IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: Please be careful whenever you see commercials for non-invasive blood glucose monitoring watches. Not all these are sold only on Amazon. After filming this video, I discovered several more models advertised heavily on Facebook. These commercials are often using video footage stolen from diabetes influencers with AI generated voiceover. I'm 99% sure these are all trash! Please share this video with your diabetic friends, especially with those who are more vulnerable and more likely to fall for these. Thank you for your help! WATCH NEXT: I Tried a New CGM You've Never Heard of ua-cam.com/video/LGtll62Bx40/v-deo.html Your Blood Sugar Reading is Wrong. Here is Why ua-cam.com/video/lPaJcHMddQU/v-deo.html
I'm hoping there will someday be a watch that keeps good numbers. I'm sick of my glucometer! lol I can't afford, currently, the continuous meter. I'm keeping my eyes peeled for something that keeps up with sugar changes quickly and is reliable and reputable. Thanks for your video!!
We could not find any whatsoever on Amazon. I suspect Amazon may have started restricting the sale of these items. Family members suggested that big pharma bought them up to eliminate competition. Guess that perspective would depend on how well any work at all vs not at all.
It's not the skin. The skin has a very slow reaction time to the chemical composition of the blood, more than 24h. As I explained earlier, the electronics of this non-invasive meter camouflaged as a watch, is an low power high frequency alternating current measuring bridge. Stricto sensu, the application of the technique is not wrong, since the bathroom scales to measure body parameters (those nice ones of glass with two steel strips to be standing on), are working under the same principle and the same small battery. The detail is that the body portion used by the scale is very large: The lenght of two legs and the pelvic zone, giving more body volume to be evaluate, compared with barely 0,5 cm² under the wrist watch, touching a poor blood irrigated area. Although, different is the working principle of the fingertip oxygen meter, which sends an low power red or infrared beam to the skin and a light sensible diode (think on a light sensor) built in an circuit changes its parameter due to light interference with the light that bounces back from the tissue and under the blood irrigsted tissue of the fingertip, which varies with the oxygen concentration of the blood in an satisfactory accuracy of 1%. Perhaps the non-invasive wrist watch is not fast enough to catch spikes or hypoglucoses, due to its bad position over the body, but the principle is probably correct. An innovation could be that on the same wrist watch, the oxygen percentage and glucose content may be correlated by combining both techniques, or puting the HF circular electrodes on the bottom side of the wrist, where the veins are visible. I suggest our friend to repeat the same experiments with the three watches, butthis time turning them 180° around the wrist. Probably the readings will improve.
Please try placing these watches on a table surface, measure the GI and then tell me the result. Most watches will show a result, because they are simply programmed to show a certain GI at a certain time of the day, for example a low value in the early morning, or a high value around 9:30 to 10 am, after breakfast. Eat nothing for a day, and then measure around 2 pm. Eat 50 g of sugar at 6 am and then measure.
I’ve been trying a similar smartwatch I bought from Ali express. I used continuously for about two weeks. My conclusions are: 1) it doesn’t measure my glucose level at all. 2) It’s just displays aproximate normal glucose level at given time, and algorithmically goes up or down according to popular eating habit (not even MY eating habit!). For exampe, at 8 am it gave 100 mg/l reading, and then at 9 am it gave around 120-140, with or without me actually eating. The pattern goes the same even in my fasting days.
You are correct. These cheap watches just have a standard blood sugar profile. It's the same every day. I tested one myself, and I have the data to prove they are rubbish.
After watching thus video a couple months ago, my LADA husband got really excited about an ad about the watch. So thank you for having done this video. You saved us from wasting money!
Thank you so much for doing a video on this! I’m a retired urologist/gynecologist in the USA. I’ve seen these advertised and knew it could mean danger for a Type 1 or Type 2 diabetic utilizing it to dose themselves with insulin. Hugs 🇺🇸
$75 one is on track if read upside down... really 3.5 x 2 = 7 which it was showing in test 2 .... pun aside ... Xiaomi and Huawei are also not FDA approved cuz it takes a lot of "bureaucratic" process to get approved..
About 30 years ago I volunteered as a test subject of a "future" noninvasive blood sugar device. I was connected to an IV drip of insulin that had been highly diluted and this was used to vary the blood sugar down. Then glucose was used to bring the level up. The device they used was using infrared sensors aimed at the skin. They took blood from another IV about every 15 minutes and were comparing readings. It was quite an ordeal taking a full day. I was thanked and given a check and dismissed. I could not even find out who was considering making such a device then. It depended on the test results. So here 30+ years later things may be changing.
things arent changing. non-invasive measuring of whatever has been subject of research for several decades all over the world. but there are only very few applications for it, and invasive methods are often the only way and always more reliable.
What was interesting at that time was the piece of equipment they were using for the non invasive test. It was the size of a refrigerator lying on its side. I laughed and told the researcher that it was sure pretty large to be hauled around for use. She stated that they were then trying to verify the accuracy of the device and not worrying about the size. They would make it much smaller if the accuracy could be gotten.
@@terriplays1726yeah, but I think it might be a long way before it’s accurate enough for t1d. However if u want an idea of how your body reacts to food or sport for healthy ppl, it does not have to be so reliable.
My wife and I tried two different watches from Amazon, both were sub-$100 pricing. Let's just say the most accurate thing about either was that they keep a good track of time, and that's about it. Otherwise, they were also both just random number generators when it came to blood glucose levels. One of them also supposedly measured blood pressure, but I think it was just recording game scores from some on-line games.
I bought a Samsung Watch for blood pressure measurement. Such non-sense tech. I mean, in my case, the upper arm blood pressure monitor barely gets consistent readings (my pulse can go down to 50ppm and upto 90ppm in seconds; that makes it tricky to measure anything), but at least that tech is at least "official" and with 2 or 3 measurements, you either get a valid average or need to retry a few minutes later. But the Samsung thing just takes one blood pressure value as its calibration point. What is the point, when my values are inconsistent? Does the thing at least warn about the issue? No, why would it admit defeat?
Were you able to return them for a refund? I once bought a smart watch off of amazon I wanted specifically to keep track of my heart rate...after fussing over it for 3 weeks, I finally gave up on it (very inaccurate) and even after all that time, Amazon let me return it for a full refund.
I am so glad you took one for thr team and tried these things. I have been seeing them pop up for over a year, but could not imagine, if they were real, why hasn't Apple or Android put the technology into their watches. I have been so tempted to buy one anyway. THANK YOU❤❤❤
It's quite possible that they are real. Knowing Apple though, they won't put something like this in their watch unless they're certain it can be useful, _dependable_ and decently accurate. My guess is that the technology just isn't quite there yet.
The watches measure glucose levels in interstitial fluid, which is inherently much less volatile than blood sugar. It’s precisely that stability that interests researchers, since it may be a more reliable indicator of average blood glucose levels over time. In the same way that A1C doesn’t reflect transient effects of diet or exercise, neither does interstitial glucose level.
This is one of the most objective tests I've seen of so-called non-invasive glucose monitoring devices. I've been actively following the half dozen legitimate companies that are seriously working on non-invasive devices and none of them have technology whose price will come anywhere near $100. Instead they all appear to be targeting a delivery price of a wearable device that will be approximately the same cost as 1-2 years of CGM sensors.
Samsung, and Apple watch will be the first 2 to the market with it Samsung has predicted it being on thier watch 7 pro when it comes out. and Apple says they are close and maybe 2 years out still on the Apple watch Ultra X
Thank you for doing this video. I just saw ads for these watches and was so excited, but decided to check reviews and see was actual people have experienced. Was disappointed, but kinda felt it was too good to be true. This is the kind of lie in the advertising that is very dangerous for people who simply want to do better for their health. Thank you again. So much
Thank you, i was about to try one of these watches after just finding out about them, luckily i came across your video, thanks for stopping me wasting my time.
