Showing posts with label DOC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DOC. Show all posts

October 15, 2014

Hey Adam needs a hand, Little help?

This is from my good friend and inspiration to bicycle, Adam Brown at diaTribe. Help him out OK? Just to be clear, diaTribe is asking to help better focus on what matters to PWD when we do the next round of #DOCasksFDA, not FDA asking. Go us!
Hello DOC friends! 

On November 3, the FDA will host an unprecedented discussion between the diabetes community and senior agency leadership (both drugs and devices). The event will be live webcast from 1 - 4 pm. We want this to be nothing short of a home run. The event will include a panel of patients (T1 and T2), as well as representatives from ADA, JDRF, and diaTribe. As a community, our job is to present the numerous challenges we as patients face each day, and we need as many opinions as possible to be a part of this discussion! With FDA, ADA, JDRF, and dQ&A input, we have created a survey posted at www.diaTribe.org/surveyWe are asking the entire diabetes community (T1 and T2!) to please fill out this short survey and share thoughts on what's important when it comes to living with diabetes. This feedback will go DIRECTLY to FDA and help influence the conversation on November 3

FDA is currently working on the registration to sign up for this webcast event; as we understand it, this should be posted within the week. We will be in touch with that information and a finalized agenda as soon as we have it. For now, it is mission critical to have a massive response to the survey. We need to show the FDA that patients care about these issues, that patients have valuable input to share, and that the treatment options we have are still not good enough.

Thank you on behalf of our entire team for your help in spreading the word on the survey and about the event. We’re truly excited about the potential to open the lines of communication with the FDA, which for too long has been a black box. We need more patient input into the drug and device approval process, and we see November 3 as a very key avenue to making that happen. Let’s show the FDA how committed our community is.

very best wishes,
Adam



April 23, 2014

Dear Newbies



Welcome to the type 1 parents club. (Including but not exclusively, Usher and family) I am so sorry you have joined but glad at least you are here. The locals call here, the DOC  (we pronounce each letter for Diabetes Online Community.)

I kinda know how you may feel. I have been through it. Twice, yes two kids with type 1.  But you Diabetes May vary and you anxiety at diagnosis is your own.

If diabetes has taught me anything it is to try to have empathy for others, other parents of kids with diabetes, other people with type 1, type 2, what we call type 3 (other parents and caregivers.) In time, I hope you get to the place where you can see empathy as a blessing.

You ain't there now. You ain't meant to be. Don't sweat it. There are a bunch of stages of loss, you are gonna deal with them. That is 100% normal.

Type 1 diabetes is a family thing. No parent likes putting insulin into a child, the child typically isn't a huge fan of it either. All try to be brave. Siblings face as much stress as anyone, through less parental attention and care and loving fear for their brother or sister. As you work diligently to learn to care for you child with diabetes, work as just as hard to show the non D-kids how much you care for them and the love all they bring to the family. Life has many demands, diabetes will add to them, for now bring all you can to your family - you will find a new normal.

Learn about Children With Diabetes Friends for Life.

There at Friends For Life, families share the magic of "getting it." Everyone "get its." No matter how much or how little anyone knows there are new things to learn and new friends to walk with you.

Your family needs people walking with them. Diabetes is hard. It is relentless. It is best managed with a little help from your friends. Nothing against your existing friends, they are wonderful people I am sure, few will appreciate that behind what you project as normal is the ever present reality of diabetes care. A few may prove they weren't true friends, such is life.

The diabetes community will embrace you, peer support makes diabetes care much less stressful. Join the forums at CDW, join #DSMA chat on Wednesday nights 9:00 easter on twitter. Let other walk with you. You can do this.

Over the years YDMV has created a collection of Newbie posts, most are silly. There are here if you need them. There are also a few focused on that "why me" stage, those are here.  What really matters is we, a community who gets it, are here and here and here and here.... well way to many places to list, but all are here for every newbie, parent, adult, child, teen, caregiver and friend living with diabetes.


