On Saturday I was invited by Diabetes Victoria to be part of the diabetes technology panel session at their Diabetes Expo. (Disclosures at the end of this post.)

The session was on the program as being about ‘The ins and outs of diabetes technology’ and promised to offer perspectives from people with type 1 and 2 diabetes, a researcher, endocrinologist and CDE.

The panel involved two of my favourite endocrinologists – Professor Peter Colman and Professor David O’Neil. I have known both for a number of years and they are, without a doubt, absolute giants in the diabetes clinical and research world. I love that they accept and acknowledge there are limitations to current tech and are not afraid of DIY solutions. Even more, I love how they are very respectful of the expertise of PWD and understand that choice is essential. How wonderful to be on a panel with HCPs who regularly deferred to the PWD sitting alongside them to answer questions and further the discussion.

The session got off to a slightly rocky start as we diverted a little from the designated topic, but we got back on track eventually with the panellists being able to share their experiences and views about just where we are with diabetes tech in 2019, how it can help people living with diabetes, the frustrations tech can lead to and what we hope for the future.

I enjoyed the question about whether tech makes life easier for PWD. I honestly believe this is a double-edged sword – technology is designed to make our lives easier and that’s what it promises to do on the box, but the reality can be very different.

This is something I speak about when explaining my love/hate relationship with tech. Getting things right so that I don’t want to tear devices from my body and throw them out the window takes time. My first encounter with CGM was shocking and I swore to never use it again. The first sensor insertion caused so much blood that the Medtronic rep helping to teach me how it all worked actually gasped and then claimed never to have seen anything ‘so scary’ before. That was not reassuring. The words scary and gory weren’t on the box.

Then there was the data overload, unstoppable alarms and inaccuracy. How was this device meant to revolutionise my diabetes treatment (thatwas promised on the box!) if it was inaccurate, caused me to bleed everywhere and caused me so much frustration and distress that I never wanted to see, let alone use, CGM as part of my diabetes management. Ever. (Fast forward a number of years and thank god that’s not the case anymore!)

There was a lot of talk on the panel about how far we’d come and how lucky we are to be living with diabetes in 2019 rather than in 1959 or 1969 or anytime other than now. We were reminded of glass syringes that needed boiling and needles that needed sharpening. And days before home glucose monitoring, back-pack sized insulin pumps and the good old days where things were really not so good. Just old.

I won’t for a moment deny that we have come leaps and bounds since those days. In the twenty-one years I’ve lived with diabetes there have been lots of tech changes and improvements.

We were asked by the panel moderator how we feel about tech in 2019 and the answer from other panellists was that they feel hopeful and appreciative. The CDE on the panel has lived with type 1 diabetes for thirty-seven years and obviously has seen a lot of changes in that time. The two endos on the panel said that they feel that there have been huge strides made in tech – rapid and very significant in recent years.

When it got to me, I acknowledged what the other speakers had said. ‘I am really pleased to be living with diabetes in 2019,’ I said. ‘I use tech and I generally do love that it is available to me to use, despite the frustrations.’ I paused and looked around the auditorium. I had more to say and I had a split second to decide whether I just left it there, saying what I felt people expected me to say. Or I speak the truth – my truth.

I lifted the microphone to my mouth. ‘But actually, I’m angry,’ I looked around again, settling my gaze on the group of people in the room I knew. ‘I’m angry because we are where we are, and PWD are being given a rough deal.

‘Technology should be easy and accessible and affordable for everyone and it is not. I use a DIY system that means that I am the least burdened by diabetes than I have ever felt. But to get this system, I had to build it myself. It is unregulated, it is experimental. And people like me, doing what we do are largely met with scepticism and suspicion from HCPs who don’t understand the technology. We are accused of not taking our safety seriously – often through passive aggressive comments from not only HCPs but also device companies about the only safe devices being those that have been through RCTs and regulatory bodies. When we talk skin in the game, those of us who have these devices actually attached to our skin have the most at stake, so suggesting we don’t care about safety is ridiculous.’

I paused long enough only to take a breath.

‘The technology is available to do what I am doing, but it takes so long for device companies to get new things to market and through regulators, and even then we are stuck with set targets and limited customisation. We are languishing with older, nowhere near as useful tech. We are expected to accept that and just deal with it and be grateful for it. THAT is why there is a hashtag and a movement called #WeAreNotWaiting. That is why I am not waiting. And it’s why I’m a little angry.’

I don’t know everyone who was at the tech panel session on Saturday, but there was a group that I did know. They were the ones who applauded after my little rant.  When they hear a group of panellists claiming that we are fortunate because the current available tech is so much better than what was available 70 years ago, they shrug their shoulders and know that there is more. They are the ones who have started down the DIY road or the Afrezza road (as one audience member explained).

We should not feel that we have to be appreciative, or that what is offered is the best there is. I am so, so glad that there are people out there who have not been prepared to just accept what was on offer, and instead go out there and make better tools – make the current tech better. They were not satisfied, and their smarts and determination has meant that many more of us don’t have to settle for the vastly imperfect tools available. Sure, DIY solutions aren’t perfect either, but they are certainly better.

I’m not really sure how my comment was taken by the broader audience. I suspect that a lot of them weren’t too sure how to take the woman waving her hands about, even after I promised them that I’m really not angry all that much and that I am actually quite delightful (not sure I fooled anyone on that point).

Probably the message that resonated most throughout the panel discussion was that choice is important and that there is no one size fits all solution to diabetes technology. That is definitely true. But that extends to there being no one size fits all to how we feel about the overall tech landscape. And the way I feel is that I am not willing to accept the status quo.

DISCLOSURES

I worked at Diabetes Victoria from September 2001 until January 2016. I was not involved in the planning of the 2019 Expo. I did not receive payment to speak at the Expo.