My first clue that there are serious issues is that Apple has been working on this for a long time and they still haven't introduced it. It was rumored they were going to introduce it a couple years ago.
NO the issue they have right now is there getting a copy right claim on the patient. Some company is saying they stole there invention. That's why it hasn't been out yet.
@@BewefauI cannot confirm your claim anywhere. The technology doesn’t even exist yet, how could there already be a copyright claim? Seems a lot like you just made it up.
As an educated individual accustomed to research methodologies, I very much appreciate your taking the time to share your very objective comparative outcome. Thank you. I don't think I will be pursuing this generation of watch based non-invasive glucose monitoring devices.
Yeah, I worked on this technology in the mid 90's - chemometrics - using spectrum light on the skin to create an evolutionary cross correlation algorithm to determine glucose values. It was rather difficult back then to get any real reliable reading. It was interesting though...... Good content - thanks....
@@Nasserist1969 All I can tell you is that Apple is exploring a noninvasive way to measure blood glucose levels. The noninvasive technique involves shooting a laser under the skin to determine the concentration of glucose. Apple has been working on needle-free blood glucose tracking technology for 12 years, but has not yet shown any meaningful clinical data.
@@StarOasis26 Every watch I checked they read as they do in the UK in mol/L but there is a conversion formula to convert to mg/dL. You take the reading from m0l/L to mg/dL by multiplying the reading by 18. So if you get 6.6mol/l times 18 = 120.6 mg/dL simple enough, yes? But it really doesn't matter because the reading you get is fake a programed reading in the average area... If you're reading from one of these type watches...
@@mlpooley Man that's dangerous you shouldn't be playing with blood sugars I can go down to very dangerous levels like that. I just won't use this technology I'll wait until something comes out more stable and accurate
You help me more than my doctor. Thank you for this information. I am type 2 Diabetic and I am 63 years of age. It is amazing how I have survived this long with reading above 250. I need to get this under control however i don't trust doctors anymore. I trust you more thank you.
Good video, not suprised that that the cheap watches fail so badly, for another test have you consider wearing one of them continuously and seeing if it tracks better over a long period, it could be that it gets a base and works from that, rather than putting them on and seeing what they detected there and then
Thanks for taking the time to expose how these type of smart watches work, or don't work. I have always been very skeptical of these smart watches. My concerns were that the readings would be way off, and that they would not last. I am keeping an eye on the upcoming smart watch from Apple, which will include the blood sugar monitor. Although they are still in the developmental stage at this time.
Thanks for everything your doing!! As a pre diabetic im trying to learn as much as I can and make changes. Your bread video helped me make one big one! Plus it tasted good! 😊 Huge thanks!!!
Thank you so much for this!!! I was so excited seeing the watch on Facebook (type 1) my insurance doesn’t cover CGMS, and after using samples I’m sure I could get my A1C to 6 or even lower! So I went to the internet to see first…. And your video was very thorough and let me know to not save up money I don’t have for this! I hope everyone like me researches.. this is indeed not only a waste of money but a VERY dangerous product if you trust it.
well I have such a watch too. And did a different test. I took 40 readings one after the other. The readings varied between 6.1 and 6.9. And yes the average was 6.5. I did this test because after using the watch I found these random values and always somewhere between 6.1 and 6,9 And those measurements were done always in the morning around 08.00 and a day apart. Sometimes I woud do 2 measurements and yes the coud vary between 6.1 and 6.9 Of course having all these readings I put them in a spreadsheet for statistical analysis. Average 6.5. Variance 0.3 Minimum 6.1 maximum 6.9 Looks like a random generator. These are all safe values. But I I don't trust them a bit. They say nothing at all. Further investigation on the internet showed that the technique to do this type of measurements is not yet available in a way it would fit in a smartwatch. Thats why Apple watches don't do this type of measurements. Well draw your own conclusions. But selling a watch and claiming a specific value can be measured while the technique is not yet available tells me the manufacturers are more interested in selling than in an honest reading.
Yep i have one and noticed the same, basically always in the 6.1-6.9 area, even when i know i was high blood sugar (200-300 range - sorry dont know the conversion)
Do these watches really work? what I don't wear all the time but just when I need to check my sugar will it work that way? If it works what brand would you recommend?
I think it’s very interesting that they all are close to each other despite being off from the real value. So they are definitely measuring *something* well, it’s just not blood sugar.
They can also not measure anything and just have a set number based on the time. Cheap heart rate watches do that too. At night they just show an average person's heart rate. In the morning it's higher, during the day low, till 12 when many people take a break and walk around. It's insane that this stuff is even allowed to be sold. It's clearly scamming
Just thinking what it measures could be the skin/surface effect which may reflect delays in the numbers, like when we (or those of us) who relied on test strips for urine testing.... it reflected and did measure sugar but was always after the fact. Thank you for this review!
Me thinking the same. Cgm has a known lag too and is different because what’s it’s measuring. If this is ever accurate it’s going to be more like cgm or a mix. Light works for oxygen to some degree (I’ve gotten random numbers from mine too). It could by detecting some trait in the reflectivity or conductivity. But as he said no manual says how to use or how it works so you could know oh it’s going to be x min off or I have to hold it tight to the skin. Or even expect y percent difference from serum levels. All of which will apply to the real technology when it’s live. I think wolf had one at nearly double the price and I can’t imagine a el cheapo one being anything. A no name brand is a hoax big a larger company has more skin in the game so there would be sure it’s measuring something and consistency to it not a random number generator as some pointed out
I have one of these watches, they use the green laser tech invented by Huawei , the tech works by firing a laser under the skin into veins and using an algorithm to make a glucose reading based on the colour changes detected which are caused by blood sugars. I did find my watch got more accurate over time as mentioned in the instructions and it needs to be positioned correctly and firm not loose. While not in perfect synch with my blood glucose monitor , it was pretty darned close!! and clearly showed a bell graph over time correlating with my food intakes and of course there’s a possibility that the watch is more accurate than those other devices? All in all I’m happy with the watch results, I even deliberately ate some chocolate to see if it would show the higher spike and it did. It was very reassuring and see my body bring down the glucose spikes after eating. I have concluded the accuracy of my watch in measuring blood glucose and blood pressure and all the other readings really depends on how tight it’s worn, what position it’s worn in and how much I’m sweating. The only inaccurate measurement was the pedometer which would measure any wrist movements as steps.
OK. Read this after my own comment. Started on reading the comments. So with time, wear it right it does work. A good idea but watches like this, some at work have these cheap link to phone watches, Just to big for my thin wrists. A good idea though.
@@karenmcguire7292 Hi, I got the KSO2 for $70au , it is very thin and lightweight with a silicone strap and often forget it’s on my wrist it’s that light.
was considering buying one of these CBG monitoring smart watches until I saw your video. Very good evaluation and it confirms my suspicion around the current technology of these watches which is, as you stated, not their yet. Thanks for the video
My experience with this watch is that it assumes when you are supposed to eat and raises the graph of the reading accordingly. It assumes you are eating 3 times a day and the wave of the graph follows this pattern. For me that skip breakfast, the reading was off. So I realize that I'll just have to use it for other purposes but definitely not for blood sugar or blood pressure.
How nice, that is quite similar to a device that I outlined to the Sunbeam Medical Division in 1995, when I was being interviewed for a position there. Mine also included Blood Pressure information as well (and a slew of other tests that could be done non-invasively).