Welcome to the club. Sorry you are here. 

September 18, 2013

There's Hope


Hope Warshaw that is, diabetes educator and advocate for the Diabetes Online Community. Hope is an advocate for peer to peer support. See why I am proud to have her as a friend by reading her blog. This post with resources to help people with the online community is outstanding.
http://www.hopewarshaw.com/connectdiabetes

Share it with your friends and maybe even your diabetes educator.


August 21, 2013

Come Play!

My friend Scott Johnson won Insulindependence.org’s Athletic Achievement award and I think that says a lot. Scott is into athletics for all the right reasons; joy, sportsmanship, camaraderie, and health. Scott wants everyone he meets to join the basketball game and play for the simple fun of playing. I hadn’t played basketball since the 70s, Scott made me feel welcome on the court. Same with a young kid who was standing there watching the game, Scott handed him the ball and invited the kid onto the game. That is why, for me, he is a role model. Athletics isn’t about self aggrandizement, it isn’t about winning, to Scott it is about joining with others and playing.
play |plā| verb
1 engage in activity for enjoyment and recreation rather than a serious or practical purpose:
2 take part in (a sport):
I am proud of Scott. 
( I am proud of Kerri the Dancing Check too.)


This is not to say I have anything against serious sports. I was screaming like the lunatic I am, when Charlie Kimball’s team won the Indycar race at Mid Ohio. Team. Racing is a team sport with all kinds of different skills contributing to a common effort to make the team's car get there first.


Today, I would love you to join me in some play. I want you to be part of a team, one that needs a lot of players who are willing to do something a little outside their individual and collective “box.” Join the StripSafely Tweet In.
  1. Go to the StripSafely Twitter Page, 
  2. Find your Elected officials, Listed by State. (Maybe include the Congressional leadership too)
  3. Click the Tweet about Meeting Link.
That will send a Tweet asking the representative asking them to send a staffer to the September 9 Diabetes Technology Society meeting. That is easy and it isn’t asking a lot from Congress, just being aware of our need for accuracy.

Some feel that politics is a dirty partisan game, I know others have felt that way. They found that speaking up from principal was not only empowering but could be fun too. Maybe our voice can help reduce  partisanship by not playing that game. Just be real.

Let's make this fun! Tweet the 'stock' message then improvise some of your own tweets, share why accurate diabetes testing matters to you. Be nice, be a good sport, no trash talking, join with others and play. Maybe as a team we can all win the race to more accurate glucose testing.


Lets make this a team effort about joy, sportsmanship, camaraderie, and health. 






























































































































August 16, 2013

New Kind of Mail - With Stamps!

I just put stamps on letter to my Senators, Congresswoman and the President.

Real snail mail letters based on this Sample Letter at StripSafely.com. 


I am asking my policy leaders to send a staffer to the 9.9.13 Diabetes Technology Society meeting. That aide can help my elected officials understand that there is an issue with test strip accuracy.

You can help. You can write too (Hint: Use the sample!) BUT can you find cooler stamps than these Pixar gems?





June 4, 2013

Caution: Isolation May be Hazardous to Your Health


There are a lot of things that are bad for our health. Some have waring labels. Cigarettes for example, everyone know they are bad for you. So much so that they come with a waring label. One of those labels says:



Ya know what else, “Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health?”

Community.
Other people.
Not being isolated. 


I am not making this up. In her May 13, 2013 article in the New Republic Judith Shulevitz writes extensively about isolation including how it can affect people at biological levels.

How much so? Julianne Holt-Lunstad mail, Timothy B. Smith , J. Bradley Layton conclude their paper, Social Relationships and Mortality Risk, saying:
Data... Indicate(s) that individuals with adequate social relationships have a 50% greater likelihood of survival compared to those with poor or insufficient social relationships. The magnitude of this effect is comparable with quitting smoking and it exceeds many well-known risk factors for mortality (e.g., obesity, physical inactivity).
People living with diabetes know that it can set them apart, make them feel alone. The social stigmas associated with it, that it diabetes the fault of those who have it, doesn’t help.

