Christopher, The AP project, as far as has been published thus far, uses commercially available CGM sensors and insulin pumps, and proposes to link them with software. While those of us who use CGM's and pumps have found that they can be amazingly effective with human intervention, we know equally well that they would be both ineffctive and unsafe without human intervention. One example I have mentioned before is when a child sleeps lying on their sensor, the corrective action is to roll the child over, something a pancreas can not do, particularly an artifical one. There are many other practical realities that can't be addressed by a closed loop system - at least insofar as the system being any more "automatic" that it is today - such as having different bolusing rules when resting vs. exercising vs. during illness, or during days when there are persistent lows even at a low basal rate, and the now-admitted reality that the AP will not be able to bolus for meals, that will also have to be done manually as we do today. I mentioned FDA testing, because once this project tries to move beyond the realm of a 10th grade engineering exhibition, they will need to pass FDA phase I, II, and III trials. At that point, with large scale testing they will encouter kids who roll over onto their sensor and end up in DKA, or gross instabilities when sensors read the inverse of the actual blood sugar trend as they occaisionally will do, and the FDA is going to send them back to the lab with the instruction: "design a reliable sensor and come see us again when you have done so."