I have seen alot of adds for these things.. then I saw a review and saw a recommendation to never buy a glucose watch that did NOT have a calibration ability on it... which made sense to me.. variations are definitely the norm for people
Thanks for doing this. I was just going to pull the trigger on Amazon and pick one up, but you video has shown that I need to do much more research. Appreciate your efforts very much.
Hey dude, thanks for this really useful video, I've been toying with the idea of trying one of these for a while, but vids I've seen don't fill me with confidence. On a plus point I've made huge changes to what I eat, cut all carbs and fibre as an experiment, results so far are that my horrendous average bs of 22.6 has now reduced to around 7.6 in 3 weeks! Sticking to this change to see what else happens but so far so good 👍 Hope it helps, keep up the good work, your vids are great 👍❤️
Hey Tom! Just stumbled across your videos. You have outstanding information! It's so good to see you doing so well. I'm 72 yo & had a successful kidney transplant. Unfortunately, years of being immune suppressed along with less active in retirement has given me type 2 diabetes. I'm managing it well with Farixga as well cutting down on breads & sugars. Thank You for your work. You seem like a good guy! Best to you & family
Thanks for the heads up. I could see myself buying one of these since I'm a sucker for new tech but now I'll wait for something that works a bit better even if the asking price is substantially higher. Best regards.
I think the readings are delayed for the wrist watches....but again, if they are sure of their technology, they should submit to the relevant authorities for vetting.
The readings are guessed based on formulas of data you input at setup. Age sex height. . A sensor can read a pulse(HR) But it can't "scan" through skin and blood vessel membrane and analyse the chemical composition of the blood to give you glucose levels. There so many other nutrients in the blood at the same time. Hard to believe the sensor can distinguish them😂
@@vladvld3433however we know Apple having been working on non invasive monitoring for some time, in theory you can measure BG based on how light is absorbed by blood, the trick is to make this accurate enough to be medically useful. Clearly no-name smartwatches aren’t doing the amount of verification required, but one day there’s a chance we’ll have something. As a T1 using Libre paid for by UK NHS it’s not going to be that big a deal, nice to reduce costs and waste, but for other diabetics who don’t get free Libre then this could be huge.
@@vladvld3433 Have to agree, it's probably just using some junk formula based off heart beat, i.e. function would define low heart rate over time to be lower blood sugar and the other way around. Explains how after his workout, where his heart rate would remain higher for a bit due to recovery of lactose flushing, the thing gave a high glucose reading instead of what it truly was.
Thank You. I have been wondering why Dexcom has not hasn't come out with a Watch. I have a small/thin wrist which tells me a needle/wire/fish line (what ever it is called) could/would not go into my wrist before hitting bone causing a problem. Common since to me that the blood has to be measured. A sensor? A sensor can't measure blood. Glad you put this out there. I have only worn a Dexcom CGM.
Excellent video report thanks for your time and energy in testing the watches. I wonder if Doctors warn their patients about these watches? I have been tracking my glucose levels (mainly because a doctor misdiagnosed diabetes) for years now just in case there may be a future issue but only used a glucose test method. The watches seem to be to a health hazard; someone unaware of their inaccuracies and receiving bogus data.
Thank you for taking the effort. Was always skeptical about these watches. Apple is supposed to be developing one & maybe that would be more accurate. Let’s hope non invasive tech. Catches up. 👍🏽
Considering Apple bought the company who was making the sensor (and had the patents) before they even got them to market, I doubt anyone has been able to successfully clone it yet.
The processed food industry and sugar industry would pay a fortune every year to keep any non invasive technology from ever being accurate. It would destroy 100’s of billions in revenue for all colas, junk food and 1000’s of patisserie bakeries.
@@nonlinearthinkingApple are a trillion dollar company and it’s in their history of not listening people telling them no. Just look at the iPhone. Telecoms wanted a lot more control of what the iPhone was allowed to do. But Steve jobs said not in this life time. Food companies trying to buy them out would just push them harder to release it.
Thanks for this. I'm not diabetic but do want to check my blood glucose on a keto diet. However, even for that purpose I would want better results. You saved me some money.
Yes, I bought one, too much of a variance. I tested premeal, post meal, before and after exercise and did my blood glucose literally at the very same time. My sugars go from 90-285 post meal, the watch has never shown higher than 120. Absolutely not reliable. As a hypoglycemic I need exact measurements so that I can adjust food, drink throughout the day. Totally agree with reviewer, current products completely unreliable.
This was an interesting video. Do your tests account for the delay effect that, e.g., the Freestyle Libre has? That is, that the measurements are approx. 15min behind the actual value in the blood? If those watches would work, they would be a good help for people with Diabetes Type II. How do those watches measure blood sugar compared to CGM and using the prick method?
It appeared that Tom did the readings when is numbers were steady. Making a reasonable assumption that the watches, as well has the G7, are reading glucose in the tissues and not blood like a fingerstick.
I hadn't thought about the Type II benefit, but you are correct, if there is any level of accuracy, would be better to have some reference than the dreaded/avoid of the finger stick for type II; which I understand because I am Type I for 50 years, husband is now struggling with Type II - he is on medication, but has developed resistance over the past year and now on 4th Type II medication. Thank you for suggesting.
They don't they use the skin method. Which the pick method is a proven test by the Federal Medical Teams. Where these other methods are approved by the warch maker.
Honestly, I would just be grateful if they would get the technology that would let my Apple Watch work as my sensor device so I didn’t have to lug my phone around everywhere. But if the watch itself could do the readings, that would be cool, especially if it could be a one-and-done purchase rather than 4 annual investments.
The infrared is supposed to detect the absorption of the light by your blood and in theory there should be a loose correlation with blood glucose (as well as oxygen levels and the variations with the pulse to blood pressure) but there are a lot of factors that could interfere with the readings, for one just whether or not the sensors line up with a vein or artery will be an issue as well as how the alignment will change as you move. Also variations in say blood oxygen levels would also affect the same light absorption you're trying to correlate with blood glucose levels as they are only measuring how much infrared is being reflected from the tissues. The software has algorithms to try and filter out the variable factors and calibrate over time but the result is that it only measures over a large period of time and hence will also have a lot of latency as well as being averaged over time. In the future, they may scan across a broad line and hence be able to detect the difference between a vein/artery and interstitial tissue but it is only the absorption of the light that is being measured. Maybe with AI, they may be able to get useful results from infrared scans but for now, they are more of a gimmick. Note the military uses the infrared night vision goggles to see the veins when having less experienced personnel draw blood or tap the cannulas for IV's so infrared does show you the blood, it's just interpreting the data with an algorithm still has a long way to go especially when inferring something like glucose levels, blood pressure and blood oxygen levels... Mind you, indirect measurements is nothing new, it's not like that inflatable cuff and microphone actually measures blood pressure directly, just the amount of pressure needed on the arm till you can no longer detect the pulse. Pretty much all our measurements are inferred but here we are trying to estimate quite a few measurements from nothing more than the reflection of an infrared light light beam.
whats interesting is that in the second test, the numbers were consistantly abiout half of the cgm and blood prick. that is an interesting anomoly, the consistancy or the desparity is very very interesting
0:36 It's amazing how a $40 scam watch made out of chinesium still manages to have a better charging solution than Garmin watches that cost 20x as much.
