|
Post by agedhippie on Mar 8, 2017 17:18:21 GMT -5
As far as ondou is concerned , glad I'm not in business with you guys / your telling me some type of deal could not become a reality aside from the data portion of their "project" ... it's not like we're building jet engines.. we have a products with synergies of the GLM that could not be more perfect / I ENVISION: television ads run in a joint advertising venture with the likes of a Dexcom 5 , or whomever CGM... monitor/ look at watch ... inhale and (. The rest is up to you : sports, food , work, beach , etc :BEST PART SPLIT ADVERTISING COST .. mike Lenny says get on it ! There is no deal there because it's not their business. They are building a global data collection company so the last thing they want to do is restrict the inputs. I'm not sure you could split an advert. With two sets of warning I am not sure there would ever be time to talk
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Mar 8, 2017 17:49:09 GMT -5
It's a think tank / the deal fom there could be consummated at a different venue .. as far as the add / sure regulations .. but with the co- op cost savings worth a little extra time .. in the disclaimer...and you know those disclaimers... with the music playing, they make you feel like a million bucks ! Not to mention , insulin and a monitor.. could actually for the the first time make the disclaimer informative with a positive bent .
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Mar 8, 2017 19:34:43 GMT -5
As far as ondou is concerned , glad I'm not in business with you guys / your telling me some type of deal could not become a reality aside from the data portion of their "project" ... it's not like we're building jet engines.. we have a products with synergies of the GLM that could not be more perfect / I ENVISION: television ads run in a joint advertising venture with the likes of a Dexcom 5 , or whomever CGM... monitor/ look at watch ... inhale and (. The rest is up to you : sports, food , work, beach , etc :BEST PART SPLIT ADVERTISING COST .. mike Lenny says get on it ! There is no deal there because it's not their business. They are building a global data collection company so the last thing they want to do is restrict the inputs. I'm not sure you could split an advert. With two sets of warning I am not sure there would ever be time to talk Onduo is not a global collection company. It is a partnership between Verily and Sanofi. Sanofi put in $250M and Verily/Google put in the technology. Their target market is PCP's handling T2s who should be on insulin and who are not. Their CEO is an insurance plan guy and they partnered with the Oscar insurance company which is Jared Kushner's brother's company. They are developing a service product. That product will be a turn-key solution to monitor, dose correct, alert, inform and report to both the doctor and PWD. If successful their service will provide A1c levels only dreamed of by existing Endos. In the end, assuming they are successful few T2s will ever see an Endo. The Dexcom G6 will be the initial sensor. The V1 aka the M&M sensor will replace the G6 and is targeted for late 2018. There is no need for Medtronics or Abbott or anyone else in supplying sensors. In 2020 they are targeting release of the non-invasive sensor. Their algorithms are being developed to specific insulin products. A big question is are Tresiba and afrezza the center of the insulin offering. Neither are Sanofi products. afrezza is an easy insulin to add as Aprida is not a major player. Tresiba is a little harder to add as it takes Lantus and Toujeo market share. However, if properly treated and put on afrezza early most T2s will not need a basal. How this service is offered and paid for is the second big question and how does the PCP get a piece of the action on the referrals.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Mar 8, 2017 20:00:02 GMT -5
From coverage I've seen of Onduo it seems as if the cooperation with TCOYD (Edelman) isn't the central focus of Onduo. Which sources of information are you drawing upon to conclude that Onduo is going to be centered around an "Edelman protocol"? One source I found says TCOYD was solicited for input on "future product designs"... implying they had little or no input into what is viewed as the first products of Onduo. Also, it seemed Sanofi was being positioned as providing the expertise in therapeutics. It's nice that Edelman's organization is assoicated with Onduo, and that he's been a supporter of Afrezza, but given that SNY has put in $250M and is clearly anti-Afrezza now, I'm guessing Onduo isn't going to be making it look like SNY were a bunch of idiots or heartless schemers in picking up and then leaving for dead MNKD. Well put. I had given up arguing the point. Onduo has to be insulin agnostic, actually treatment agnostic, because it's about using data for better outcomes. People persist in thinking that it is somehow going to drive drug sales. Onduo is focused on connected devices, not what the devices are dispensing. As a case in point there is a lot of work going on at the moment around basal + GLP-1 rather than basal + prandial insulin (I don't think this pans out at the advanced end but it does loot good at the early end.) I am glad you finally gave up because you are wrong. The algorithms are not insulin agnostic and they are not sensor agnostic. It would be extremely difficult to develop models which are agnostic as each of the analogs are different and each