advertisement

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is a "closed-loop" CGM and Pump a Cure?

Discussion in 'Stickies' started by Sarah Maddie's Mom, Jan 6, 2010.

?

Is a "closed-loop" system a cure?

Poll closed May 6, 2010.
  1. Yes

    4 vote(s)
    1.7%
  2. No

    224 vote(s)
    96.1%
  3. I don't know

    5 vote(s)
    2.1%
  1. Sarah Maddie's Mom

    Sarah Maddie's Mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    12,510
    Ok - maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but it seems to me that the powers that be have proclaimed a "closed-loop" system to be a "cure" for D. What do you think?
     
  2. emm142

    emm142 Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    6,883
    I think it would be wonderful and amazing. But no, I don't think it's a cure. A cure isn't having pieces of machinery attached to me every day and night... JMO.
     
  3. CC'sMom

    CC'sMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,605
    Definitely not a cure. And honestly with all the issues we've had in the past withe the Dexcom, it would take me a long, long time to trust it and to be comfortable with it.
     
  4. hawkeyegirl

    hawkeyegirl Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    13,151
    No, not a cure, but a huge, huge, huge improvement on current treatment.
     
  5. buggle

    buggle Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,267
    You still would have to fill insulin cartridges, poke your kid with an infusion set and deal with tape -- hopefully they won't have tubing to deal with. You'd have to insert a sensor and connect to a transmitter or whatever communication device they end up using.

    And as long as insulin is injected just under the skin and glucose is measured just under the skin, you'll still have a lag in both -- lag in time for to insulin to start working, just like now. And a lag in how long it takes the glucose to reflect what's in the blood to use that feedback between the two.

    In healthy bodies, insulin works within a few minutes when it's released right into the portal vein. So the feedback is immediate. You just can't replicate that with with a closed loop pump/CGM. I'm sure the algorithms will get better and better so that the interface becomes more trustworthy, but it'll never be perfect and will likely require calibrations.

    And there will always be equipment failures and issues.

    I have no idea why they call it a cure other than hyping it for marketing and trying to raise funds for development. It's just a better version of what we have now.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2010
  6. danismom79

    danismom79 Approved members

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,300
    No. My baby would still have diabetes.
     
  7. hypercarmona

    hypercarmona Approved members

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    698
    No. Cure means I don't have to ever do anything related to diabetes ever again. An artificial pancreas is just one more expensive, on going "treatment" of the symptoms of diabetes, not a cure. Personally, I think that there are other avenues of research that are more promising and that aggressively searching for an artificial pancreas to make living with diabetes more comfortable is not a good use of time and expense. But that's just me. I'm not crazy of making meters pink, green, or tiny when they could work on how inaccurate they are, either. :rolleyes: I'm not saying that it wouldn't be an improvement on what we have now, but it shouldn't be the ultimate goal, which many seem to be saying it is.
     
  8. saxmaniac

    saxmaniac Approved members

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,057
    Heck no.

    By this sense we could "cure" polio just by attaching little motors to people's arms. Look ma, no more symptoms! Ima cured!
     
  9. joy orz

    joy orz Approved members

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,460
    Absolutely not a cure. I just saw that poll and was going to write the same thing. I'm a little peeved by the idea to be honest.

    Kinda like saying insulin is a cure.
     
  10. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    absolutely NOT.. its another bandaid, more technology, its not a cure. A cure means our kids would have a functioning pancreas like everyone else.
     
  11. angiej

    angiej Approved members

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    318
    No. not a cure, but a step that I would welcome wholeheartedly.

    I would LOVE for a cure so that she never had to think about her D again - but if she could have something that did a whole bunch of the thinking for her, then that would be a good thing, it's just not a cure ...
     
  12. Gracie'sMom

    Gracie'sMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,039
    No. When people tell me how close they are to a cure and then go into this closed loop cure, I tell them that it is an advancement, but not a cure!
     