I have the same watch as your $100 one and absolutely agree with your conclusion about it giving average results rather than specific results. It is however possible to greatly improve accuracy by performing some calibration. For example, after getting out of bed this morning my reading from the finger prick monitor was 5.9 and from the smart watch it was 5.6. Not too bad. To calibrate you must have the app that you mentioned. In the app you can personalise your readings by recording them over a number of days. The best way to do this is to record your actual readings from your blood glucose monitor before and after meals. Doing this allows the watch to get a better understanding of your personal blood glucose levels. Although it greatly increases accuracy I don’t think it will detect sudden hypo or hyper blood glucose events which makes it rather useless if that’s the case. Anyway I will persist with the calibration process for a couple of weeks as I’ve only been doing it for two days so we’ll see if it can continue to improve. Some commenters have said their watch gives the blood glucose level of the couch. I tried this with mine and all I get is an error message as I should. Regardless of this particular feature the watch has a host of other features including the ability to make and receive phone calls, Dick Tracey style which, in my opinion, makes it well worth the price.
Thank you for this well thought video. I just want to ask if there is a possible delay on the smart watches and they might be still useful if we consider that delay?
Thank you so very much for making this video. It helps to go to the right direction in picking a smartwatch that would be beneficial for me. I really appreciate it.
Great video! The one thing you don't mention at all though is, most of these watches now a days comes with an app, that allows you to calibrate glucose monitoring function. Meaning the first time you use it, you should use a finger pricker and insert the value. Supposedly you would get a more more precise monitoring afterwards. Would love to see you compare the results to these awful results and see if the accuracy improves
I use the $40.00 version. I actually bought it for the watch and the timer. But after having it for a few months and occasionally reading the blood glucose I have figured out that all its good for is showing the change in level. It does read differently than pricking my finger but the numbers do go in the right direction; high after eating a meal and then after an hour or so the number drops off to somewhere close to normal. I agree that the readings should be taken with a grain of salt as information, but not for any accurate medical record. This watch has other medical readings which I assume should be approached the same way.
My beloved husband had type I and after heart attacks, open heart surgeries, multiple insulin coma's, kidney transplant--then another kidney with pancreas transplant he had a final heart attack in 2009. About 30 yrs ago he had a 'watch' it only beeped loudly when his BS was dropping and that was due to the amount of sweating on his skin. I could write a book about our life together with type I but wanted to say...that 'watch' he had around 40 yrs ago saved us many trips to the ER but then...the patent ran out and the company never made them again. Think that was made in Germany. The medical mafia would rather you ended up in ER...I knew eventually something like this would come out but thank you for sharing so so many people don't get scammed! God bless !!! purrr
The body produces adrenaline when you have low blood sugar, not everybody sweats when they have low blood sugar, the watch is useless anyway, and it was 95 degrees many days this summer - it's beyond a useless invention.
Recently diagnosed as pre diabetic so I'm interested in this tech. Thank you for your research. Guess I'll wait for Apple 10, 11 or maybe 12 for glucose watch readings. Using ADF and carnivore to battle my pre diabetes. Fasting glucose slowly going down. 😀
I think the watches were just making up numbers that would be just close enough to a normal sugar level for you to not be suspicious when comparing it to a glucose meter and you don't question it afterwards...
The first reading was acceptable. My guess is that the watch reads the sweat and it takes longer for changes to reach the outer skin. I would like a test that measures results every half hour for a few hours after the spike.
I would have prefered for "fairness" to wear the watch for a day and comparing the plots afterwards. It is non invasive Ok, it is some work, so maybe only with the most promising one? but... that would leave zero devices here... so I understand why 3 data points is not enough on one hand, yet plenty to prove that does devices are over confident. If they would have required 24 hours + a few actual glucose measurement values, I could have actually thought that does things did something.
I love your presentation, thank you for bringing these toys and their reality to diabetes population, who are desperately looking for a non-invasive blood glucose measuring device, love it ❤🙏😊, hope our dream comes true soon 😢
Also, I haven't seen a watch that measures blood glucose using units used in the USA, mg/dl. mmol is not used here, and I don't like having to convert the reading to mg/dl.
The problem of trying to use a skin sensor with light shining through to measure glucose is that glucose in solution in the blood stream doesn't change the light spectrum of the blood inside the capillaries hardly at all. This is a hard physics limit that has prevented any of these devices from being able to measure glucose levels through the skin without breaking the skin and actually sampling some of the blood. That what the CGMs do - the needle is actually in physical contact with the blood/interstitial fluid in your arm, under the skin, and has a direct electrical way to sample the glucose levels. Pulse oximeters work great because the color of oxygenated hemoglobin is so drastically different from unoxygenated hemoglobin that you can actually see the difference in the color of the skin with your eyes (red/pin vs. blue) and the pulse oximeter just calibrates the change in the color by shining a light through your skin. Glucose levels don't have the same effect in the light spectrum of blood.
could be interessting to see the measurement away from the wrist. optical hrm sensors have trouble if the watch is to close to the wrist - maybe the same here..
Thank you. I was considering buying one of these watches. Won’t now! A few years ago I bought one of these types of devices to monitor blood pressure. Same thing, did not jive with my professional device.
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT:
Please be careful whenever you see commercials for non-invasive blood glucose monitoring watches. Not all these are sold only on Amazon.
After filming this video, I discovered several more models advertised heavily on Facebook. These commercials are often using video footage stolen from diabetes influencers with AI generated voiceover. I'm 99% sure these are all trash!
Please share this video with your diabetic friends, especially with those who are more vulnerable and more likely to fall for these. Thank you for your help!
WATCH NEXT:
I Tried a New CGM You've Never Heard of ua-cam.com/video/LGtll62Bx40/v-deo.html
Your Blood Sugar Reading is Wrong. Here is Why ua-cam.com/video/lPaJcHMddQU/v-deo.html
I would like to know if there is a long delay I suspect the skin will not fluctuate quickly unless you have high glucose values for a long period.
I'm hoping there will someday be a watch that keeps good numbers. I'm sick of my glucometer! lol I can't afford, currently, the continuous meter. I'm keeping my eyes peeled for something that keeps up with sugar changes quickly and is reliable and reputable. Thanks for your video!!
We could not find any whatsoever on Amazon. I suspect Amazon may have started restricting the sale of these items. Family members suggested that big pharma bought them up to eliminate competition. Guess that perspective would depend on how well any work at all vs not at all.
It's not the skin. The skin has a very slow reaction time to the chemical composition of the blood, more than 24h.
As I explained earlier, the electronics of this non-invasive meter camouflaged as a watch, is an low power high frequency alternating current measuring bridge.
Stricto sensu, the application of the technique is not wrong, since the bathroom scales to measure body parameters (those nice ones of glass with two steel strips to be standing on), are working under the same principle and the same small battery. The detail is that the body portion used by the scale is very large: The lenght of two legs and the pelvic zone, giving more body volume to be evaluate, compared with barely 0,5 cm² under the wrist watch, touching a poor blood irrigated area.
Although, different is the working principle of the fingertip oxygen meter, which sends an low power red or infrared beam to the skin and a light sensible diode (think on a light sensor) built in an circuit changes its parameter due to light interference with the light that bounces back from the tissue and under the blood irrigsted tissue of the fingertip, which varies with the oxygen concentration of the blood in an satisfactory accuracy of 1%.
Perhaps the non-invasive wrist watch is not fast enough to catch spikes or hypoglucoses, due to its bad position over the body, but the principle is probably correct.
An innovation could be that on the same wrist watch, the oxygen percentage and glucose content may be correlated by combining both techniques, or puting the HF circular electrodes on the bottom side of the wrist, where the veins are visible.
I suggest our friend to repeat the same experiments with the three watches, butthis time turning them 180° around the wrist. Probably the readings will improve.
Please try placing these watches on a table surface, measure the GI and then tell me the result.
Most watches will show a result, because they are simply programmed to show a certain GI at a certain time of the day, for example a low value in the early morning, or a high value around 9:30 to 10 am, after breakfast.
Eat nothing for a day, and then measure around 2 pm. Eat 50 g of sugar at 6 am and then measure.
