• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

epichealth is this a fake apps/website

Gabrielle_Tai

Well-Known Member
Messages
185
Type of diabetes
Type 1
Treatment type
Insulin
I saw a website (https://epichealth.io) that claim their have a apps for phone that can wait for it wait..... Take blood glucose reading without poking my finger full of hole. But it feel like a scam / fake.Anybody feel it fake? If it true than my finger poking day are over soon or i still need to poke?
 
 
extract from their press release
"
The app is currently in clinical trials but will be available to download, free of charge, on Android smartphone devices and IOS in Q4 2017.

ENDS

Press enquiries to “Harriet Dalwood” harriet@10yetis.co.uk or hello@bioepic.co"

I remember many moons ago a TV report showing a similar type of meter that measured bloodflow in fingers using a laser and interferometer processing to measure bgl non-invasively. That attempt failed to produce anything useable or marketable. This uses closeup of a fingertip using the inbuilt phone (an extreme selfie) and no controlled light source. Think this will be the problem, they are not controlling the test environment. Has anyone manged to use their smartphone for ultra closeups using a fixed focus camera lens?

Remains to be seen if this makes the commercial marketplace.
 
IF the app works as described the developers stand to make millions of £s so I'm not totally convinced about it being a "free app".
Companies currently producing invasive testing devices will be banging on the door with offers to purchase the patent.
Maybe I'm just an old cynic!
 
Hadn't heard of this. Would be nice if it's a success, my fingertips are like pin-cushions. Plus I often don't take readings at interesting times because of the expense.
 
Sounds like BS to me. There are apps that work with freestyle libre. But on their own, non-invasively? ...not this millennia.

I studied capillary blood flow as part if my BMedSci degree at med school using highly accurate multi thousand pound kit and still couldn't get sufficient accuracy to determine the level of A-V shunting occurring, let alone glucose concentrations
 
Hmm.. I wonder if we diabetics would have problems with fingerprint readers? I guess if we use the side of the finger, not so much.

As for this app, and being a photographer/general geek.. I'm dubious. Here's something I found with a quick search showing how a pulse oxymeter could be added to a smartphone:-

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3892845/

Showing some of the challenges. Smartphone cameras are designed to take pics, and as far as I know don't have the right kinds of LEDs or sensing to do this kind of thing without additional hardware.. But companies are doing (or trying to do) neat things via phones, eg:-

https://gigaom.com/2014/04/29/consu...can-tell-the-number-of-calories-in-your-food/

which doesn't seem to have launched and the Kickstater page says it's in an IP dispute.
 
Anyone who has been in an ambulance bluelight episode or A&E recently will know that an oxymeter is perfectly feasible - they already have finger cap sensors and monitors to show oxy saturation levels. That measures light transmitted through the finger and presumably the red colour change due to less or more oxygen, These sensors provide a powerful and controlled light source, and presumably a photoelectric cell behind a red filter of sorts. So this is not stretching technology too far

Not aware of anyone programming an iPhone to do this task though. On a similar note, there seems to be moves to measure BP using visual type technology and certainly blood pressure meters can already measure pulse rate and these are integrated into smart watches and fitbits. But glucose concentration?.
 
It's whether a plain'ol smartphone can do any of this without an additional device. So for pulse-oximetry, it's all about the Beer. Take one IR and one red LED, pulse them rapidly, measure absorption/attentuation and apply Beer. I mean Beer-Lambert's Law to figure out what you're measuring. So it's a form of spectroscopy, and would be limited by the spectrum emitted from any LEDs on the phone, and sensitivity of it's CCD +/- any filters that are in the camera assembly to help make nice pics. With an accessory doing the sensing, it's more possible, eg:-

http://www.andor.com/learning-acade...tral-response-within-optical-window-of-tissue

But.. If it's going to be used as any meaningful diagnostic aid, it'll need a LOT of testing & certification. That's the part that put me off going into medical electronics. Plus there are no doubt existing patents to work with/around, and then figuring out how to avoid law suits or ending up as the next Theranos.
 
Gabrielle_Tai said:
But it feel like a scam / fake.Anybody feel it fake?
Click to expand...

It would be very difficult for a non expert like myself to tell. However, they have gone to a lot of trouble for a scam, even roping in the World Health Organisation.

I suggest that one keeps an eye on the ongoing clinical trials. The results will be very interesting.

As for patents, I think one should look at the problems of getting a patent for what is a piece of software, it's certainly not a forgone conclusion. Globally, the extent to which patent law should allow the granting of patents involving software is controversial and also hotly debated. Abbott will be really upset if a piece of software designed to run on a mobile phone which nearly everyone has these days is made available. Even if they charged £50 for the app, I think millions would go for it.

Watch this space!
 
I've been talking to them about the next phase of the Alpha programme and hopefully I'll be getting on to that. We shall see...

