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

Glucose measuring watch

Jo_the_boat said:
Then Fitbit get an even worse rating and half the world has one.
Thanks for the reply.
Click to expand...
There's a number of threads on these watches on the forum. Nobody has ever come back after buying one to say the gadgets work.

My view is that if the things worked, this would have been bought up long ago by one of the tech giants, would be produced at scale and (eg) sold through legitimate outlets and nobody would be putting any investment into CGMs etc.

I think the price point is neatly pitched to appear reasonable next to the cost of a couple of weeks CGM use.
 
I trusted one of these “smart” watches. When the paramedics arrived at 05.00, and saved my life as I was suffering a severe hypoglycaemic episode, they and the doctors treating me said “throw it in the bin.” Total guesswork backed up by an algorithm or two gives a false reading almost every time.
 
I have tried several of these watches and I am afraid that my opinion is that they are a waste of money. Most produce an idealised graph showing three neat peaks in the day even when you haven't eaten and the numbers are always desirable but nonsense. If you wear two at the same time they never agree and the results are far from what the Abbott freestyle meter gives. The best thing about the one I am wearing at the moment is that it gets the time of day right.
 
All of the ones I've ever looked at had disclaimers saying they weren't to be used for treatment decisions (ie useless to diabetics).

I keep hoping that one of these days someone will post a link to one that actually works, but it hasn't happened yet.
 
Jo_the_boat said:
Oh, right. Pity, the theory is good.
I suppose you're going to tell me I've wasted my dosh on that self-refilling bottle of wine I've just bought?
Click to expand...
If you're interested in non invasive glucose measurement, there are a few companies that I have been watching (hopefully) for several years now but they never seem to quite get over the line. A problem they appear to be having is the light sensor - which does not work well with multiple different skin tones. I've seen 1 company on the web claiming to offer specific 'watches' for 5 different skin tones !
This news page provides a summary of the most advanced (10 minute read).
 
I can't see non-invasive ever working. Maybe the best bet is permanently installed sensor or a tiny nano sensor, but if that floats around in the blood stream I can imagine it being peed out, or getting stuck like a clot!

Mind you when we see how far things have come in last few years...maybe just maybe, fingers crossed in hope
 

I can see a big market in it so someone somewhere is going to be trying their best.
 

Hi Jo,

I’ve seen reviews testing a few of these non invasive watches with T1 measuring against sensors & meters.
One guy even sent himself out of normal range & took a hypo dive to test these?

In conclusion to date regarding the BG monitoring these watches tell you your BG putting their fingers in the tech’s ear going la la la when you are not.

For what they are charging for this device in the link…
One could get an older much cheaper Galaxy watch 4 due to the succession of the 5, 6, & now 7. There are also updates for the GW4 which gives it the same features as the later more expensive versions. (If you’re inclined?)
Download Juggluco or the G-watch wear app?
Then you’re good to go extrapolating from a Libre 2 sensor..

Not the same principle as a “non invasive” watch. But so far..
That’s as good as it gets?


Weirdly it could be how the device sits on the wrist too?

Mine has the feature of taking BP. (Blood pressure.)
I have slim wrists dispite correct strap adjustment, it’s never concluded a set up, let alone a test?
It keeps telling me to seat the watch correctly on my arm, after aborting the test…
 
Thanks.
The jury is still out on my (cheap) smart watch. Sleep OK, pulse OK, time and a few other things, BUT....

Went to a Warner Hotel and had a go at archery. The forearm protector you have to wear was digging into my wrist so when I came to look at the watch after we'd finished, everything was in Chinese! The arm guard must have been pressing on the watch's buttons and changed the lingo. Couldn't get it back whatever I tried - largely because the screen that allowed you to change the language to English - was in Chinese!
 
I've just come across something interesting - Lifeleaf from Life Plus.
They make some interesting claims about validated research and conformance to blood tests and CGM's - and it's on sale within the EU - which ******** excludes us Brits now. If I could get hold of one I'd try it.
CHECK THIS OUT

I have also been contacted by a company that I follow (DiaMonTech) who are holding some kind of press junket on July 15th and they are supposedly disclosing when they expect market launch. This could be cool as long as they don't say "it's 5 years away"
 
Last edited:
Funny how the website doesn't have links to those studies proving that it works, and I couldn't find how it works, except that it uses AI.
 
The link to the evidence given (if you follow the Lifeleaf link above) goes to a 270 page pdf which is a collection of hundreds of abstracts from a diabetes symposium. There are some on "non-invasive glucose monitoring" subtitled "reality versus hype". There could be more because I didn't read the entire 270 pages - I'm a bit dubious about a link that actually obscures what it's apparently referencing.

None of any of those I read has any indication whatsoever that this technology is currently available - they all say how useful it would be and how everyone wants it - that's true enough. But it doesn't yet exist.
 
In my OP I got wrapped up in the hype and it took a few well-directed posts from sensible folk on here to save me £80.
This one 'looks' to be another in similar vein. I have more than a healthy disrespect for all things medical and trials thereof after our less than forthright research and subsequent acceptance of various other medical interventions.
This one says, 'clinically proven', which means little. Two organisations are paid a few quid each to produce a favourable result and - hey presto, in the glossy literature - clinically proven.

I really hope someone can make something so convenient and effective - but it seems, not yet.
 

I couldn’t find a price?
 
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.…