The Artificial Pancreas: Are You Ready To Trust It?
One of the biggest, if not the biggest issue concerning the type 1 diabetes field currently is the artificial pancreas that the JDRF wants to introduce in the US, but is facing roadblocks from the FDA. Most people are aware of the happenings, but this recent article on CNN provides a good overview of where we are in the process.
From the article:
The FDA is expected to release new guidance for future generations of the artificial pancreas systems on December 1.
Many people are urging the FDA to approve the artificial pancreas, which some are calling a cure for type 1 diabetes.
We have a survey over at the JDCA website that asks for your opinion about the AP.
From a personal standpoint, however, I am very interested to find out how much people are ready to trust such an artificial system? Many tests have been done to ensure the efficiency of the system, but at the end of the day we will have to be entrusting our lives to a robotic system.
One one hand, getting over a fear and having courage is important to progress and live a more comfortable life, such as what the AP may have the potential to provide. Yet on the other, how many times have we heard that a machine is 99% accurate, only for it to malfunction or not work that well? I have certainly seen it happen more than once.
So are you ready to live with an artificial pancreas? Do you think the majority of diabetics will be ready to accept it as a cure? How practical will efforts be to distribute it to a large part of the population in the U.S. and abroad? (though the U.S. is actually behind Europe in this regard)
Is the AP really the “holy grail,” as the article claims?
- Stoyan
Hi Stoyan:
- Am I ready to trust the AP, since it’s another robotic device/system? On one hand, yes I am. Just like I trust my pump and CGM, my other so-called bionic limbs currently being used. However, with the AP being more “smart” in combining these functions and being able to take some of the guess-work out, there’s a natural level of skepticism about completely trusting a device. But I trust that before the FDA would allow approval, they’d ensure safety and compliance with strict standards as they do for their other devices. So yes, I’d trust the AP because of my robotic device history and the overall process for the most part.
This doesn’t change the fact that I wouldn’t completely “trust” its 100% accuracy, given our current state of sensor accuracy and the fact that our meters have had the same 20+/- error margin since the 80s. But that’s a different discussion. It’s not perfect, obviously, but even with the flaws it’s been proven to safe lives and improve management in the non-U.S. countries where it’s approved.
-So are you ready to live with an artifical pancreas? Yes, I would be if it were available and I could afford it. But I’d really really really like the choice to have it as an option.
-Do you think the majority of diabetics will be ready to accept it as a cure? I don’t pretend to speak for any other Person With Diabetes, but I highly doubt anyone (myself included) would be “ready to accept it as a cure.” It’s not a cure, and I don’t believe I’ve heard anyone say that they believe it is a cure. However, I believe – and have heard countless other Adult Type 1s say – that if it were available, it could possibly be as close to a cure as we might ever see in our lifetimes.
-How practical will efforts be to distribute it to a large part of the population in the U.S. and abroad? (though the U.S. is actually behind Europe in this regard)
Again, there’s an affordability issue – and much like the CGM, I’d expect that it would take time for this to become covered and mainstream for those of us who need and want one.
Is the AP really the “holy grail,” as the article claims?
I don’t see it as a “holy grail” – that term bothered me in the article. Personally, I see a holy grail being more equivalent to insulin. Or, you know, an actual end-all-be-all cure. But a closed loop has been the dream of generations of PWDs for decades, and so in the context of us finding a “holy grail short of a cure,” I might be comfortable enough with that.
Short answer: Trust outweighs the distrust. That’s just me.
I don’t always trust the SEVEN device… so nope. Sometimes it can be very off. Like by over 100. So nope, I won’t trust a machine to rely on it. That, and on those days I’m out in the garden all day… no way. It would be a nightmare. Always going low…
oh yeah, and because it is about a half hour behind… that kinda stinks.
Thanks for your feedback Carrie and Mike!
Mike, I agree that the word “holy grail” in the article was bothersome (which I think is what Stoyan was getting at). Its unfortunate that the media sensationalizes most stories (both in and out of the diabetes world) because it makes it difficult for people to extract fact from emotion and opinion.
The AP has certainly been through many more hoops in the US than it has in other countries. We can only hope that this will ensure its safety. The AP is not a cure and will require monitoring (but I guess that’s true of most modern technology. We should never completely rely on it because its not infallible). It will be interesting to see how things progress in the coming months.
Thanks for sharing this interesting article Stoyan!