Did I misunderstand something, or was something left out of this article, or is part of this article just plain wrong?? The article states that "five people absorbed the insulin more slowly than expected and ended up with low blood sugar levels serious enough to require intervention with additional food". This cause and effect reasoning here implies that slowly absorbed insulin led to low blood sugar. However, slowly-absorbed insulin would be insufficient insulin, wouldn't it? Insufficient to handle the increase in blood sugar resulting from the "carbohydrate-rich meal", yes? So wouldn't the result be a rise in blood sugar, as the carbs were converted to sugar with not enough insulin to cover it? HIGH, NOT "LOW blood sugar levels would be the result, I believe. Those of us who test our blood sugar all day long know all too well that insufficient insulin and a carbohydrate-rich meal lead to hyPERglycemia, not hyPOglycemia. Please respond. Tnanks
Seaton Greenof NC1:03PM October 05, 2010
BTW this is NOT an artificial pancreas and you should NOT be calling it as such. it is nothing more than a different insulin pump. as the pump evolves, it should become a better mousetrap.
Lileenof FL7:01AM July 16, 2010
I think 5 years is a bit ambitious for this type of system. i would rather see more research dollars and effort going to the islet cell transplantation. where there is a will there is a way and too many research projects quit too early. encapsulation of the islet cells are a much more natural way to go. and there is no mention of c-peptide. the pre-cursor that prevents complications. way too much still needs to be done.
Reader Comments
Back to article
Seaton Green of NC 1:03PM October 05, 2010
Lileen of FL 7:01AM July 16, 2010
Lileen of FL 6:56AM July 16, 2010