I’ve been trying a similar smartwatch I bought from Ali express. I used continuously for about two weeks. My conclusions are: 1) it doesn’t measure my glucose level at all. 2) It’s just displays aproximate normal glucose level at given time, and algorithmically goes up or down according to popular eating habit (not even MY eating habit!). For exampe, at 8 am it gave 100 mg/l reading, and then at 9 am it gave around 120-140, with or without me actually eating. The pattern goes the same even in my fasting days.
You are correct. These cheap watches just have a standard blood sugar profile. It's the same every day. I tested one myself, and I have the data to prove they are rubbish.
Why would you waste your money on Ali Express on something like this that is related to health?
@@canuck21Because it's still better than Temu?
It’s a toy😢
@@MetalheadAndNerd Why not eat rotten egg? I mean it's better than eating poop right?
After watching thus video a couple months ago, my LADA husband got really excited about an ad about the watch. So thank you for having done this video. You saved us from wasting money!
looool
Was really wondering about these devices as their ads are everywhere, thank you for taking the time to test them
Thank you so much for doing a video on this! I’m a retired urologist/gynecologist in the USA. I’ve seen these advertised and knew it could mean danger for a Type 1 or Type 2 diabetic utilizing it to dose themselves with insulin. Hugs 🇺🇸
Won't even move me to slightest bit to purchase this. We still need our blood pricked for accurate result. Our life depends on that 😅
Thank you for testing
Thank you for testing those watches on behalf of all of us!
$75 one is on track if read upside down... really 3.5 x 2 = 7 which it was showing in test 2 .... pun aside ... Xiaomi and Huawei are also not FDA approved cuz it takes a lot of "bureaucratic" process to get approved..
Thanks for taking the time to put this comparison together. Excellently presented and vital information.
About 30 years ago I volunteered as a test subject of a "future" noninvasive blood sugar device. I was connected to an IV drip of insulin that had been highly diluted and this was used to vary the blood sugar down. Then glucose was used to bring the level up. The device they used was using infrared sensors aimed at the skin. They took blood from another IV about every 15 minutes and were comparing readings. It was quite an ordeal taking a full day. I was thanked and given a check and dismissed. I could not even find out who was considering making such a device then. It depended on the test results. So here 30+ years later things may be changing.
Could have been the Glucowatch. I'd imagine they were in development 30 years ago because they came to market in 2005 or so.
things arent changing. non-invasive measuring of whatever has been subject of research for several decades all over the world. but there are only very few applications for it, and invasive methods are often the only way and always more reliable.
What was interesting at that time was the piece of equipment they were using for the non invasive test. It was the size of a refrigerator lying on its side. I laughed and told the researcher that it was sure pretty large to be hauled around for use. She stated that they were then trying to verify the accuracy of the device and not worrying about the size. They would make it much smaller if the accuracy could be gotten.
You can bet your ass Apple is researching this topic heavily. It would be THE killer feature.
@@terriplays1726yeah, but I think it might be a long way before it’s accurate enough for t1d. However if u want an idea of how your body reacts to food or sport for healthy ppl, it does not have to be so reliable.
My wife and I tried two different watches from Amazon, both were sub-$100 pricing. Let's just say the most accurate thing about either was that they keep a good track of time, and that's about it. Otherwise, they were also both just random number generators when it came to blood glucose levels. One of them also supposedly measured blood pressure, but I think it was just recording game scores from some on-line games.
I bought a Samsung Watch for blood pressure measurement. Such non-sense tech.
I mean, in my case, the upper arm blood pressure monitor barely gets consistent readings (my pulse can go down to 50ppm and upto 90ppm in seconds; that makes it tricky to measure anything), but at least that tech is at least "official" and with 2 or 3 measurements, you either get a valid average or need to retry a few minutes later.
But the Samsung thing just takes one blood pressure value as its calibration point. What is the point, when my values are inconsistent?
Does the thing at least warn about the issue? No, why would it admit defeat?
Were you able to return them for a refund? I once bought a smart watch off of amazon I wanted specifically to keep track of my heart rate...after fussing over it for 3 weeks, I finally gave up on it (very inaccurate) and even after all that time, Amazon let me return it for a full refund.
All those `smart` watches can read pulse even on bologna. No matter the price. Which is absolute baloney ;0) @@sarowie
@@twitchster77 Amazon will give a refund, good luck on getting a refund from any of the other watch sellers with these types of watches on FB.
I am so glad you took one for thr team and tried these things. I have been seeing them pop up for over a year, but could not imagine, if they were real, why hasn't Apple or Android put the technology into their watches. I have been so tempted to buy one anyway. THANK YOU❤❤❤
It's quite possible that they are real. Knowing Apple though, they won't put something like this in their watch unless they're certain it can be useful, _dependable_ and decently accurate. My guess is that the technology just isn't quite there yet.
@@Dojan5they have been working on it. The fact that they haven’t incorporated it yet says they aren’t there yet.
The watches measure glucose levels in interstitial fluid, which is inherently much less volatile than blood sugar. It’s precisely that stability that interests researchers, since it may be a more reliable indicator of average blood glucose levels over time. In the same way that A1C doesn’t reflect transient effects of diet or exercise, neither does interstitial glucose level.
This is one of the most objective tests I've seen of so-called non-invasive glucose monitoring devices. I've been actively following the half dozen legitimate companies that are seriously working on non-invasive devices and none of them have technology whose price will come anywhere near $100. Instead they all appear to be targeting a delivery price of a wearable device that will be approximately the same cost as 1-2 years of CGM sensors.
Samsung, and Apple watch will be the first 2 to the market with it Samsung has predicted it being on thier watch 7 pro when it comes out. and Apple says they are close and maybe 2 years out still on the Apple watch Ultra X
Thank you for doing this video. I just saw ads for these watches and was so excited, but decided to check reviews and see was actual people have experienced. Was disappointed, but kinda felt it was too good to be true. This is the kind of lie in the advertising that is very dangerous for people who simply want to do better for their health.
Thank you again. So much
There could be a delay in the readings by the watches. Should plot the graphs half-hourly to see if there indeed was a delay.
Thank you, i was about to try one of these watches after just finding out about them, luckily i came across your video, thanks for stopping me wasting my time.
My first clue that there are serious issues is that Apple has been working on this for a long time and they still haven't introduced it. It was rumored they were going to introduce it a couple years ago.
Yup, it’s nice to see tho, that they are not selling something that they know it doesn’t work.
NO the issue they have right now is there getting a copy right claim on the patient. Some company is saying they stole there invention. That's why it hasn't been out yet.
@@BewefauI cannot confirm your claim anywhere. The technology doesn’t even exist yet, how could there already be a copyright claim? Seems a lot like you just made it up.
@@ZimZam131
It can happen. Even if there is no real product on sale, there can be tens of licensed technologies.
@@jaerg91because Apple don't want to get Sued!
As an educated individual accustomed to research methodologies, I very much appreciate your taking the time to share your very objective comparative outcome. Thank you. I don't think I will be pursuing this generation of watch based non-invasive glucose monitoring devices.
Yeah, I worked on this technology in the mid 90's - chemometrics - using spectrum light on the skin to create an evolutionary cross correlation algorithm to determine glucose values. It was rather difficult back then to get any real reliable reading. It was interesting though...... Good content - thanks....
Will they ever improve them?
@@Nasserist1969 All I can tell you is that Apple is exploring a noninvasive way to measure blood glucose levels. The noninvasive technique involves shooting a laser under the skin to determine the concentration of glucose. Apple has been working on needle-free blood glucose tracking technology for 12 years, but has not yet shown any meaningful clinical data.
how do they get the meter readings to 6.7 converted 121 mg?? what watch would you recommend?