  13. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    I wonder why the 'powers that be' THINK that a closed loop system is a cure, when we clearly think its NOT.. Maybe the 'powers that be' need a reality check. I see things more clearly these past few days.
     
  14. badshoe

    badshoe Approved members

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,153
    Nope. I am fairly suspicious of any claim it even works. CGMs are great for building data to make basal changes but not good enough to base insulin on.
     
  15. frizzyrazzy

    frizzyrazzy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    14,141
    nope, it would be akin to giving a person with a missing leg a state of the art, almost not detectable, prosthetic and calling him "cured".
     
  16. Jacob'sDad

    Jacob'sDad Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,803
    What powers-that-be say it's a cure? I guess I've never heard that.
     
  17. Toni

    Toni Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,882
    Heck no! To tell you the truth I am afraid of it. I would like more help with analysis re basals/bolus, etc. from an AP. I might like the AP overnight if cgms was at the point where it is virtually foolproof, but I would like a hybrid AP. I would not want to turn everything over to the AP. But I could change my mind, depending on what transpires in the future. Have to wait and see. If it turns pump off for a few hours when BG hits 50, alarms are real loud and dependable, cgms 95 percent accuracy that would be great. A cure? Nope, it's not a cure. Still have to think about D 24/7.
     
  18. lil'Man'sMom

    lil'Man'sMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,244
    Nope, a cure to me would be when my son and all our children can say "We used to have diabetes."
     
  19. HeatherJakesMom

    HeatherJakesMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    202
    No, welcomed...not totally trusting at first...but not a cure. As the above poster said, I wanna hear "We USED to have diabetes!"
     
  20. Sarah Maddie's Mom

    Sarah Maddie's Mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    12,510
    I suppose what really got me thinking about it was this interview with the CEO of JDRF. Ellen posted it a few weeks ago and I've been thinking of it since and then today I saw the poll on the CWD home page and that "closed-loop" was included in the choices of what form a cure might take and I began to wonder if there had been some memo that I missed :rolleyes:

    4. The Future of Diabetes Research: Thoughts from JDRF CEO Alan Lewis
    We recently spoke with Alan Lewis, PhD, the new President and CEO of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF). Dr. Lewis discussed the future of diabetes research, the companies he believes will play a role in that future, and how diabetes therapy will change on the road to a cure. The JDRF, of course, has great influence on the direction of diabetes research ? we appreciated Dr. Lewis? candor and are eager to see where he will take the organization. He comes into the position with a long history in drug development and discovery and most recently served as the President and CEO of Novocell.
     Though encouraged by new technologies and treatments, Dr. Lewis acknowledged that finding a single ?cure? for type 1 diabetes would likely take longer than expected, likely longer than a decade. He noted that definitions of ?cure? vary and that some patients may consider a fully functional artificial pancreas as a cure ? Dr. Lewis anticipates success with the JDRF?s Artificial Pancreas Project within five years. However, he indicated that the ultimate goal is ?beta cell preservation and restoration.? He was enthusiastic about crossover treatments, which are being used for indications other than diabetes; if they work for diabetes, they would have an accelerated approval process.
     Notably, Dr. Lewis explicitly stated that one of the top near-term priorities of JDRF is developing a closed-loop device ? reflecting a shift in focus to more ?here and now? therapies to complement its research on far-off cures. Dr. Lewis believes this priority will address the immediate need of the patient to maintain health and live longer. However, he noted that JDRF is still committed to the ultimate goal of beta cell recovery, with a particular focus on antigen-specific therapies (therapies targeted for a particular substance that causes an immune response). He expressed hope that JDRF would be seen as a leader in this field, just as JDRF?s leadership is now broadly acknowledged in CGM and the movement toward the artificial pancreas.

    From Diabetes Close Up #96 ~ November 2009 ~ Regulatory Crossroads ~ www.closeconcerns.com 21

    I'm going to post a link to the whole interview as soon as I can find it :cwds:
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2010

Share This Page

advertisement