Hacker News Reader

Comment by dkarras | Hacker News Reader

I was never interested in "smart watches" but an affordable and non-invasive blood glucose monitoring would be a game changer for me, even if it is not accurate as the ones diabetics have to use (I am not diabetic) and if it "just works" without fuss like how Apple usually does it.

View on HN

If I'm understanding the blood glucose monitoring feature correctly, this would be very valuable for me. I don't know that I would want to wear an Apple Watch all the time (my Pebble does what I need on a daily basis), but it would be very helpful to be able to wear one for a month or so to see how my body responds to various foods.

For example, I've heard that some people have spikes after eating bananas, but other people do not. Also, rice can be very bad for some people (and different kinds of rice have different effects). I'd be curious to wear one for a month or so just to see how my body reacts to various foods and combinations of foods. I think it's possible to rent devices that do this, but it's hundreds of dollars for not that long of a trial. If I could spend $400, gather data for a month, and then sell the device in like-new condition for $250, that'd be a win in my book.

Unless I had a medical need, I would not want to wear any monitoring devices 24/7. I think it would contribute more to overall anxiety and stress than do anything helpful.

I know some people who can't even wear a fitbit to bed because it causes anxiety. I am open to the idea of wearing a device that monitors blood glucose if (1) it could accurately measure blood glucose, and (2) the information it provides me passively/via notification can help me to make significant improvements in my health.

For example, if I could make my liver 20% healthier by eating more moderate portions of bread in a meal where I plan to eat dessert, it would be useful to know that.

On the other hand, I don't think I have to wear the device forever to gain this information. I could learn about what makes my blood glucose spike after a month or two, and then just carry that knowledge with me going forward.

Honestly it's not like these stats are always present on the watch face, unless you choose for things like your heart rate to be present. For ECG for example, you have to specifically go into the ECG app and hold your finger on the crown for 30 seconds just to get a scan.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. I got an apple watch that I wear all the time and I occasionally find the data interesting. For instance, I was able to see in absolute terms just how much cutting out coffee improved my sleep (went from averaging ~6 hours 10 min to ~7 hours asleep). I don't look at the data all the time though.

Exactly. I would much rather have these sensors embedded in elsewhere where I can make a conscious decision to activate the sensor as a part of my routine. Something that sits on my body all the time is just to anxiety-inducing.

These types of continuous monitoring systems, wrist mounted and also in smart toilets, will be required by insurance companies in the future.

I mean, the potential health benefits in terms of preventive care seem to be incredibly large to me.

I hold/held the opinion. I've asked several of my doctor friends what they think of a future like this. They are all resoundingly pessimistic, due to the false positives they think would result and a general sense that it would result in unnecessary interventions.

It made some sense to me, but ultimately considered it would work out for the greater good.

If you think about something like cardiovascular disease or diabetes, it seems incredibly obvious that having a continuous stream of data with blood glucose, pulse, oxygen etc. would be extremely valuable.

So I feel like your doctors maybe don't understand or appreciate technology.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com