@@StarOasis26 Every watch I checked they read as they do in the UK in mol/L but there is a conversion formula to convert to mg/dL. You take the reading from m0l/L to mg/dL by multiplying the reading by 18. So if you get 6.6mol/l times 18 = 120.6 mg/dL simple enough, yes? But it really doesn't matter because the reading you get is fake a programed reading in the average area... If you're reading from one of these type watches...
@@mlpooley Man that's dangerous you shouldn't be playing with blood sugars I can go down to very dangerous levels like that. I just won't use this technology I'll wait until something comes out more stable and accurate
You help me more than my doctor. Thank you for this information. I am type 2 Diabetic and I am 63 years of age. It is amazing how I have survived this long with reading above 250. I need to get this under control however i don't trust doctors anymore. I trust you more thank you.
I hope they come up with a genuinely good non-invasive device for monitoring glucose during my lifetime. I'm so excited about the prospects.
Thanks for making this video. I was suspecting that this might be the case but now it's confirmed.
Excellent video and it's great to have a trustable info resource help us detect a scam! Thanks!
one of the genuine review on UA-cam, great effort thanks bro👍
Really refreshing to see an actual test/comparison
Good video, not suprised that that the cheap watches fail so badly, for another test have you consider wearing one of them continuously and seeing if it tracks better over a long period, it could be that it gets a base and works from that, rather than putting them on and seeing what they detected there and then
I wear my watch continually, the reading always, says 6.7. Or 6.5 my blood sugar is actually reading14 this is second watch. Usless
Thank you for doing this Tom. I was hoping someone would do this and was glad it was you.
Thank you Mr Tom for your support comparing blood sugar devices tests video.
Thanks for taking the time to expose how these type of smart watches work, or don't work. I have always been very skeptical of these smart watches. My concerns were that the readings would be way off, and that they would not last. I am keeping an eye on the upcoming smart watch from Apple, which will include the blood sugar monitor. Although they are still in the developmental stage at this time.
The variety of textures in the kisluxs pack is impressive. From smooth leather to textured suede, there's something for everyone.
Thanks for everything your doing!! As a pre diabetic im trying to learn as much as I can and make changes. Your bread video helped me make one big one! Plus it tasted good! 😊
Huge thanks!!!
Check out Dr. Ken Berry to permanently reverse T2 diabetes. It IS ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE!!!
Thank you so much for this!!! I was so excited seeing the watch on Facebook (type 1) my insurance doesn’t cover CGMS, and after using samples I’m sure I could get my A1C to 6 or even lower! So I went to the internet to see first…. And your video was very thorough and let me know to not save up money I don’t have for this! I hope everyone like me researches.. this is indeed not only a waste of money but a VERY dangerous product if you trust it.
well I have such a watch too. And did a different test. I took 40 readings one after the other. The readings varied between 6.1 and 6.9. And yes the average was 6.5. I did this test because after using the watch I found these random values and always somewhere between 6.1 and 6,9
And those measurements were done always in the morning around 08.00 and a day apart. Sometimes I woud do 2 measurements and yes the coud vary between 6.1 and 6.9
Of course having all these readings I put them in a spreadsheet for statistical analysis. Average 6.5. Variance 0.3 Minimum 6.1 maximum 6.9
Looks like a random generator. These are all safe values. But I I don't trust them a bit. They say nothing at all. Further investigation on the internet showed that the technique to do this type of measurements is not yet available in a way it would fit in a smartwatch. Thats why Apple watches don't do this type of measurements.
Well draw your own conclusions.
But selling a watch and claiming a specific value can be measured while the technique is not yet available tells me the manufacturers are more interested in selling than in an honest reading.
Yep i have one and noticed the same, basically always in the 6.1-6.9 area, even when i know i was high blood sugar (200-300 range - sorry dont know the conversion)
Do these watches really work? what I don't wear all the time but just when I need to check my sugar will it work that way? If it works what brand would you recommend?
SO SO happy you have done this testing. I've really wondered the same thing but never spent the money to do the testing.
Thanks for your comparison video, we all will be "better consumers" (buyers) because of your service.😊
I think it’s very interesting that they all are close to each other despite being off from the real value. So they are definitely measuring *something* well, it’s just not blood sugar.
They can also not measure anything and just have a set number based on the time. Cheap heart rate watches do that too. At night they just show an average person's heart rate. In the morning it's higher, during the day low, till 12 when many people take a break and walk around.
It's insane that this stuff is even allowed to be sold. It's clearly scamming
@@tharealmb thats my point exactly, it’s simply measuring the time in that case lol
Just thinking what it measures could be the skin/surface effect which may reflect delays in the numbers, like when we (or those of us) who relied on test strips for urine testing.... it reflected and did measure sugar but was always after the fact. Thank you for this review!
Me thinking the same. Cgm has a known lag too and is different because what’s it’s measuring. If this is ever accurate it’s going to be more like cgm or a mix. Light works for oxygen to some degree (I’ve gotten random numbers from mine too). It could by detecting some trait in the reflectivity or conductivity.
But as he said no manual says how to use or how it works so you could know oh it’s going to be x min off or I have to hold it tight to the skin. Or even expect y percent difference from serum levels.
All of which will apply to the real technology when it’s live.
I think wolf had one at nearly double the price and I can’t imagine a el cheapo one being anything. A no name brand is a hoax big a larger company has more skin in the game so there would be sure it’s measuring something and consistency to it not a random number generator as some pointed out
Thanks
😮 wtf
I have one of these watches, they use the green laser tech invented by Huawei , the tech works by firing a laser under the skin into veins and using an algorithm to make a glucose reading based on the colour changes detected which are caused by blood sugars.
I did find my watch got more accurate over time as mentioned in the instructions and it needs to be positioned correctly and firm not loose.
While not in perfect synch with my blood glucose monitor , it was pretty darned close!! and clearly showed a bell graph over time correlating with my food intakes and of course there’s a possibility that the watch is more accurate than those other devices?
All in all I’m happy with the watch results, I even deliberately ate some chocolate to see if it would show the higher spike and it did.
It was very reassuring and see my body bring down the glucose spikes after eating.
I have concluded the accuracy of my watch in measuring blood glucose and blood pressure and all the other readings really depends on how tight it’s worn, what position it’s worn in and how much I’m sweating.
The only inaccurate measurement was the pedometer which would measure any wrist movements as steps.
OK. Read this after my own comment. Started on reading the comments.
So with time, wear it right it does work. A good idea but watches like this, some at work have these cheap link to phone watches, Just to big for my thin wrists. A good idea though.
Would like to know which one you are using? If that is possible?
Which watch were you using? I would love to try it too as a t1d!
@@DanielGlover I have the KSO2 watch which I paid $70au for but I treat it as a guide and it’s great for that.
@@karenmcguire7292 Hi, I got the KSO2 for $70au , it is very thin and lightweight with a silicone strap and often forget it’s on my wrist it’s that light.
was considering buying one of these CBG monitoring smart watches until I saw your video. Very good evaluation and it confirms my suspicion around the current technology of these watches which is, as you stated, not their yet. Thanks for the video
My experience with this watch is that it assumes when you are supposed to eat and raises the graph of the reading accordingly. It assumes you are eating 3 times a day and the wave of the graph follows this pattern. For me that skip breakfast, the reading was off. So I realize that I'll just have to use it for other purposes but definitely not for blood sugar or blood pressure.
Thank you for doing this! I'm looking forward to the tech being perfected, but like you I assumed the ones out now were junk.
