# Due for release next year, a non-invasive watch that monitors blood glucose.



## Amity Island (Jan 15, 2021)

__





						Afon Technology, the future of blood glucose monitoring to benefit diabetics
					






					afontechnology.com


----------



## Docb (Jan 16, 2021)

They appear to be a start up in a "new business" office block.  Don't hold your breath!


----------



## mikeydt1 (Jan 16, 2021)

would benefit so many if it was to happen.


----------



## Northerner (Jan 16, 2021)

They've been trying to flog things like this for years, at least since I was diagnosed in 2008  Never heard of a reliable one yet.


----------



## Docb (Jan 16, 2021)

mikeydt1 said:


> would benefit so many if it was to happen.



Many things would do that @mikeydt1!


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jan 16, 2021)

Checking the European patent register, Afon acquired the technology last year out of bankruptcy from something called Orsus Medical, which seems to have been working on it for a while. Orsus is now defunct.

More detail: https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/n...-medical-research-firm-bought-administration/









						Diabetes monitoring startup seeks buyer
					

A start-up business that is aiming to revolutionise the way that diabetes is monitored and managed is seeking a buyer after entering administration.




					www.med-technews.com
				




Despite claims to be "patented", there doesn't seem to have been a patent granted yet. The patent prosecution was interrupted by the Orsus bankruptcy.

They make repeated claims like: 

_... recent clinical trials carried out by Afon Technology at a world leading clinical trial facility in Germany have yielded exciting results. The ability of the Afon technology device to detect changes in blood glucose compared favourably with a market leading minimally invasive blood glucose monitor. _

But as far as I can see they don't include any details of the trial, which is a pretty bad look. And I don't see anything at www.clinicaltrials.gov, which you would normally expect to have a listing if there had been a genuine "clinical trial".  I guess there's a faint chance it was sponsored by some entity other than Orsus or Afon ....


----------



## Docb (Jan 16, 2021)

Look at the web site and see what they say about diabetes.  If repeated on this forum then I suspect that many members would have quite a lot to say!


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 16, 2021)

Eddy Edson said:


> Checking the European patent register, Afon acquired the technology last year out of bankruptcy from something called Orsus Medical, which seems to have been working on it for a while. Orsus is now defunct.
> 
> More detail: https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/n...-medical-research-firm-bought-administration/
> 
> ...


Eddy,

They received an Experimental Development  grant  from Welsh Governemnt from the SMART inovation programme, which was partly funded by the european regional development fund.





__





						SMART Cymru supports Afon Technology Ltd to develop a unique real time non-invasive blood glucose monitor.
					

Afon Technology is developing a sensor which will be an integral part of a non-invasive blood glucose monitor designed for the use of people with diabetes.    This will be a first non-invasive, wearable, real-time and continuous blood glucose monitor. It will give sufferers the freedom from...




					businesswales.gov.wales
				




It has a European Union Intellectual Property Office Registered Community Design No: 008213961-0001



			https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#basic/1+1+1+1/100+100+100+100/008213961-0001
		


The company is owned by 4 Doctors





__





						AFON TECHNOLOGY LTD people - Find and update company information - GOV.UK
					

AFON TECHNOLOGY LTD - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity




					find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk
				




The product trials are at Profil in Germany which is the world's leading contract research organisation for diabetes a picture of their device is pictured here.









						Non invasive CGM; hope at the horizon?
					

Non-invasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring is the holy grail of glucose monitoring. But the quest has been arduous so far; research carried out over the past 35 years has not resulted in a device with durable availability on the market.




					blog.profil.com


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jan 16, 2021)

The paper arising from the work with Profil, authored by Afon and Profil people, published last year in the first issue of a new journal from a new publisher:









						Novel Microwave Based Non-Invasive Glucose Device - Unified Citation Journals
					

Novel Microwave Based Non-Invasive Glucose Device. Keywords: Glucose Device, Diabetes, Clinical Trials, Afon Device.




					www.ucjournals.com
				




Feel free to draw own conclusions ...


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jan 16, 2021)

Eddy Edson said:


> Feel free to draw own conclusions ...