In Twenty-First Century Behavioral Medicine: A Context for Empowering Clinicians and Patients With Diabetes, David Marrero, writes that, "Diabetes is a challenging condition, both to live with and to treat.” He outlines roles for both family and wider communities in supporting self motivated change by individuals to better live with diabetes.

Marrero makes the need of support starkly clear observing that social isolation has effects on mortality, at the individual level, comparable to smoking cigarettes. Not having a social support system can be as bad for our health as smoking.

Marrero only briefly refers to online opportunities for individuals to find peer support. Gilbert et al more clearly define peer support in their paper, Online Communities Are Valued by People With Type 1 Diabetes for Peer Support: How Well Do Health Professionals Understand This? They offer a wide discussion of the value that diabetes patients see in online communities. They also outline some of the concerns that health professionals have of patients using the internet.

Not all people with diabetes have family or a community that understand diabetes. Gilbert suggests peer to peer patient support is an additional avenues of support that can be effective.

Community helps. Don’t let diabetes isolate us.

I am not suggesting that community takes the place of quitting smoking, being active or loosing weight. I am suggesting that it is part of the mix, as important as other health risks and we need to say so.

Our insurance will not pay for social relationships, our doctor can’t prescribe anti isolation medications but we can create community. Community that is good not only for our individual health but the well being of other too.

Community is a win - win.

Maybe we need labels on strips an insulin.


WARNING: Joining Diabetes Communities Now 
Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health.



Resources:

Judith Shulevitz, The Lethality of Loneliness, New Republic, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113176/science-loneliness-how-isolation-can-kill-you#

Julianne Holt-Lunstad, Timothy B. Smith, J. Bradley Layton, Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000316

David G. Marrero, Jamy Ard, Alan M. Delamater, Virginia Peragallo-Dittko, Elizabeth J. Mayer-Davis, Robin Nwankwo, and Edwin B. Fisher, Twenty-First Century Behavioral Medicine: A Context for Empowering Clinicians and Patients With Diabetes: A consensus report, Diabetes Care February 2013 36:463-470; doi:10.2337/dc12-2305, http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/36/2/463.extract

Kate Gilbert,  Sarity Dodson, Marie Gill, and Rosemary McKenzie, Online Communities Are Valued by People With Type 1 Diabetes for Peer Support: How Well Do Health Professionals Understand 
This?, Diabetes Spectrum August 2012 25:180-191; doi:10.2337/diaspect.25.3.180 http://spectrum.diabetesjournals.org/content/25/3/180.full

May 16, 2013

Accomplishments: Serious and Silly

This week I am joining Karen and many others in D-Blog Week.
Today's topic is, "Accomplishments Big and Small"


Our prompt of Today is: 
We don’t always realize it, but each one of us had come a long way since diabetes first came into our life. It doesn’t matter if it’s been 5 weeks, 5 years or 50 years, you’ve done something outstanding diabetes-wise. So today let’s share the greatest accomplishment you've made in terms of dealing with your (or your loved one’s) diabetes. No accomplishment is too big or too small - think about self-acceptance, something you’ve mastered (pump / exercise / diet / etc.), making a tough care decision (finding a new endo or support group / choosing to use or not use a technology / etc.).

I think one accomplishments in which take pride, and I will leave the evaluation of greatness to others, is this post. I am proud where writing it took me. It is fairly serious and I share another link that is spectacularly silly but related in that I shared with with the same friend I have never met other than in the DOC. 

Bad things happen to good people.

I wrote this for another T1 dad who has had some issues with a church preschool. OK y’all may not recognize me as the author here but what the heck here goes:

Bad things happen to good people. It isn’t God’s will that they happen but part of God’s providence. There is a distinction there that is small but significant.