How nice, that is quite similar to a device that I outlined to the Sunbeam Medical Division in 1995, when I was being interviewed for a position there. Mine also included Blood Pressure information as well (and a slew of other tests that could be done non-invasively).
This video was super helpful! The way you explained the features made it so much easier to choose the right smartwatch for my needs
Thanks for testing these watches for us! Much appreciated!
I took mine off to check blood pressure and it was still reading. Must be fake lol
I have seen alot of adds for these things.. then I saw a review and saw a recommendation to never buy a glucose watch that did NOT have a calibration ability on it... which made sense to me.. variations are definitely the norm for people
Thanks for doing this. I was just going to pull the trigger on Amazon and pick one up, but you video has shown that I need to do much more research. Appreciate your efforts very much.
I was really considering buying a smart watch for my dad but after watching this video, l reconsider. This is very informative. Thank you.
Hey dude, thanks for this really useful video, I've been toying with the idea of trying one of these for a while, but vids I've seen don't fill me with confidence. On a plus point I've made huge changes to what I eat, cut all carbs and fibre as an experiment, results so far are that my horrendous average bs of 22.6 has now reduced to around 7.6 in 3 weeks! Sticking to this change to see what else happens but so far so good 👍 Hope it helps, keep up the good work, your vids are great 👍❤️
Hey Tom! Just stumbled across your videos. You have outstanding information! It's so good to see you doing so well. I'm 72 yo & had a successful kidney transplant. Unfortunately, years of being immune suppressed along with less active in retirement has given me type 2 diabetes. I'm managing it well with Farixga as well cutting down on breads & sugars. Thank You for your work. You seem like a good guy! Best to you & family
I was always curious about these devices. Thanks for the review. It looks like they are just providing random numbers lol
😅😹😂... 🙊
I think Samsung does the same for.blood pressures is it just random numbers?
Thanks. I don’t have to watch the whole god awful video now !!
Chinese scam as always.
I have one of these pice of sh*t and it seems to increase the glicemia on the moments they expect me to est, even if i’m fasting…
Thanks for the heads up. I could see myself buying one of these since I'm a sucker for new tech but now I'll wait for something that works a bit better even if the asking price is substantially higher. Best regards.
I think the readings are delayed for the wrist watches....but again, if they are sure of their technology, they should submit to the relevant authorities for vetting.
The readings are guessed based on formulas of data you input at setup. Age sex height. . A sensor can read a pulse(HR) But it can't "scan" through skin and blood vessel membrane and analyse the chemical composition of the blood to give you glucose levels. There so many other nutrients in the blood at the same time. Hard to believe the sensor can distinguish them😂
@@vladvld3433however we know Apple having been working on non invasive monitoring for some time, in theory you can measure BG based on how light is absorbed by blood, the trick is to make this accurate enough to be medically useful.
Clearly no-name smartwatches aren’t doing the amount of verification required, but one day there’s a chance we’ll have something. As a T1 using Libre paid for by UK NHS it’s not going to be that big a deal, nice to reduce costs and waste, but for other diabetics who don’t get free Libre then this could be huge.
@@vladvld3433 Have to agree, it's probably just using some junk formula based off heart beat, i.e. function would define low heart rate over time to be lower blood sugar and the other way around. Explains how after his workout, where his heart rate would remain higher for a bit due to recovery of lactose flushing, the thing gave a high glucose reading instead of what it truly was.
Thank You. I have been wondering why Dexcom has not hasn't come out with a Watch. I have a small/thin wrist which tells me a needle/wire/fish line (what ever it is called) could/would not go into my wrist before hitting bone causing a problem. Common since to me that the blood has to be measured. A sensor? A sensor can't measure blood. Glad you put this out there. I have only worn a Dexcom CGM.
I never believed for a second these watches... no way they could measure blood sugar without any groundbreaking (on the news) discovery
Excellent video report thanks for your time and energy in testing the watches. I wonder if Doctors warn their patients about these watches?
I have been tracking my glucose levels (mainly because a doctor misdiagnosed diabetes) for years now just in case there may be a future issue but only used a glucose test method. The watches seem to be to a health hazard; someone unaware of their inaccuracies and receiving bogus data.
Thank you for taking the effort. Was always skeptical about these watches. Apple is supposed to be developing one & maybe that would be more accurate. Let’s hope non invasive tech. Catches up. 👍🏽
I am diabetic and looking at buying measuring device...Thank you for video and I will go for CGM for sure....thanks !
Considering Apple bought the company who was making the sensor (and had the patents) before they even got them to market, I doubt anyone has been able to successfully clone it yet.
The processed food industry and sugar industry would pay a fortune every year to keep any non invasive technology from ever being accurate. It would destroy 100’s of billions in revenue for all colas, junk food and 1000’s of patisserie bakeries.
@@nonlinearthinkingBIG BLOOD SUGAR STRIKES AGAIN
@@nonlinearthinkingApple are a trillion dollar company and it’s in their history of not listening people telling them no. Just look at the iPhone. Telecoms wanted a lot more control of what the iPhone was allowed to do. But Steve jobs said not in this life time. Food companies trying to buy them out would just push them harder to release it.
Thanks for this. I'm not diabetic but do want to check my blood glucose on a keto diet. However, even for that purpose I would want better results. You saved me some money.
Yes, I bought one, too much of a variance. I tested premeal, post meal, before and after exercise and did my blood glucose literally at the very same time. My sugars go from 90-285 post meal, the watch has never shown higher than 120. Absolutely not reliable. As a hypoglycemic I need exact measurements so that I can adjust food, drink throughout the day. Totally agree with reviewer, current products completely unreliable.
I just subscribed to this channel because this guy comes across as honest and intelligent, thank you sir.
This was an interesting video. Do your tests account for the delay effect that, e.g., the Freestyle Libre has? That is, that the measurements are approx. 15min behind the actual value in the blood? If those watches would work, they would be a good help for people with Diabetes Type II. How do those watches measure blood sugar compared to CGM and using the prick method?
It appeared that Tom did the readings when is numbers were steady. Making a reasonable assumption that the watches, as well has the G7, are reading glucose in the tissues and not blood like a fingerstick.
I hadn't thought about the Type II benefit, but you are correct, if there is any level of accuracy, would be better to have some reference than the dreaded/avoid of the finger stick for type II; which I understand because I am Type I for 50 years, husband is now struggling with Type II - he is on medication, but has developed resistance over the past year and now on 4th Type II medication. Thank you for suggesting.
They don't they use the skin method. Which the pick method is a proven test by the Federal Medical Teams. Where these other methods are approved by the warch maker.
Really good video..creating awareness amongst public..! Appreciate your efforts🎉
Honestly, I would just be grateful if they would get the technology that would let my Apple Watch work as my sensor device so I didn’t have to lug my phone around everywhere. But if the watch itself could do the readings, that would be cool, especially if it could be a one-and-done purchase rather than 4 annual investments.
The infrared is supposed to detect the absorption of the light by your blood and in theory there should be a loose correlation with blood glucose (as well as oxygen levels and the variations with the pulse to blood pressure) but there are a lot of factors that could interfere with the readings, for one just whether or not the sensors line up with a vein or artery will be an issue as well as how the alignment will change as you move. Also variations in say blood oxygen levels would also affect the same light absorption you're trying to correlate with blood glucose levels as they are only measuring how much infrared is being reflected from the tissues. The software has algorithms to try and filter out the variable factors and calibrate over time but the result is that it only measures over a large period of time and hence will also have a lot of latency as well as being averaged over time. In the future, they may scan across a broad line and hence be able to detect the difference between a vein/artery and interstitial tissue but it is only the absorption of the light that is being measured. Maybe with AI, they may be able to get useful results from infrared scans but for now, they are more of a gimmick. Note the military uses the infrared night vision goggles to see the veins when having less experienced personnel draw blood or tap the cannulas for IV's so infrared does show you the blood, it's just interpreting the data with an algorithm still has a long way to go especially when inferring something like glucose levels, blood pressure and blood oxygen levels... Mind you, indirect measurements is nothing new, it's not like that inflatable cuff and microphone actually measures blood pressure directly, just the amount of pressure needed on the arm till you can no longer detect the pulse. Pretty much all our measurements are inferred but here we are trying to estimate quite a few measurements from nothing more than the reflection of an infrared light light beam.