works different in different people. Human insulin has the empirical formula C257H383N65O77S6 and a molecular weight of 5808. Novolog analog is C256H381N65O79S6 and a molecular weight of 5825.8 and the Humalog analog is C257H389N65O77S6 and a molecular weight of 5813.63. They are not the same and neither Novolog or Humalog have a baseline to model from. You also never really know how many monomers/dimmers/hexamers are in any given unit at any given time. Since afrezza is the exact same as the pancreas, it should work like natural insulin which is does so there is a defined baseline and it is predictable. Dreamboat - I am not sure what you mean by central focus. Developing a protocol with real time sensor input is pretty straight forward if you have well defined expected outcomes. With Edelman actually having practical experience as an afrezza user it makes it even easier. Edelman has been involved in this from the beginning. Sanofi included him in their Sanofi press release. No one does that unless he is involved and Edelman thinks Onduo is aligned with TCOYD's mission. From the Sanofi PR Edelman said “With Onduo, Sanofi and Verily are bringing forward a platform that is novel and critical in diabetes management,” said, Steven V. Edelman, M.D., Founder and Director, TCOYD. “Onduo is a company focused on the improvement of health outcomes through the marriage of technology and medicine. Its information-based solutions align well with TCOYD’s mission to empower people with diabetes and their loved ones to effectively and easily take control of diabetes. We welcome and support Onduo’s efforts and look forward to their progress.” mediaroom.sanofi.com/sanofi-and-verily-life-sciences-announce-launch-of-onduo-a-joint-venture-to-develop-comprehensive-diabetes-management-platform/
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 8, 2017 20:06:28 GMT -5
There is no deal there because it's not their business. They are building a global data collection company so the last thing they want to do is restrict the inputs. I'm not sure you could split an advert. With two sets of warning I am not sure there would ever be time to talk Onduo is not a global collection company. It is a partnership between Verily and Sanofi. Sanofi put in $250M and Verily/Google put in the technology. Their target market it PCP's handling T2s who should be on insulin and who are not. Their CEO is an insurance plan guy and they partnered with the Oscar insurance company which is Jared Kushner's brother's company. They are developing a service product. That product will be a turn-key solution to monitor, dose correct, alert, inform and report to both the doctor and PWD. If successful their service will provide A1c levels only dreamed of by existing Endos. In the end, assuming they are successful few T2 will ever see and Endo. The Dexcom G6 will be the initial sensor. The V1 aka the M&M sensor will replace the G6 and is targeted for late 2018. There is no need for Medtronics or Abbott or anyone else in supplying sensors. In 2020 they are targeting release of the non-invasive sensor. Their algorithms are being developed to specific insulin products. A bigquestion is are Tresiba and afrezza the center of the insulin offering. Neither are Sanofi product. afrezza is a easy insulin to add as Aprida is not a major player. Tresiba is a little harder to add as it takes Lantus and Toujeo market share. However, if properly treated and put on afrezza early most T2s will not need a basal. How this service is offered and paid for is the second big question and how does the PCP get a piece of the action on the referrals. Didn't Google also put in $250M? I remember that is what some articles said, unless the $250M cited for Verily was "in kind". I doubt that SNY would put $250M into a company and then allow it to base a therapy regime on competitors products. Others have speculated that they would take an insulin agnostic approach, which would be somewhat more believable than actually focused on competitors products. Where are you getting your information that they are developing algorithms to specific insulin products? I've not seen that other than as speculation here on proboards, and perhaps just from you. It may be true, but I would just appreciate knowing if it is your own speculation or if you have actual sources where it can be verified. I also think that the level of sophistication you are stating of dose correction is likely not to come as early as you are implying. My understanding is that anything that would give specific dosing would need to have FDA clinical trials and approval. If they aren't already doing Phase III then they are still quite a ways off from that. I would presume they are first aiming for something less ambitious... e.g. collecting data over some period of weeks and feeding that info and perhaps some analysis to a patient's doctor to make the actual clinical judgement... for instance pointing out a correlation that when the patient exercises they tend to have increased incidence of hypos. If the FDA were to allow an "algorithm" to recommend dosing without review and approval, why on earth would they require a review to change the dosing recommendations on the drug prescribing information as we know they do require? If the FDA required the algorithms used to run simulations relating to blood sugar physiology for research, which we know they did, why would they allow unapproved algorithms trying to do the same modeling to give patients dosing directions?