If bad things only happened to bad people we could easily know who’s evil from there rest. It would be like God showing up in a cloud and tossing about lightening bolts. There would be no question of who was in charge and we would be compelled to believe in that all powerful God.

Now think of God as a parent. Parents want their kids to do OK and to love them back. We all kind of get around to the idea that, the kids have to choose to be OK and love us back for themselves.

God being infinite is infinitely more loving and wise is more aware of this truth than we are. So God is infinitely more motivated to let us, his children, choose to love him by NOT forcing us to do so. In short God keeps us in freedom to choose to love God or reject God because that is how love works. (Every one sing the Sting song, “If you love someone, set them free…” OK enough of that sillieness.)

So what does this have to do with the topic at hand? Lots. First we get what we can handle or more precisely what we can handle with God’s help. We didn’t do anything bad, were not being punished, it is just our at bat, our lot, our thing. It is real hard to keep that in mind particularly, when those piling on the crap are wearing religious garb and projecting that they are all wise and speaking for god. Nope they are just human.

Second, we only get what we can handle, if we couldn’t, if it was going to break us for sure, we wouldn’t get it. That ain’t saying it is an easy load. It is saying we have an even shot. No more, no less, we are in freedom.

Third somehow there is a way to be better for all of it, we have to find the up side of the equation that is keeping us in freedom to come out OK. I am not so sure that I know what that is. If I figure it out I’ll let you know but it is there someplace. Our gig is to find it and do it.

I am coming to feel that there is a community here that may be more than it seems. We are here to help each other with the diabetes thing but the fact is the real issue is how the diabetes thing gets into our heads and hearts. That is more than helping with blousing tips.

It may be that we are here to really reach out and say, “That is wrong. I will stand by you to help you not over react but to act in accordance with what is right.” We can’t change the way Fishville or some church board act and think. We can support each other and in doing so help ourselves on a better path.

So let me say that I empathize with every emotion you are feeling, I know them first hand. The real spiritual issue is not to let what we experience as the shallow hollow self interest of others turn us into them.

Stand up for your child, her mom, her grandfather and her brother. You were put on this path because you can come out of it a better stronger man, father, husband and son. I probably can too. It may well be that you sharing your experience is a way to help me see that it is the same for me.

Thanks for the hand.

Stand tall stand and proud stand up for the children you are God’s chosen advocate for. Do so in away that makes us, them and God proud of you. You have done so so far. I have faith you can continue to do so.

In the long run - it is how we react that counts


This was originally posted as:
http://www.ydmv.net/2007/10/bad-things-happen-to-good-people.html

And now for something completely different

That was a little deeper and really out of character for me. So here is another bit I did for the same guy far more in the public character of us both. I am just about as proud of this which should be proof that I am, at best, an adolescent at heart. Here is an excerpt, the full long link follows:

BadShoe: And you don't know the peoples’ names?
Brensdad: Well I should.
BadShoe: Well then who's on NPH?
Brensdad: Yes.
BadShoe: I mean the kid’s name.
Brensdad: Who.
BadShoe: The guy on NPH.
Brensdad: Who.
BadShoe: The NPH kid
Brensdad: Who.
BadShoe: The guy using...
Brensdad: Who is on NPH!
BadShoe: I'm asking YOU who's on NPH.
Brensdad: That's the kid’s name.
BadShoe: That's who's name?
Brensdad: Yes.
BadShoe: Well go ahead and tell me...

It go on and on at: http://www.ydmv.net/2008/07/not-that-abbott.html




March 6, 2013

Empathy. Honoring struggle without trite solutions.


I wrote this as a response to my good friend Scott Benner's post Our Community at Arden's Day. It is also a response to Sara, Jess, a classic by Boba new blog by Christela host of Facebook messages, Tweets, texts, phone calls and more.  I originally posted it at Arden's Day and have copied it here.  


