Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank goodness, specialist embedded systems are immune from Malware.
I honestly cannot tell if this is sarcasm.
Here you go - /s
Apple Monitoring Blood Glucose
141–142 of 142 posts
Re: Apple Monitoring Blood Glucose
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, why would you want blood-glucose monitoring that is not medically proven to work or be reliable? Like, yeah, maybe it works in a very limited set of situations, but that's the same as a broken clock that only tells the right time twice a day; you'd never know when the monitoring device is working 'correctly'. It would be a random number generator, effectively, if it was not proofed. Besides, if you aren't a dia…
Perfect is the enemy of good. My Fitbit counts steps, but it isn't all that accurate from an absolute standpoint. Still, I find the day-to-day variances interesting. Same goes for blood glucose monitoring. I'd like to see if I can find correlations between my mood, productivity, sleep, fasting, etc... and my blood glucose levels. Like step tracking, the absolute number doesn't matter. Cook has already said that blood…
The problem is that the number you are getting is useless, there is no relative measure. Yes, maybe for you and for your particular fitbit recently, you may believe hat it 'works'. But you are very likely an outlier, there is no reason to believe some device like the glucose one will work for you or just about anyone else. The tech is essentially vaporware.
Also, giving people even psuedo-medical diagnoses is just irresponsible; either it works or it does not. You can't tolerate psuedo-random number generators with health in any way. This is why 23andMe has to licence their genetic counselors on what the results mean, as the data can be very easily misunderstood by even very well educated people.
Harvard just released a study on the fitbit, even the best of them were far off on something as simple as calorie counting: https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/05/fitness-track...