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Mar 8, 2017 20:20:40 GMT -5
Onduo is not a global collection company. It is a partnership between Verily and Sanofi. Sanofi put in $250M and Verily/Google put in the technology. Their target market it PCP's handling T2s who should be on insulin and who are not. Their CEO is an insurance plan guy and they partnered with the Oscar insurance company which is Jared Kushner's brother's company. They are developing a service product. That product will be a turn-key solution to monitor, dose correct, alert, inform and report to both the doctor and PWD. If successful their service will provide A1c levels only dreamed of by existing Endos. In the end, assuming they are successful few T2 will ever see and Endo. The Dexcom G6 will be the initial sensor. The V1 aka the M&M sensor will replace the G6 and is targeted for late 2018. There is no need for Medtronics or Abbott or anyone else in supplying sensors. In 2020 they are targeting release of the non-invasive sensor. Their algorithms are being developed to specific insulin products. A bigquestion is are Tresiba and afrezza the center of the insulin offering. Neither are Sanofi product. afrezza is a easy insulin to add as Aprida is not a major player. Tresiba is a little harder to add as it takes Lantus and Toujeo market share. However, if properly treated and put on afrezza early most T2s will not need a basal. How this service is offered and paid for is the second big question and how does the PCP get a piece of the action on the referrals. Didn't Google also put in $250M? I remember that is what some articles said, unless the $250M cited for Verily was "in kind". I doubt that SNY would put $250M into a company and then allow it to base a therapy regime on competitors products. Others have speculated that they would take an insulin agnostic approach, which would be somewhat more believable than actually focused on competitors products. Where are you getting your information that they are developing algorithms to specific insulin products? I've not seen that other than as speculation here on proboards, and perhaps just from you. It may be true, but I would just appreciate knowing if it is your own speculation or if you have actual sources where it can be verified. I also think that the level of sophistication you are stating of dose correction is likely not to come as early as you are implying. My understanding is that anything that would give specific dosing would need to have FDA clinical trials and approval. If they aren't already doing Phase III then they are still quite a ways off from that. I would presume they are first aiming for something less ambitious... e.g. collecting data over some period of weeks and feeding that info and perhaps some analysis to a patient's doctor to make the actual clinical judgement... for instance pointing out that when the patient exercises they tend to have incidence of hypos. If the FDA were to allow an "algorithm" to recommend dosing without review and approval, why on earth would they require a review to change the dosing recommendations on the drug prescribing information as we know they do require? If the FDA required the algorithms used to run simulations relating to blood sugar physiology for research, which we know they did, why would they allow unapproved algorithms trying to do the same modeling to give patients dosing directions? No, Google put in people and technology and Dexcom's development. As far as SNY putting in $250M into a company and then allow it to base a therapy regime on competitors products is a non-concern. Aprida has little market share and if Onduo is successful is will dwarf Aprida. As I said, if the protocal works and it will there will be little need for basals. They should be able to stop and in some cases reverse T2 through early insulin intervention. However, a split dose of lantus might be as good as Tresiba in some cases, if needed. But lantus is going generic anyway. Dosing is easy, the models will track and dose increases will be suggestions as will phase 2 dosing. Any major adjustment/second dose will always be double checked with a meter and if Teledoc consultation is needed, easy. Remember, dosing with afrezza is easy, just think like the pancreas and you are always better to over dose and let the liver do its job than under dose for phase 1 release. I use to develop algorithms for a living. Now I am writing a book which I need to get back to.