In my view empathy is what hold the diabetes community together. By empathy. I mean to honor another’s struggle without offering them a trite formula. I have written about empathy a lot. I think the DOC does it well, most of the time. Lots of folks do that. Scott, you do. So so Sara, Jess, Bob and countless others. I hope I do, I hope Tom gets back to it. 

From my perspective both the lines of honoring and trite were crossed, and crossed with forethought, by DRI. That is unfortunate, to the point that I agree with your assessment of both cruel and unthinkable. 

Here is why I say DRI forthought. 



This came days before Tom's Facebook post. It is a DRI email teasing "The Next Quantum Leap: The Biological Cure" in the subject line. Clearly the "The Biological Cure" hype was DRI's communication plan. So in addition to Tom's rationalization laced, "I'm sorry," DRI need to be accountable for the hype they apparently hoped to manipulate. They need to return to honoring the struggle and apologize for trite formula hyping "The Biological Cure" to serve their immediate ends. That should happen without the ‘but we didn’t mean it they way we clearly said it’ we have seen. 

Let me be clear I am NOT saying encapsulation is a trite path to treatments. Hyping it as "The Biological Cure" is. "The Biological Cure" is not the same as saying it a very promising path to a possible cure that is soon to enter human trials. As they say on sesame Street, "One of these things is not like the other." One is cruel, the other is honest.

Living and breathing the science of type 1 isn't same as the emotions of living with or parenting a child with Type 1. DRI has shown the clear appreciation of the relationship the two. In an 2010 story, Rive Greenburg quotes DRI’s Dr. Ricordi saying, "I hate to over-promise because so many people have been disillusioned." So it is even more disheartening to see DRI choose hype and discredit Dr. Ricordi’s prior empathy for the community. 

Calling it "The Biological Cure" now completely discounts what that they have achieved buy putting it on the same footing as every other claim of a cure in 5 or 10 years. 

Hyping a cure in 5 years as is not honoring the struggle. A cure in five years is THE standing joke of false hope. We all know it and know why.  I suggest that by definition anything 5 years out is NOT a cure.  Five years is a lifetime with type 1. 

The idea becomes trite when put into the context of the tragic cases where 5 years is more than a person lifetime with type 1. Lets all hope those are few. Sadly we know none is not realistic. 

Am I encouraged by encapsulation? Sure. Have been for years and years. I expect encouraged by progress for years to come. I am encouraged by lots of stuff: better basal insulins, faster bolus insulin, better sets, glucose responsive insulins, innovation in CGM, better data management and mostly the peer to peer community. 

Am I very discouraged by the premeditated choice of hype over empathy by DRI? Absolutely. 

I suggest that tuning out their communications, specifically this campaign is not a trite response.  If this becomes a successful communication / funding campaign, who will be next to play the hyped cure card? When will we see copy cats? What will that serve? How does that honor the struggle for the next few years?

I decided to unsubscribe to DRI email as a step in turning down their choice of hype. I encourage other to do so too. I did so to send a small message that choosing hype over empathy is self selection out the community that honor other’s struggle without offering a trite formula.

I welcome an honest conversation about advancing encapsulation. This wasn’t it. Rewarding it as such only invites more hype. 

February 21, 2013

#SpareARose Feed Back Wanted

#SpareARose had wonderful success in social media raising awareness for the IDF's Life for a Child and helping save some kids. Some results are not in yet but it was clear the Diabetes Online Community came together in a big way very quickly to pull the program together.



How quickly you ask? 12 days from first idea as a sidebar comment to going public.

In kind of rush the focus was all about can we get something done. Now that we can breath, it would be great to know what people think worked and what could work better if we do something like it again. Maybe next time, with two full weeks or more, we could be even better

So how about taking a quick survey and sharing your thoughts on how to do it better?

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3PGYZ7Y

November 10, 2012

Patient Voices

At a blogger event with a drug company one conversation turned to why they were engaging with diabetes people rather than patients from one of their other lines of business. The company folks replied it was because the diabetes online community (aka DOC) is significantly more active than the online patient communities of the conditions they serve.

