Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 10:04:02 GMT -5
There seems to be this idea that food makes levels change rapidly - they don't unless you are eating refined sugar (even glucose tablets take 15 minutes). On to slide 6 - that data is true for Type 2 only if you read the whole paper and Type 2 do not get CGMs. If you want to see how CGMs are used look at my earlier reply to tchalaa in this thread. I still think the fuel gauge is a better analogy, people don't spend their life watch their CGM. you should have in the first month to see how your sugars reacted to various foods and then not so much. so ?
|
|
|
Post by cm5 on Jul 17, 2016 10:55:03 GMT -5
An analogy to consider re: checking three times a day, including one's supposed exact memory of what happens with intake of food (not taking into consideration of other physiological/ambient parameters)---
Checking several times a day = Fuel Gauge on dashboard, doing something when 1/4 tank alert appears
VS
Watching TACHOMETER !
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jul 17, 2016 12:15:32 GMT -5
There seems to be this idea that food makes levels change rapidly - they don't unless you are eating refined sugar (even glucose tablets take 15 minutes). On to slide 6 - that data is true for Type 2 only if you read the whole paper and Type 2 do not get CGMs. If you want to see how CGMs are used look at my earlier reply to tchalaa in this thread. I still think the fuel gauge is a better analogy, people don't spend their life watch their CGM. you should have in the first month to see how your sugars reacted to various foods and then not so much. so ? Yes, I think that is a good description. Once you know how much and when to bolus the CGM is really just there to catch random events and the alarms handle that.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jul 17, 2016 12:20:00 GMT -5
An analogy to consider re: checking three times a day, including one's supposed exact memory of what happens with intake of food (not taking into consideration of other physiological/ambient parameters)--- Checking several times a day = Fuel Gauge on dashboard, doing something when 1/4 tank alert appears
VS
Watching TACHOMETER !Tachometer is a good example. Mostly you don't look at it because you know when the engine note sounds right but when the engine note sounds wrong you check. CGM is the same - I check before a meal or when I feel wrong. The alarms are the rev limiter (to push an analogy ).
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Jul 17, 2016 16:40:18 GMT -5
Although I am not diabetic it would seem AFREZZA used w a cgm would make it more effective and precise (up to limits of cgm)
For me it would not seem to be a question about the absolute need to use both to get the benefits of AFREZZA but more about ability to maximize the benefits.
And that would become imho a question about diminishing returns. I know what insurance companies would say but an individual diabetic may feel differently.
Also is a cgm less expensive than a pump? I don't know but if so and u can replace pumps w AFREZZA, basal and a cgm that would also make sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jul 17, 2016 16:50:23 GMT -5
Although I am not diabetic it would seem AFREZZA used w a cgm would make it more effective and precise (up to limits of cgm) For me it would not seem to be a question about the absolute need to use both to get the benefits of AFREZZA but more about ability to maximize the benefits. And that would become imho a question about diminishing returns. I know what insurance companies would say but an individual diabetic may feel differently. Also is a cgm less expensive than a pump? I don't know but if so and u can replace pumps w AFREZZA, basal and a cgm that would also make sense to me. If Afrezza behaves as advertised I don't think you will need a pump or a CGM. That is a potential selling point to insurers. The capital cost of a pump is higher but the run cost is far lower. Looked at over 3 years a pump is a lot cheaper than a CGM.
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jul 17, 2016 17:06:00 GMT -5
As long as we are throwing around imperfect analogies I will add my own. The cgm is like a smoke alarm. Even though you seldom check it, it is still performing an important safety job. And I've never heard someone say " I got rid of my smoke alarm because I've had it for 10 years and it hasn't gone off even once".
|
|
|
Post by seanismorris on Jul 17, 2016 18:05:55 GMT -5
Not a "Holy Grail"
A non additive painkiller is a "Holy Grail"...
I still want t know what MannKinds data looked like. Staying silent for competitive advantage only takes you so far...
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jul 17, 2016 19:14:27 GMT -5
Although I am not diabetic it would seem AFREZZA used w a cgm would make it more effective and precise (up to limits of cgm) For me it would not seem to be a question about the absolute need to use both to get the benefits of AFREZZA but more about ability to maximize the benefits. And that would become imho a question about diminishing returns. I know what insurance companies would say but an individual diabetic may feel differently. Also is a cgm less expensive than a pump? I don't know but if so and u can replace pumps w AFREZZA, basal and a cgm that would also make sense to me. If Afrezza behaves as advertised I don't think you will need a pump or a CGM. That is a potential selling point to insurers. The capital cost of a pump is higher but the run cost is far lower. Looked at over 3 years a pump is a lot cheaper than a CGM. Here we are at the catch 22 of sorts. Afrezza users only use a CGM for a little while, then the ones I was reading, posting on twitter, stopped using CGM. Sam and Eric come to mind, at least at one point in time. A good poster on another thread, saying afrezza needs to partner with dexcom. afrezza would kill dexcom. non invasive glucose monitors on their way very soon.
