
Researchers develop tattoo ink capable of monitoring health by changing color - mxschumacher
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/09/harvard-researchers-help-develop-smart-tattoos/
======
inetsee
This isn't new. There was an article six years ago about a bioactive tattoo
ink that could measure blood glucose levels non-invasively (after the tattoo
was applied, of course). The measurement required a sensor attached to an
I-Phone and the sensor was estimated to cost several hundred dollars, but it
would allow for frequent glucose measurements without finger sticks. Not
continuous like CGM devices, but less painful and significantly less
expensive.

So far as I know it still hasn't been approved by the FDA, and I don't know
whether the developers are even still trying to get it approved.

Google also developed a sensor incorporated into a contact lens that provided
non-invasive, continuous glucose monitoring at about the same time. Same
result; not approved (that I know of) and no indication that it ever will be.

~~~
QAPereo
Unfortunately these companies/institutions have no experience with, and no
concept of the challenges involved in approving a totally novel medical device
in the US.

~~~
wyager
And double unfortunately, approving a medical technology is vastly more
expensive and slower than it needs to or should be. Existing medical approval
policies are strongly motivated by political concerns (we're still reeling
from thalidomide) rather than any rational social optimization policy. It's
very easy to scare people into excessive conservatism (in the literal sense).
[http://www.fdareview.org/05_harm.php](http://www.fdareview.org/05_harm.php)

~~~
jfoutz
> we're still reeling from thalidomide

Wasn't that one of the FDA's big victories? Perhaps you mean the FDA is far to
powerful because of that win.

I can see some argument for abandoning the efficacy requirement, and only
going with "safe" but so few drugs actually do anything - isn't it something
like a 95% attrition rate? only 1 in 50 actually have a measurable effect?

Maybe the bar is too high. Seems like the bigger challenge, and far far
greater win is just making testing cheaper.

~~~
serf
>Wasn't that one of the FDA's big victories? Perhaps you mean the FDA is far
to powerful because of that win.

depends who you ask.

Milton Friedman used the thalidomide reaction as a case-book example of
government meddling in the private sector where it needn't be, causing vast
delay in possible new therapeutics, which basically created an unquantifiable
loss of value due to us being unaware of "what could have been without
bureaucratic delay".

Friedman believed that if a company does sufficient harm to a population that
the negative market signal will eventually destroy the 'bad-actor' company,
without the need for anything like the FDA and the delays it imposes[0]

I don't know whether or not he's right.

[0]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUDV0YII6lk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUDV0YII6lk)

------
Isamu
See also "mediatronic tattoo" in The Diamond Age, Neal Stephenson

------
leemailll
I think John Rogers’ group already made quite some progress in this field.
Maybe he is not in MIT or Harvard so not often seen here.

------
ryandrake
This should help keep health insurance premiums down as all those Millennials
start aging!

(I kid, I kid...)

------
tdburn
If I had diabetes I would really want this kind of capability for monitoring
my glucose levels

~~~
dice
My wife has T1D and uses a continuous glucose monitor from Dexcom to keep
track of her levels.

The current state of the technology is probably best described as "finicky":
the sensor skin patch needs to be replaced every week or two, at which point
it's much less accurate for a couple days. It also needs calibration inputs
from a finger prick at least every 12 hours. In general if the sensor is
reporting a high or low condition her first action is to double-check with a
finger prick. More often than not the sensor is simply wrong.

With all that said, it's better to have the sensor than not. She is able to
use an app [0] to track her glucose levels over both the short term and long
term trends. She's been able to use that data to make dietary decisions which
allow her to keep her glucose within range and she had very good A1c levels
(5.4, vs a goal of "under 7" for many diabetics) at her last checkup.

I think the long term data collection ability means that a more connected
sensor (as opposed to the linked tattoo) will continue to be beneficial for
diabetics. The next steps in the useful technological development will be to
integrate with insulin pumps (this technology is already in trials) and to
integrate with diet tracking data e.g. from MyFitnessPal to assist with meal
decisions.

0:
[https://github.com/StephenBlackWasAlreadyTaken/xDrip](https://github.com/StephenBlackWasAlreadyTaken/xDrip)

~~~
tdburn
Recently my cousin, and my friend's child were diagnosed with type 1.
Following their Facebook posts I was surprised how limited and frustrating
current monitors/pumps are.

Thanks for the input from your wife's experience

------
agumonkey
I wonder how this would fare with kids.

------
Mr_Whoer
As a type 1 diabetic, I will gladly sign up for this. As soon as this is
viable and available, I will be getting my first tattoo. Now for the design,
maybe the insulin molecule?

~~~
cwkoss
I'd imagine endurance athletes would also love an easy to read blood glucose
monitor on their forearm. Would probably be great for runners or bikers.

------
Destinesia
Next our corporate overlords will make drug reactant tattoos.