Yay us! Right?

I had the chance to see another side of patient engagement this week. The FDA had an advisory committee considering a potential new basal insulin. There was a part of the meeting where 'we the people' could speak. Thanks to a little help with gas money from the Diabetes Advocates I drove down and spoke as a dad of T1d teens.



Comments about the DOC, like the one I started with, could make one think patients have more influence than maybe we do really do. Patients were not a significant voice in the FDA meeting room.

The majority of the committee discussion I heard was not about diabetes outcomes but about potential cardio vascular signals that may, or may not, be a potential risk. The talk around hypos and the possibility of reducing them seemed to me to be detached from the idea of hypos as a material health issue. In fairness I did not hear all the presentations.

A few physicians spoke in the public comment forum. God bless them. They were patient advocates. A doctor from the Endocrine society spoke very clearly to the fear of hypos as a barrier to good care. I found it particularly significant that he was talking about the role emotions play in the process of care, specifically the fear. Next time we complain that the care community doesn’t get the emotional side, I want to remember who spoke up to the FDA about the impact of the fear of hypos.

Hypos matter. The conversation about night time lows should be about the impact they have on how patients self manage, the fear of them and the complications of nocturnal hypos  - including dead in bed. Sadly a big part of the conversation was about what time frame counts as a nocturnal hypo; 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., 12 a.m. to 6 a.m., or 12 a.m. to 8 a.m..

While I found the time of a nocturnal hypos conversation inane for the most part this meeting was a serious science event. I freely admit it was a little intimidating to speak as a layperson, particularly following four very articulate physicians. However if we the DOC don’t show up to speak for patients who will?

We need better care options. Innovative insulins even incrementally innovative insulins are an area of better options. We would benefit form longer non-peaking basal insulin, faster bolus insulin and the holy grail of injectables glucose responsive insulins. So we need to be our own advocates making our case for benefits of better tools.

I felt there was a distinct under current in the conversation that there are perfectly serviceable insulins on the market now, so the process can hold possible innovations to a higher standard with more and longer trials without any adverse affect.

No.

Delaying or preventing access to better tools is an unfortunate outcome. These CV tests will cost more and so be barriers to new insulins making it into the butter compartments of people with diabetes. I am not sure Banting and Best could have had done CV studies. (Nor do I think there process is a model for modern safety and efficacy.)

Let me be clear. I am not advocating neglecting other safety issues such as CV risk. I am suggesting that we as patient community need to be part of the off line conversations that determine the medications and tools that are options for us to explore with our physicians. We need to be there to voice the value of better diabetes care. Maybe even introduce into the process a definition of better that not only looks at A1C but one that considers stability of glucose levels. That can include fewer or no night time hypos.

I am not saying there was no conversation about balancing better diabetes care with risks. I am saying from my perspective the value of better care appeared to be trivialized at times. In fairness I may be over stating my views.  (Raise you hand if you think I ever over state my views - ok, that is everyone who has ever read anything I ever have written.) The committee did recommend the insulin subject to ongoing CV consideration 8 to 4. Clearly the 8 felt there was benefits that were significant even with possible risks.

Still I think patient voices are needed to help balance the benefit side of consideration. We could even help the good doctor from the endo society make the case that the emotional parts of diabetes care are significant. I have been kicking myself the past two days for letting emotion breaks into my voice when I spoke about doing night time blood tests. In retrospect maybe that was a good thing. Maybe I helped him make his point. He did reach out and shake my hand as I retuned to my seat.

If we are not part of the process who will be our voice? How can we consistently do that?

September 20, 2012

Get your FDA Pre-Sub. Docket Comments here!

Will you please consider commenting on an open FDA docket? I would love the FDA to see the FDA everywhere they look, particularly when they reach out for public comment.