Accuracy sucks. So (like the other non-invasive device that Tim Cook was seen using for a while) maybe it's of value to people with prediabetes (or the worried well). If it can be improved a lot, maybe of use for some T2. But it's not the kind of thing that looks useful for bolus calculation, say.


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 16, 2021)

My only conclusion from this is, rather than spending ones time on a forum trying to discredit someone else's efforts for spending their time, money, effort and expertise trying to create something that could improve the lives of many diabetics, it would be better to just to be grateful.  
If it works, great; if it doesn't, you can hardly criticise someone for at least trying.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jan 16, 2021)

Amity Island said:


> My only conclusion from this is, rather than spending ones time on a forum trying to discredit someone else's efforts for spending their time, money, effort and expertise trying to create something that could improve the lives of many diabetics, it would be better to just to be grateful.


I'm not saying it's not worth pursuing, let alone that they shouldn't work on it. I've no idea whether it'll eventually work well. (And obviously new things tend not to work well at first.) I'm just imagining (based on the article) it'll be 5 years of development if its ever useful to me.

(And sucky accuracy could be of great value now and again. An easily portable gadget that could distinguish between drinks that are loaded with sugar or just have artificial sweeteners would be of value.)


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 16, 2021)

Bruce Stephens said:


> I'm not saying it's not worth pursuing, let alone that they shouldn't work on it. I've no idea whether it'll eventually work well. (And obviously new things tend not to work well at first.) I'm just imagining (based on the article) it'll be 5 years of development if its ever useful to me.
> 
> (And sucky accuracy could be of great value now and again. An easily portable gadget that could distinguish between drinks that are loaded with sugar or just have artificial sweeteners would be of value.)


Hi Bruce, I was refering to Eddy's forensic effort to investigate the company and discredit the new gadget. The way I see it, just be grateful there are people out there actually getting off their backside to try and develop new products, which one day might be of benefit to us. I'm tired of hearing all the complaints, why not use that energy to write to them and give them some encouragement or back them financially or perhaps offer some time to try and help.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jan 17, 2021)

Amity Island said:


> Hi Bruce, I was refering to Eddy's forensic effort to investigate the company and discredit the new gadget. The way I see it, just be grateful there are people out there actually getting off their backside to try and develop new products, which one day might be of benefit to us. I'm tired of hearing all the complaints, why not use that energy to write to them and give them some encouragement or back them financially or perhaps offer some time to try and help.


I do tech start-ups for a living. If these guys said, "This is really early, a gadzillion miles away from a working product and no assurance it will get there, and also we have very limited funding, no fiirm data, no partnerships with validating industry/tech/research entities and no corporate history of successful product development - but we think it's a nifty approach with the following key conceptual advantages over all the other players working on NI CGM: ...." then I'd respect them more. But as it is, they're putting out hype.


----------



## Docb (Jan 17, 2021)

Excellently put Eddy.  I did tech development for most of my life and there is nothing here which gives any incentive into investing in time and effort into development.  

I has all the hallmarks of somebody trying to raise capital.  If they want to put their own money into it, then good luck to them, they will end up poor.  If they are trying to get money out of the private sector then good luck to them, they will find that very tricky and will probably still end up poor.  

The other place to get money is the public sector.  It's by far the easiest to tap and that way they will have fun, and we will end up poor because that is taxpayer money over which we have some ownership.


----------



## everydayupsanddowns (Jan 17, 2021)

I think it’s just a bit if cynicism born out of regular disappointment Amity. 

Like Northie, I’ve seen ‘non invasive glucose monitor about to launch’ stories for years (decades actually) and have reached the point where I am unable to generate any enthusiasm until I see a working, tested, validated product, with results that compare with existing market leaders. 

A successful product in this class would certainly shake up the whole industry (where sensors cost £££ for a few days of use), but how would it be priced? And would the company make enough money to continue developing and refining without the revenue stream of consumables?

I wish them every success, but I’ve seen too many of these stories to get excited... yet.


----------



## Inka (Jan 17, 2021)

I think it’s not just cynicism. It can be more of a protective response eg I used to take news of a Type 1 cures very seriously, get excited - and then it all turned to *insert rude word*. So now I keep myself somewhat detached and not too invested emotionally in the idea as a protection from disappointment.