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 8, 2017 21:17:16 GMT -5
Didn't Google also put in $250M? I remember that is what some articles said, unless the $250M cited for Verily was "in kind". I doubt that SNY would put $250M into a company and then allow it to base a therapy regime on competitors products. Others have speculated that they would take an insulin agnostic approach, which would be somewhat more believable than actually focused on competitors products. Where are you getting your information that they are developing algorithms to specific insulin products? I've not seen that other than as speculation here on proboards, and perhaps just from you. It may be true, but I would just appreciate knowing if it is your own speculation or if you have actual sources where it can be verified. I also think that the level of sophistication you are stating of dose correction is likely not to come as early as you are implying. My understanding is that anything that would give specific dosing would need to have FDA clinical trials and approval. If they aren't already doing Phase III then they are still quite a ways off from that. I would presume they are first aiming for something less ambitious... e.g. collecting data over some period of weeks and feeding that info and perhaps some analysis to a patient's doctor to make the actual clinical judgement... for instance pointing out that when the patient exercises they tend to have incidence of hypos. If the FDA were to allow an "algorithm" to recommend dosing without review and approval, why on earth would they require a review to change the dosing recommendations on the drug prescribing information as we know they do require? If the FDA required the algorithms used to run simulations relating to blood sugar physiology for research, which we know they did, why would they allow unapproved algorithms trying to do the same modeling to give patients dosing directions? No, Google put in people and technology and Dexcom's development. As far as SNY putting in $250M into a company and then allow it to base a therapy regime on competitors products is a non-concern. Aprida has little market share and if Onduo is successful is will dwarf Aprida. As I said, if the protocal works and it will there will be little need for basals. They should be able to stop and in some cases reverse T2 through early insulin intervention. However, a split dose of lantus might be as good as Tresiba in some cases, if needed. But lantus is going generic anyway. Dosing is easy, the models will track and dose increases will be suggestions as will phase 2 dosing. Any major adjustment/second dose will always be double checked with a meter and if Teledoc consultation is needed, easy. Remember, dosing with afrezza is easy, just think like the pancreas and you are always better to over dose and let the liver do its job than under dose for phase 1 release. I use to develop algorithms for a living. Now I am writing a book which I need to get back to. By coincidence I used to develop algorithms for modeling, simulation and artificial intelligence myself... work included in my Ph.D. research. It was not biological in nature, though I have read a fair amount in biological/physiological modeling/simulation. The things you are saying are not unreasonable from a long view technology standpoint... however, I have seen you offer no evidence that it is anything but speculation about what Onduo is actually doing, much less about to bring to market. It seems like all of your posts about Onduo are what you believe you would do if you were trying to develop the technology you believe should be developed. I do believe it would be better for others here if you were open about what is your speculation about what makes sense technically vs what you actually have verifiable sources of information about Onduo's activities.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Mar 8, 2017 22:28:26 GMT -5
There is no deal there because it's not their business. They are building a global data collection company so the last thing they want to do is restrict the inputs. I'm not sure you could split an advert. With two sets of warning I am not sure there would ever be time to talk Onduo is not a global collection company. It is a partnership between Verily and Sanofi. Sanofi put in $250M and Verily/Google put in the technology. Their target market is PCP's handling T2s who should be on insulin and who are not. Their CEO is an insurance plan guy and they partnered with the Oscar insurance company which is Jared Kushner's brother's company. Lets see - Google and a French drug company. Of course this isn't going to be international. Their initial market is Type 2, growing to Type 1, and finally to pre-diabetes. There is no remit to push insulin that I see, perhaps you can point out where that is? The CEO's view on Onduo's mission? " Onduo' mission is to help people with diabetes live their life. Using software, hardware, and service we believe we can help remove friction from the life of someone with diabetes for the ultimate goal of living longer, healthier lives." To meet that they are going to need to cover a broad sweep of treatments and devices.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 8, 2017 23:43:02 GMT -5
Onduo is not a global collection company. It is a partnership between Verily and Sanofi. Sanofi put in $250M and Verily/Google put in the technology. Their target market is PCP's handling T2s who should be on insulin and who are not. Their CEO is an insurance plan guy and they partnered with the Oscar insurance company which is Jared Kushner's brother's company. Lets see - Google and a French drug company. Of course this isn't going to be international. Their initial market is Type 2, growing to Type 1, and finally to pre-diabetes. There is no remit to push insulin that I see, perhaps you can point out where that is? The CEO's view on Onduo's mission? " Onduo' mission is to help people with diabetes live their life. Using software, hardware, and service we believe we can help remove friction from the life of someone with diabetes for the ultimate goal of living longer, healthier lives." To meet that they are going to need to cover a broad sweep of treatments and devices. to do that they need to get an non invasive glucose monitor on the market. Hopefully a wrist watch or ear ring that sends blood glucose levels to the wrist watch. Let's go.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Mar 9, 2017 6:28:16 GMT -5
Lets see - Google and a French drug company. Of course this isn't going to be international. Their initial market is Type 2, growing to Type 1, and finally to pre-diabetes. There is no remit to push insulin that I see, perhaps you can point out where that is? The CEO's view on Onduo's mission? " Onduo' mission is to help people with diabetes live their life. Using software, hardware, and service we believe we can help remove friction from the life of someone with diabetes for the ultimate goal of living longer, healthier lives." To meet that they are going to need to cover a broad sweep of treatments and devices. to do that they need to get an non invasive glucose monitor on the market. Hopefully a wrist watch or ear ring that sends blood glucose levels to the wrist watch. Let's go.