|
|
|
Post by surplusvalue on Jul 17, 2016 21:08:28 GMT -5
If Afrezza behaves as advertised I don't think you will need a pump or a CGM. That is a potential selling point to insurers. The capital cost of a pump is higher but the run cost is far lower. Looked at over 3 years a pump is a lot cheaper than a CGM. Here we are at the catch 22 of sorts. Afrezza users only use a CGM for a little while, then the ones I was reading, posting on twitter, stopped using CGM. Sam and Eric come to mind, at least at one point in time. A good poster on another thread, saying afrezza needs to partner with dexcom. afrezza would kill dexcom. non invasive glucose monitors on their way very soon.
Not sure who the reference is to about "partnering with dexcom" (certainly wasn't me) but as I suggested to MNKDNUT ... promotion/recommendation, collaboration and partnership are not all the same thing. Collaboration (which is what I specifically referred to in my first post about this in another thread) would be important if MNKD's repeated view is that Afrezza works best with CGM's. Even if this would be primarily for initial dosing and new patients and not necessarily long term or permanent (as the agedHippie suggests) it would no doubt be optimal for getting and maintaining new adherents thereby combating drop out rates from frustrated initial Afrezza users. The continued use of CGM's could be left up to individuals, context and circumstances. Would a manufacturer welcome such collaboration is a question we can't answer but I wouldn't assume that it would be a only negative for the CGM manufacturer as in Afrezza would "kill Dexcom". What the arrangement would be between the two? companies is another question. Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/5865/shorts-last-hurrah#ixzz4EipEWj4i
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jul 17, 2016 21:39:53 GMT -5
Here we are at the catch 22 of sorts. Afrezza users only use a CGM for a little while, then the ones I was reading, posting on twitter, stopped using CGM. Sam and Eric come to mind, at least at one point in time. A good poster on another thread, saying afrezza needs to partner with dexcom. afrezza would kill dexcom. non invasive glucose monitors on their way very soon.
Not sure who the reference is to about "partnering with dexcom" (certainly wasn't me) but as I suggested to MNKDNUT ... promotion/recommendation, collaboration and partnership are not all the same thing. Collaboration (which is what I specifically referred to in my first post about this in another thread) would be important if MNKD's repeated view is that Afrezza works best with CGM's. Even if this would be primarily for initial dosing and new patients and not necessarily long term or permanent (as the agedHippie suggests) it would no doubt be optimal for getting and maintaining new adherents thereby combating drop out rates from frustrated initial Afrezza users. The continued use of CGM's could be left up to individuals, context and circumstances. Would a manufacturer welcome such collaboration is a question we can't answer but I wouldn't assume that it would be a only negative for the CGM manufacturer as in Afrezza would "kill Dexcom". What the arrangement would be between the two? companies is another question. Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/5865/shorts-last-hurrah#ixzz4EipEWj4iI know what you are saying... screencast.com/t/4W2uaL19IqtW screencast.com/t/tb72AUHjv9 screencast.com/t/AhnFhHunq
|
|
|
Post by lakon on Jul 18, 2016 12:11:40 GMT -5
Although I am not diabetic it would seem AFREZZA used w a cgm would make it more effective and precise (up to limits of cgm) For me it would not seem to be a question about the absolute need to use both to get the benefits of AFREZZA but more about ability to maximize the benefits. And that would become imho a question about diminishing returns. I know what insurance companies would say but an individual diabetic may feel differently. Also is a cgm less expensive than a pump? I don't know but if so and u can replace pumps w AFREZZA, basal and a cgm that would also make sense to me. If Afrezza behaves as advertised I don't think you will need a pump or a CGM. That is a potential selling point to insurers. The capital cost of a pump is higher but the run cost is far lower. Looked at over 3 years a pump is a lot cheaper than a CGM. agedhippie is in good company on this opinion. Al Mann stated about the same years ago. He was going to cannibalize his past successes. Some might even believe this is why the deal with Duane DeSisto fell apart. I know PWD that hate finger pricks so I can see a desire for less-invasive, or non-invasive, CGM, to get rid of the sore fingers as well as automated (night time) monitoring. Better, faster, cheaper diagnostics, like BG tests and CGM are needed, but less so with Afrezza. That said, PWD will probably prefer a monitoring device and real-time control by puffing Afrezza as opposed to doing the math while eating spontaneously. I would think that more people would like the ease and safety of taking corrections in real-time when they decided to splurge on desert. As MattB said, what about not having to finish a meal when you are full to avoid a hypo?
|
|