yea the worst part is that my partner is an educator and this was a genuine example she gave when describing to me the conversation her colleagues had about their upcoming no-tolerance cell phone policy and exceptions they'd need to generally try to abide by to not overpolice the kids.

[–] Speaker@hexbear.net 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It doesn't, especially. The phone is a bridge between the continuous glucose monitor and the pump. Pairing two devices to a common piece of technology is easier to troubleshoot and less error-prone than trying to make the two devices talk to each other directly, and allows some of the work to be offloaded to a general purpose computer rather than having to build all of that into the devices themselves. These are things that have to work, so reducing the number of things they have to do is a safety feature. The phone can also share data from the monitor whenever it's online, versus the old situation where you'd have to bring your monitor in and hope your care team remembers to download the results.

Some pumps do pair directly to the monitors, but that often locks you into a specific configuration of monitor and pump and often costs more.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It just seems to me like adding the phone and an app is adding an extra failure point and that having a dedicated device would be more reliable. Take out the general computer entirely and just have a box with a display and a knob. But then again I am not a glucose pump designer.

[–] Speaker@hexbear.net 8 points 2 weeks ago

That is largely what most of the pumps are, but it's basically a device that's constantly embedded in your body and drip-feeding you insulin (and a button for dumping a larger amount when you're eating). Mechanically, it is very much as simple as it gets: insulin storage, delivery system, and a little computer controlling a valve.

Generally, the spots where you can reliably measure your glucose and the places where you can stick the pump for weeks at a time are not especially close. Continuous monitoring means the pump can adjust the dosage (and shut off when you're in range) without your input, which prevents tons of complications.

The pumps already require a tube between the actual device and the needle that goes into your body, and they're compact but by no means form-fitting. Adding sensors, displays, and other functionality there means more bulk, worse quality of life, and if the sensor fails that's the whole device dead. Separate sensors mean if you brush your shoulder against a door a little too hard, you just replace the relatively cheap monitor instead of the whole system.

Phones are built to talk to shit over Bluetooth and have lots of extra space to build in fault tolerance and fancy graphs and whatever other garbage, leaving the little miracle tech alone to do one thing really well. A Bluetooth radio is really small, but the little computer that needs to live next to it to do anything with the signals adds bulk that's hard to balance with quality of life.

[–] hellinkilla@hexbear.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It is such a marginal use case it is irrelevant. 2024 JAMA says "Among youths, the reported prevalence of type 1 diabetes (per 1000) was 3.5 (95% CI, 2.8-4.4)". And not all of those have fancy insulin pumps.

As an accommodation, it would be plausible to lock down a phone to do whatever the minimum required is for this and nothing else. No social apps, no telephony, no camera. Networking disabled or severely restricted.

I find the deployment of people with chronic health conditions as a gimmick to win a badly constructed arguments very distasteful.

[–] Llituro@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

I find the deployment of people with chronic health conditions as a gimmick to win a badly constructed arguments very distasteful.

people with disabilities that impact blanket policies when children get faced with ignorant teachers or administrators are not a gimmick. they're people whose existence highlights that you're just being reactive instead of actually wanting to solve underlying issues of western schooling.

As an accommodation, it would be plausible to lock down a phone to do whatever the minimum required is for this and nothing else. No social apps, no telephony, no camera. Networking disabled or severely restricted.

pointless, ludicrous, silly, puritanical. you're worried about the very possibility of a type 1 diabetic with a fancy insulin pump sneaking tiktoks in algebra that they need a dedicated piece of specially locked down technology for it.