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 17, 2021)

Inka said:


> I think it’s not just cynicism. It can be more of a protective response eg I used to take news of a Type 1 cures very seriously, get excited - and then it all turned to *insert rude word*. So now I keep myself somewhat detached and not too invested emotionally in the idea as a protection from disappointment.


More than just cynicism for me too. I thought it was unnecessary. I dont mind a bit of cynicism, keeps people on their toes.

A comment like " I'll believe it when I see it" I'd see as cynical. But for me, it was a real effort to try and publicly discredit someone. 

It was just a bit of news for the forum.


----------



## Inka (Jan 17, 2021)

Yes, I’m all for people trying to ‘think outside the box’ and get their own tech up and running. I think #wearenotwaiting is a good example of people moving faster than big corporations.


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 17, 2021)

Inka said:


> Yes, I’m all for people trying to ‘think outside the box’ and get their own tech up and running. I think #wearenotwaiting is a good example of people moving faster than big corporations.


Thanks Inka, I'll have a look at that link.


----------



## Docb (Jan 17, 2021)

Sorry @Amity Island, but for me it was not cynical at all, just a quick appraisal of publicly available information in response to a what was probably a press release.   Eddy, and to some extent myself, have done a lot of miles in technical development and have had to be pretty good at sorting the things with potential from the bull pooh.  This one has far too many red flags against it. 

Fundamentally what we are saying is that we would not invest our pension fund in the company behind it and would recommend that people do not set their sights on a successful outcome from their endeavours.  Not cynical but a quick appraisal based on experience.

One or other point of view will be proven wrong in the fulness of time!


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 17, 2021)

Docb said:


> Sorry @Amity Island, but for me it was not cynical at all, just a quick appraisal of publicly available information in response to a what was probably a press release.   Eddy, and to some extent myself, have done a lot of miles in technical development and have had to be pretty good at sorting the things with potential from the bull pooh.  This one has far too many red flags against it.
> 
> Fundamentally what we are saying is that we would not invest our pension fund in the company behind it and would recommend that people do not set their sights on a successful outcome from their endeavours.  Not cynical but a quick appraisal based on experience.
> 
> One or other point of view will be proven wrong in the fulness of time!


Hello Doc B,

Nice to hear from you.

I guess it all boils down to whether one is a half glass empty or half full glass full mindset.
It's easy to look for the negative, but its equally as easy to see the positive.

I've not seen anything that confirms the product doesn't work nor can it. It's got financial backing, its undergone clinical trials, the company is owned by doctors, plenty of good stuff there.

I'd rather live with a mindset of hope.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jan 17, 2021)

Presentation by the CEO in December: 




Good description of the journey, some background on NI CGM in general, some detail on positioning versus the main CGM's. Much better than their PR's, web site etc.

IMO - a real effort; long way from a product (they're really at internal late bench-prototype stage, pre miniaturisation & pre production prototyping; they need way more data); mainly engineers and would need to have a bunch more capabilities beyond engineering to actuallly address a market; best option may be to license to a bigger player if it does have legs. Not sure if they have a good handle on how much money, time, marketing and regulatory effort would be required to get something like this into the market.   

Bread'n'butter product engineering issues I think not addressed in this presentation: battery life, water resistance, shock resistance. Calibration requirements?

Positioning versus the interstitial CGM's:  their microwave tech means that BG is being measured directly, so no interstitial lag; early limited data says "almost as accurate"; possible advantages of being NI (though IMO not clear how much this matters versus minimally-invasive Abbott,  etc). Positioned as an alert device, not really a BG monitor: simple hi/in-range/lo indications driving TIR reporting and alerts. Doesn't show actual BG levels. Is this a viable offer vs the established players? 

Obviously pricing would be a big factor but no information given on this aspect. One-off buy versus constant replacement of sensors? But how long do their sensors/microwave transmitters last? (And medtech companies hate one-off widget sales with no consumables, so maybe a challenge finding the kind of partner I think they would probably need.)


----------



## Amity Island (Jan 17, 2021)

Eddy Edson said:


> Presentation by the CEO in December:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good find, seems like they're making progress. 

I'm undecided whether time in range is more important than getting an actual figure. It's does appear that time in range seems to be an important factor at diabetes reviews these days. Good luck to them.


