
But you already know what you are eating. So I think it’s just a little pointless
It’s not an issue. In fact, it’s a “thing” with the biohacking crowd. They can be a little pretentious, but I don’t think they’re bad. They’re using it to track the effect of food on their glucose. Good for them. I think it’s a way for companies to capitalize on people’s ignorance but maybe there is something to it.
I did have someone just assume that I knew nothing about CGMs once. She doesn’t have diabetes and got lucky with one of these companies working on CGM tech for non-diabetics that agreed to let her test it out. I asked her what was the name of the company because I know of one.
She then said that if I were diabetic, I could get a prescription for one. As if I didn’t already know this. I had to correct her fast that I’ve been wearing a CGM for over 10 years now. I’m good. And then redirected her back to what I asked: the name of the company.
There are moments like that because a lot of people just have no clue. I tell them what they need to know, laugh it off, and go on with my day. They don’t know what they don’t know.
The problem with that is, if your body is reacting to sugars normally, you won’t really see much of a difference between foods unless you were also checking insulin levels at the same time. A normally functioning pancreas starts dumping insulin into your blood the second you start eating.
That video on here that was posted showed 2 diabetic doctors and anon diabetic eating 3 doughnuts.
Both doctors spiked up and brought themselves down using a few different methods.
The non diabetic went as high as 120ish and returned to normal.
That’s 3 doughnuts!
No matter what he eats he is going to stay in that tight range.
Mila, I had difficulty making a selection from the options you provided but selected “I don’t see an issue.” If there are no shortages that would always be the case. But in the presence of shortages they should be reserved on a need basis.
I recently read an article about an individual who was not diabetic but was suffering bouts of hypoglycemia. She used a CGM before seeking assistance from an endocrinologist in trying to solve her problem. So there are other needs for using CGM.
Unfortunately and just my opinion, but I can’t see a corporation (particularly like Dexcom) lowering the price. I can’t stand that I am forced to change a transmitter with a still viable battery or to change a sensor at precisely the same time it was changed the previous session without any “grace” period! (let’s imagine a sensor error that caused a sensor change at 5am, now the next change in 10 days calls for a 5am change unless you’d like to go without BG readings for at least a few hours) I think it is quite clear what drives these kinds of decisions. (I’m not talking about using my sensor insertion for 21 days or 14 days or whatever, but to be forced into an exact 10 day, 0 hour, 0 minute change as well as the 3 month battery use period on the transmitter) It all speaks volumes to its greater intention (and not the medical intention!).
Anywho, that’s my opinion regarding expecting the price to come down based on the size of the market. (remember Epipen?)
@Steve_Henry I am basing that more users will reduce the prices of CGMs on the history of other technology such as cell phones and personal computers coming down in price as more and more people bought them. This happened with glucometers as well.
I think that everyone and anyone has a right to know what their blood glucose level is.
If that helps them be a better and healthier athlete, or prevent or discover undiagnosed diabetes, then that’s a good thing. Maybe they won’t be surprise-diagnosed at age 55 like I was, when I should have been diagnosed 25 years earlier with gestational diabetes. Now, after 23 years with type 2 – my Freestyle Libre 14 Day CGM is helping me keep my BG in line after meals and exercise and around the clock. I’m loving that I can read my sensor with my iPhone LibreLink app, and looking forward to when I can get continuous BG readout on the Libre 3 and my Apple Watch soon.
I believe that BG-awareness is an important aspect to overall health, and however we and/or anyone else can get it, we should cheer them on, because no one knows what they will discover, and it might very well be critical to their health and lives.
Right now, as far as I’ve seen, it’s not companies like Dexcom or Abbott getting into this market. Although, if they’ve got the capacity, maybe they should. They know more than these newer companies trying to do this.
Non-diabetics using CGM? It’s technology looking for a problem. It’s a sales department creating a market that’s not needed. It’s salesmen selling a fad to stupid people.
People with working pancreases don’t need to monitor their glucose levels. They’re wasting their money. But as someone has already posted here very astutely, maybe it’ll drive the price down for those of those do need CGM, so I shouldn’t complain.
I can see Abbott jumping in because their Freestyle initially wasn’t for type 1s. Do they have a low alert now on the Freestyle? I don’t know. I did participate in a few Freestyle studies last year and liked wearing it, but I’d not switch it for a Dexcom. I’m pretty brand loyal.
I totally agree with that statement, however, we are a society where obesity and diabetes are growing at epic rates so I think if diabetes 1,2 or any other type runs in your family a CGM may be of benefit. I also think if starting at age 40 or with a BMI nearing obesity, an annual A1C test is cheap insurance as the test, even if self pay is in the $20 range. Then if you show any signs of pre-diabetes, a CGM is no longer a vanity project.
@Regina
The new Freestyle2 has a low alert and a high alert, but still no calibrating. You can still get a 14 day Libre which doesn’t have alerts and was cheaper than the new Libre2. However the last time I went to get one the Libre2 was $35 versus the 14 day Libre was $37, so I got the Libre2. I’ve used both in the past and have a reader for each. I really don’t care which I get as I use it for swimming. They both seem about the same accuracy, which is off between 15-30 points. So I will keep using a Dexcom too. The Libre is cheaper and accurate enough for people who self fund them. Now if they only made every cgm available like a meter without a prescription it would help a lot more people.