This Jerry doesn't rig Anything😅
lol It’s Zack’s long lost cousin I think
whats interesting is that in the second test, the numbers were consistantly abiout half of the cgm and blood prick. that is an interesting anomoly, the consistancy or the desparity is very very interesting
Exactly, I have found the deviation uniform enough to generate a factor
This is dangerous, these watch makers should be jailed! Because they are risking people's lives!!!
How?
No...they are not risking peoples lives at all. They are helping people actually.
Thank you for testing these and publishing this video!❤
0:36 It's amazing how a $40 scam watch made out of chinesium still manages to have a better charging solution than Garmin watches that cost 20x as much.
I have the same watch as your $100 one and absolutely agree with your conclusion about it giving average results rather than specific results. It is however possible to greatly improve accuracy by performing some calibration. For example, after getting out of bed this morning my reading from the finger prick monitor was 5.9 and from the smart watch it was 5.6. Not too bad. To calibrate you must have the app that you mentioned. In the app you can personalise your readings by recording them over a number of days. The best way to do this is to record your actual readings from your blood glucose monitor before and after meals. Doing this allows the watch to get a better understanding of your personal blood glucose levels. Although it greatly increases accuracy I don’t think it will detect sudden hypo or hyper blood glucose events which makes it rather useless if that’s the case. Anyway I will persist with the calibration process for a couple of weeks as I’ve only been doing it for two days so we’ll see if it can continue to improve. Some commenters have said their watch gives the blood glucose level of the couch. I tried this with mine and all I get is an error message as I should. Regardless of this particular feature the watch has a host of other features including the ability to make and receive phone calls, Dick Tracey style which, in my opinion, makes it well worth the price.
Thanks so much for covering this. It´s aweful how people can use and scam by takinga advantage of the hope of people who are sick just to earn money.
why no graph lining up the reads of the constant monitor with that of the watch? that's the easy way to tell if they are accurate or not.
Thank you for this well thought video. I just want to ask if there is a possible delay on the smart watches and they might be still useful if we consider that delay?
Thank you so very much for making this video. It helps to go to the right direction in picking a smartwatch that would be beneficial for me. I really appreciate it.
Great video!
The one thing you don't mention at all though is, most of these watches now a days comes with an app, that allows you to calibrate glucose monitoring function. Meaning the first time you use it, you should use a finger pricker and insert the value.
Supposedly you would get a more more precise monitoring afterwards.
Would love to see you compare the results to these awful results and see if the accuracy improves
I really appreciate you doing this test and sharing it. This is very eye opening.
Thanks for this video. It's has exactly what I wanted to know. I also appreciate you got right to the point and into the tests.
Thank you for doing this video ... I was actually wondering if I should buy one of these. Money and confusion saved.
Great idea to see how the glucose level over a period of time against pricking your body every time
Thank you for very useful information! Seems like you have good glucemic control, btw! Good work on both counts.
I use the $40.00 version. I actually bought it for the watch and the timer. But after having it for a few months and occasionally reading the blood glucose I have figured out that all its good for is showing the change in level. It does read differently than pricking my finger but the numbers do go in the right direction; high after eating a meal and then after an hour or so the number drops off to somewhere close to normal. I agree that the readings should be taken with a grain of salt as information, but not for any accurate medical record. This watch has other medical readings which I assume should be approached the same way.
Great review, thanks! I will not be wasting my money on the watches. Hopefully their accuracy will improve over time,
My beloved husband had type I and after heart attacks, open heart surgeries, multiple insulin coma's, kidney transplant--then another kidney with pancreas transplant he had a final heart attack in 2009. About 30 yrs ago he had a 'watch' it only beeped loudly when his BS was dropping and that was due to the amount of sweating on his skin. I could write a book about our life together with type I but wanted to say...that 'watch' he had around 40 yrs ago saved us many trips to the ER but then...the patent ran out and the company never made them again. Think that was made in Germany. The medical mafia would rather you ended up in ER...I knew eventually something like this would come out but thank you for sharing so so many people don't get scammed! God bless !!! purrr
The body produces adrenaline when you have low blood sugar, not everybody sweats when they have low blood sugar, the watch is useless anyway, and it was 95 degrees many days this summer - it's beyond a useless invention.
Recently diagnosed as pre diabetic so I'm interested in this tech.
Thank you for your research. Guess I'll wait for Apple 10, 11 or maybe
12 for glucose watch readings. Using ADF and carnivore to battle
my pre diabetes. Fasting glucose slowly going down. 😀
I think the watches were just making up numbers that would be just close enough to a normal sugar level for you to not be suspicious when comparing it to a glucose meter and you don't question it afterwards...
It must be interpreted the other way around, when the glucose went up the clock measured low but when the glucose went down the clock measured high.
The first reading was acceptable. My guess is that the watch reads the sweat and it takes longer for changes to reach the outer skin. I would like a test that measures results every half hour for a few hours after the spike.
I would have prefered for "fairness" to wear the watch for a day and comparing the plots afterwards. It is non invasive
Ok, it is some work, so maybe only with the most promising one? but... that would leave zero devices here... so I understand why 3 data points is not enough on one hand, yet plenty to prove that does devices are over confident. If they would have required 24 hours + a few actual glucose measurement values, I could have actually thought that does things did something.
Thank you! I had been considering trying one of these myself. You just saved me some time and money.
I love your presentation, thank you for bringing these toys and their reality to diabetes population, who are desperately looking for a non-invasive blood glucose measuring device, love it ❤🙏😊, hope our dream comes true soon 😢
Also, I haven't seen a watch that measures blood glucose using units used in the USA, mg/dl. mmol is not used here, and I don't like having to convert the reading to mg/dl.
Thank you! I was going to buy one of those things!
thank you for doing this research, and saving me and no doubt many others the associated costs I for one can't afford
Really good and scientific approach. Would have liked to see a longer timeframe but great still
The problem of trying to use a skin sensor with light shining through to measure glucose is that glucose in solution in the blood stream doesn't change the light spectrum of the blood inside the capillaries hardly at all. This is a hard physics limit that has prevented any of these devices from being able to measure glucose levels through the skin without breaking the skin and actually sampling some of the blood. That what the CGMs do - the needle is actually in physical contact with the blood/interstitial fluid in your arm, under the skin, and has a direct electrical way to sample the glucose levels. Pulse oximeters work great because the color of oxygenated hemoglobin is so drastically different from unoxygenated hemoglobin that you can actually see the difference in the color of the skin with your eyes (red/pin vs. blue) and the pulse oximeter just calibrates the change in the color by shining a light through your skin. Glucose levels don't have the same effect in the light spectrum of blood.
could be interessting to see the measurement away from the wrist. optical hrm sensors have trouble if the watch is to close to the wrist - maybe the same here..
great video. Thanks for taking the time to perform these tests.
Hope a good non-invasive CGM comes soon, thank you for the video!
Thank You for posting this video! You probably saved thousands of people 40-100 bucks!
Thank you. I was considering buying one of these watches. Won’t now!
A few years ago I bought one of these types of devices to monitor blood pressure. Same thing, did not jive with my professional device.