----------



## Docb (Jan 18, 2021)

Amity Island said:


> Hello Doc B,
> 
> Nice to hear from you.
> 
> ...


Hi Amity, half full or half empty?  I dunno, all I know is that I am a natural R&D person whose instinct is to look for the areas where work needs to be done.  

The presentation was interesting and Eddy has picked up on the things that were not mentioned.  I also think that the idea the device will not produce readings is a little disconcerting.  Rather glossed over in the presentation but I assume that the signal to noise ratio in real life as opposed to the lab conditions is so poor all you can get from the data processing is things like time in range and being out of range.  Somebody talking about all the IT stuff (i.e. soluble problems) and pretty rendered pictures, rather than the hard nitty gritty (how do you get the thing to produce a reliable blood glucose measurement real time) gets my old antennae throbbing.

Good first step or chasing rainbows.... only time will tell.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Jan 18, 2021)




----------



## Ralph-YK (Jan 18, 2021)

I saw a talk at a diabetes support group about 4-5 years ago. It was a guy developing a non invasive monitor. (University based.) At that stage, they were years away from getting a wearable device. They were initially developing a desktop device that you put your finger on. Testing such things through fingers is easier than on the arm, they said. More issues involved.
I should really check for an update.


----------



## Docb (Jan 19, 2021)

Apologies for resurrecting this but....

I looked at the presentation found by @Eddy Edson and could not stop thinking about it on my long country walk yesterday afternoon.  Something was bugging me and I eventually worked it out.  The sensor is said to based on the observation that if you fire a beam of microwave radiation at blood then the reflected radiation has a frequency shift that is dependent on the glucose content of the blood.  If this actually happens then I think it goes against conventional understanding of what electromagnetic radiation is all about and has quite profound implications for our understanding of the physical world.

You can get a frequency shift in reflected radiation but that is due to the doppler effect and for that the object providing the reflection has to be moving.  Use of microwave doppler shift detectors is well known, most of the automatic doors you pass through depend on it to the point where you can by the guts of the unit (microwave generator, antenna, processing circuitry) in a unit costing a few quid.  I know somebody who bought one and uses it to check the speed of traffic outside his house.

I have not been able to find any other reference to frequency shifting on reflection of electromagnetic radiation under any other circumstances, let alone it being due to a small change in chemical composition of the reflecting substance.  I don't find that surprising.  If it was a real effect then it would have transformed chemical analysis long ago.

Anyway I am not in any way suggesting that the developers are not genuine, but I would not be surprised to find that their development is based on a misinterpretation of the observations from their early experiments.  Were I considering a long term investment in the product I would be organising an independent confirmation of the reproducibility of their basic observations.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jan 19, 2021)

Docb said:


> Apologies for resurrecting this but....
> 
> I looked at the presentation found by @Eddy Edson and could not stop thinking about it on my long country walk yesterday afternoon.  Something was bugging me and I eventually worked it out.  The sensor is said to based on the observation that if you fire a beam of microwave radiation at blood then the reflected radiation has a frequency shift that is dependent on the glucose content of the blood.  If this actually happens then I think it goes against conventional understanding of what electromagnetic radiation is all about and has quite profound implications for our understanding of the physical world.
> 
> ...


I'm clueless about this stuff, but it seems to have some reality. Eg here's a recent literature review: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6468903/ 

And this: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-06926-1

But I'm not sure how precisely these studies fit with the Afon claims. 

Easy enough to see the descriptions and claims in their patent filing via seach at https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/search.jsf


----------



## Docb (Jan 19, 2021)

Bit of reading to do there Eddy but quick glance suggests that they talk about measuring the effect of glucose on the dielectric properties of blood at microwave frequencies.  Not the same as claiming to have observed a frequency change in a reflected beam as far as my limited knowledge of these things goes.

Yet to find the patents but you have given me something to do. It's too wet to contemplate going out for my afternoon walk!


----------



## Docb (Jan 19, 2021)

Found one patent.  Looks like they are trying to patent Mr Spock's tricorder.  Star Trek watchers will get that one!