As for if it's a scam? At this stage, they've not asked for any money, and have a ton of patents for this stuff, so I'm comfortable it's legit.
 
Let hope so, tired of poking my finger 8 to 12 times a day. Even if it need poking like 2 times a day to calibrate still better than 8
 
I don't think it's a scam or fraud, just dubious about how well it could work. Plus the website is high on 'Woo!' and light on facts. If it'd listed patents, given more info about how it worked, or even just showed more than just blank-ish screenshots of the app in action it'd inspire more confidence. It's also pretty negative about existing tests, ie saying it's doing a wide trial compared to other tests. Accu-Chek's got pretty comprehensive test info and states it's ISO 15197 compliant, and states calibration and accuracy measurements.

All of that is missing from Epic's website. If it's got patent protection, then it should be able to post more technical info and results. Then there's the commercial aspect. The company isn't going to pay back R&D costs, wages, or investors with a 'free' App. What is more likely is the app is free, but the cloud processing of the results will be £20/$20 a month and priced to compete with traditional testing. And being cloud based, will also have to comply with privacy legislation, especially as it'd be holding medical records.
 
first14808 said:
Accu-Chek's got pretty comprehensive test info and states it's ISO 15197 compliant, and states calibration and accuracy measurements.

All of that is missing from Epic's website.
Click to expand...
Bearing in mind that what it's doing at the moment is effectively a publicly selected Phase 3 clinical trial, it's not really a surprise that much of this data is unpublished. I'd be surprised if it even exists yet. We do need to remember that the other panacea, i.e. the Libre, had just as little published data when it was launched and we all jumped on that like it was a gift from god....

It's interesting seeing how perception of different technologies changes how people think they should be presented and whether they are viable, with scant evidence as to the merit of that thinking.
 
tim2000s said:
...

It's interesting seeing how perception of different technologies changes how people think they should be presented and whether they are viable, with scant evidence as to the merit of that thinking.
Click to expand...
I take personal umbrage at this,. Tim

Some of us here have a scientific or engineering background and are aware of how some things work. We also see previous attempts such as the GlucoWatch and others fall by the wayside, or not meet the expectations placed on new technologies that offer promise, but fall short. There are technical limitations to using a Smatphone for a medical application, in the same way that the aero industry would not rely on commercial PC and Windows technolgy for use on planes, or on a military weapons system. Some things just do not go together,

Lastly there have been scam attempts to pass off equipment as pukka, when they are rebranded or rebadged rejects from the scrap bin. Anyone can claim adherence to an ISO or a CE mark, but unless they have proper independent qualification test evidence to back the claim, then they are counterfeit copies. They make money until proven wrong, but that needs someone to question their validity. Recently the CCG's forced myself and others to choose a replacement bgl meter selected from a list of manufacturers that offered cheap test strips. My CCG gave me a possible list of 6 meters. One on the list was a rebadge operation who were closed down by Trading Standards, and another supplier had over £1m trading debts and was in admin. Neither of these meters were actually viable for me to choose, Even the SD Codefree was eliminaed because they were unable to supply the test evidence for ISO or CE so were omitted from the competition at a National level (i,e, not just my local CCG)

So yes I am sceptic about new companies launching new products. My own university was about to launch one such product using light modulation techniques, and although they had a demonstrator unit that was probably hand crafted and tweaked for maximum smoke, it did not make it onto the market as a commercial product. The TV clips and news items were impressive, though.
 
I applied to be one of the beta testers on this product. Unfortunately I wasn't picked. Would be brilliant if the trials prove successful. As previously mentioned cant see it being free for very long.
 

As a disclaimer, I did a BEng in biomedical instrumentation. Admittedly that was quite a while ago. Since then, I've worked in various design, development and for my sins, marketing roles. Which has perhaps made me a bit cynical. I blame my tutors who nagged me to show them my log book for wanting to see detail.

But a Phase 3 trial should suggest previous phases have been completed. That's more drug terminology than alpha/beta and compliance testing needed for medical devices, especially diagnostic aids. Some data have been published, so press releases like this:-

https://epichealth.io/2017/09/03/press-release-glucose-2/


I.. respectfully disagree with that claim. The results show 99.4% gave a low risk reading. The Fig.2 Bland-Altman plot in the results paper showed pretty wide variation between the app reading and traditional/control reading, ie a lot of results +/- 20mg/dl or more. I might be misinterpreting that plot as it's not a style I use, but there should be little difference between app and meter result, if it's '99.4% safe'.

That may improve with more neural net training, or it may highlight challenges with different skin tones, age, phone CCD etc.
 

I think there's hope for non-invasive testing. But I've been thinking about this, and there's a handy convergence of tech and market. So phones have pretty good compute power, and the demand for phones has lead to cheap sensors, high output 'white' LEDs along with cheap IR/RGB semiconductor lasers. So there's potential to create a more controllable finger scanner that can do spectroscopy or diffraction trickery to sense what's going on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…