I would like to see an non-invasive sensor as well but it is not needed to get started. For T2s the biggest issue is the titration and early use period, about 2 months. After that most T2s do not need a 24/7 sensor. However, Onduo will and the G6 is not bad and the M&M is even better. IMO, non-invasive for diabetics is a nice to have. From a technology perspective, Onduo has an integration effort and not a development effort. This is a huge difference as all they have to do is put the pieces together. All the technology pieces exist to get this going and a non-invasive product exists which works just like the pancreas. Lets see how this rolls. I think their biggest challenge is putting a "solution" together which they can sell to the PCPs, which the PCP get a piece of and how this gets paid for by insurance.
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Mar 9, 2017 8:05:01 GMT -5
But at the end of the day , isn't this all about insulin ! And the best insulin at that .
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 9, 2017 8:39:40 GMT -5
sayhey, no. quote: two posts above, "I would like to see an non-invasive sensor as well but it is not needed to get started. For T2s the biggest issue is the titration and early use period, about 2 months. After that most T2s do not need a 24/7 sensor. However, Onduo will and the G6 is not bad and the M&M is even better. IMO, non-invasive for diabetics is a nice to have.
From a technology perspective, Onduo has an integration effort and not a development effort. This is a huge difference as all they have to do is put the pieces together. All the technology pieces exist to get this going and a non-invasive product exists which works just like the pancreas.
Lets see how this rolls. I think their biggest challenge is putting a "solution" together which they can sell to the PCPs, which the PCP get a piece of and how this gets paid for by insurance. "
Reply: my blood glucose level is am in 122. So lizzy is running prediabetic. These numbers change. I need a non invasive continuous glucose monitor to manage my glucose. If we human beings here in America had a non invasive monitors we could wear as jewelry, how long would it be before people had them like iphones and we could watch them as we eat. What corporate entities would be hurt by this? Coca-cola? Doritos? candy? the gasoline stations that sell this stuff? Gross domestic product wise: less diabetes = less gross domestic product if people have less medications and buy less produced complex carbohydrates? It may be that that is the war. The less we know the more controllable we as a people are. Just sayin. I want my continuous glucose monitor jewelry and I want it now. it can be done. Glucosewise has one made? what continues to be the hold up?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Mar 9, 2017 9:26:55 GMT -5
Lets see - Google and a French drug company. Of course this isn't going to be international. Their initial market is Type 2, growing to Type 1, and finally to pre-diabetes. There is no remit to push insulin that I see, perhaps you can point out where that is? The CEO's view on Onduo's mission? " Onduo' mission is to help people with diabetes live their life. Using software, hardware, and service we believe we can help remove friction from the life of someone with diabetes for the ultimate goal of living longer, healthier lives." To meet that they are going to need to cover a broad sweep of treatments and devices. to do that they need to get an non invasive glucose monitor on the market. Hopefully a wrist watch or ear ring that sends blood glucose levels to the wrist watch. Let's go.
There were a few Israeli companies working on this a while back although that was as a meter rather than a CGM. The basic technology is all there, but at the moment they cannot get the repeatability and hence the accuracy suffers. The first company to invent a working non-invasive (lets say light based) device will absolutely clean up. There is a disincentive though - all those nice juicy test strip sales will go away.
|
|
|
Post by lennymnkd on Mar 9, 2017 10:58:37 GMT -5
to do that they need to get an non invasive glucose monitor on the market. Hopefully a wrist watch or ear ring that sends blood glucose levels to the wrist watch. Let's go.
There were a few Israeli companies working on this a while back although that was as a meter rather than a CGM. The basic technology is all there, but at the moment they cannot get the repeatability and hence the accuracy suffers. The first company to invent a working non-invasive (lets say light based) device will absolutely clean up. There is a disincentive though - all those nice juicy test strip sales will go away. Software, data, fees / rentals .. and god only knows what else . They have themselves covered ( glucowise)
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 9, 2017 13:36:32 GMT -5
it can be done. Glucosewise has one made? what continues to be the hold up? It probably is accuracy. There is a lot of variability in skin that poses problems trying to do accurate sensing of what lies beneath it. On the other hand, trying to draw fluids through the skin has proven to have its own problems... primarily skin irritation. Using fluids such as tears has limitations on accuracy and the don't represent the real time blood levels. A tough nut to crack.
|
|