PS... talks about amplitude, phase and resonant frequency changes but not frequency changes of a reflected wave.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Jan 19, 2021)

If I recall correctly, the Leeds project used a laser & some sort of coating on a piece of glass. You would put your finger on the glass. Such things being easier with fingers than arm skin. The projected device would be too big to wear on the arm.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Jan 19, 2021)

University page https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/3723/non-invasive_device_could_end_daily_finger_pricking_for_people_with_diabetes


> The new technology, developed by Professor Gin Jose and a team in the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Leeds, uses a small device with low-powered lasers to measure blood glucose levels without penetrating the skin.
> The technology is licensed to Glucosense Diagnostics, a spin-out company jointly formed and funded by the University of Leeds and NetScientific plc, a biomedical and healthcare technology group specialising in commercialising transformative technologies from leading universities and research institutes.


Looks like a publicity piece. Unfortunately I couldn't spot a date on it.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Jan 19, 2021)

> At the heart of the new technology is a piece of nano-engineered silica glass with ions that fluoresce in infrared light when a low power laser light hits them. When the glass is in contact with the users’ skin, the extent of fluorescence signal varies in relation to the concentration of glucose in their blood. The device measures the length of time the fluorescence lasts for and uses that to calculate the glucose level in a person’s bloodstream without the need for a needle. This process takes less than 30 seconds.​


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jan 19, 2021)

Ralph-YK said:


> University page https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/3723/non-invasive_device_could_end_daily_finger_pricking_for_people_with_diabetes
> 
> Looks like a publicity piece. Unfortunately I couldn't spot a date on it.


From 2015, and the spin-out company website, https://www.glucosense.net/ doesn't look like what's promised so it looks like something odd happened there.

Searching for Glucosense Diagnostics suggests the company did exist and has a patent but I don't see a web site.


----------



## NotPink (Jan 28, 2022)

'Noninvasive' Glucose Monitoring for Diabetes: Where Is It Now?https://www.healthline.com › diabetesmine › non-invasi... Just a link that may be of interest ...or not.


----------



## mikeyB (Jan 28, 2022)

What’s wrong with the single prick for a fortnight of CGM? Are T1’s so feart of that (despite injecting insulin four or five times injecting insulin) . This kind of product must be aimed at T2s to get any sales.

In any event, what they are trying to do is see through skin. Skin is designed to be impenetrable. It excludes water, bacteria and fungi, and just about everything you could throw at it. And how exactly does blood passsing through capillaries reflect microwaves? It doesn’t reflect Radio 2. Such waves pass straight through the body.


----------



## travellor (Jan 28, 2022)

Everything reflects, it's just how much, and whether it's measurable yet.


----------



## mikeyB (Jan 28, 2022)

travellor said:


> Everything reflects, it's just how much, and whether it's measurable yet.


Yes, that’s what skin does.


----------



## travellor (Jan 28, 2022)

mikeyB said:


> Yes, that’s what skin does.


Google "pulse oximeter" for a skin101 on reflection, absorption, and transmission.


----------



## mikeyB (Jan 28, 2022)

They do mention using microwaves, which do not get reflected. Microwaves are passing through your body as a type this. 

I’m wearing a watch which measures my Blood Oxygen, works just like those in hospital. I’m currently at 99%. They work with two lights, red and infra red. Blood with enough oxygen absorbs more red light, blood with not enough absorbs more infrared. So they only work in areas where blood capillaries are close to the surface. They work on the effect of Oxygen on the red blood cells. Arterial blood is bright red, venous blood on its way back to the lungs and heart is dark red. Glucose doesn’t play any part in that colour change, so I’d be interested into what they are attempting to address.


----------



## travellor (Jan 28, 2022)

mikeyB said:


> They do mention using microwaves, which do not get reflected. Microwaves are passing through your body as a type this.
> 
> I’m wearing a watch which measures my Blood Oxygen, works just like those in hospital. I’m currently at 99%. They work with two lights, red and infra red. Blood with enough oxygen absorbs more red light, blood with not enough absorbs more infrared. So they only work in areas where blood capillaries are close to the surface. They work on the effect of Oxygen on the red blood cells. Arterial blood is bright red, venous blood on its way back to the lungs and heart is dark red. Glucose doesn’t play any part in that colour change, so I’d be interested into what they are attempting to address.



"Microwave non contact imaging"


----------