The FDA currently has a docket open on “Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Medical Devices: The Pre-Submission Program and Meetings with FDA Staff; Availability.”
http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;dct=FR%252BPR%252BN%252BO...

So far there are just a few public comments. This docket is an opportunity to for the DOC to be seen by the FDA. It is a fairly dull issue and at first glance not specifically about T1D. However the FDA did bring pre-submission up in an email exchange about LGS. See this YDMV post.

In simple terms, pre-submission is a formal process of industry working with the FDA to help define issues the FDA will want to see addressed in an actual application. Think of pre-submission as meeting with a teacher to understand the rubric and go over an outline before writing a paper. This guidance is 35 pages of how that will work where the FDA is the teacher and industry is writing the term paper.

My hope is for the FDA to know the DOC is looking at everything they do. So much so that they anticipate they will get our comments. Open dockets are an official way to do that.

In addition to posting a comment to the docket consider copying your Congressmember and Senators and noting that in what you post to the FDA. YDMV, so may FDA comments. Below are a few general form letters that you could used for this particular docket. Please feel free to use them, modify them and post them to the docket. In that modification please fill out and change the the opening paragraph so it  states who you are, what your relationship to diabetes is and how long you have been living with it. 


Comment here:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=FDA-2012-D-0530-0001


If you do post I would love a comment here just to know who has sent one in.

Thanks
 


General Support

Dear Sir or Madam:

First, let me begin by extending my sincere gratitude to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for this opportunity to share my perspective as an individual whose life will be directly impacted by the draft guidance document: "Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff; Medical Devices: The Pre-Submission Program and Meetings with FDA Staff; Availability".

I hope FDA will give the same consideration to my perspective as it does to comments from companies that stand to profit from the FDA’s final guidance documents, and that the FDA will remember to give the patient perspective appropriate consideration when preparing the final guidance document(s).

Perhaps I should take a moment to introduce myself.  My name is {your name here}. I live in {town/state}. I have been living with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes -or- I am the parent of a child with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes. {I/he/she} was diagnosed {X} years ago. Living with diabetes is a daily balancing act that requires multiple devices to measure blood sugar and administer insulin. It is never easy and while the tools available are acceptable, there is little doubt they can be better.  Innovative diabetes devices are not an abstraction in my life, they are the means of staying alive, and better tools will help {me/my child} live a longer and more productive life while also helping to reduce the amount of time that must be spent on routine management of blood glucose levels that {my/my child’s} body can no longer do on its own.

As the Federal Register announcement dated July 13, 2012 notes:

"The purpose of this guidance is to describe the Pre-Submission program (formerly the pre-Investigational Device Exemption [IDE] program) for medical devices reviewed in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)."  The draft guidance document also notes that the original process was “designed to provide applicants a mechanism to obtain FDA feedback on future Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) applications prior to their submission. Over time, the pre-IDE program evolved to include feedback on other device submission program areas, such as Premarket Approval (PMA) applications, Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) applications, and Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions, as well as to address questions related to whether a clinical study requires submission of an IDE.”

As I interpret these statements as a layperson, these seem to suggest that the draft guidance is describing the FDA's thinking about how this Federal agency will be handling early conversations with drug, biotechnology medicines and medical devices BEFORE the actual submission of an application.

As I noted previously, I live with Type 1 diabetes, and have done so for {specify duration of time lived with diabetes}. I know that there are a number of devices and tools available in almost every other developed nation that are not currently available here. While I’d like to believe Americans are safer as a result of this, there are valid reasons to question such a presumption.  While I support the FDA initiative to use the pre-submission process to help industry more quickly make applications for devices that the FDA can approve, as a patient {or caregiver} the specifics addressed in such premarket discussions are largely undisclosed to the public, hence the process as it has operated so far lacks transparency, which is one area I’d like to see some more specificity in the final guidance document(s).

Innovation in diabetes care is accelerating. Today, there are more options for Continuous Glucose Monitors (“CGM”) enabled insulin pumps (also known as Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion or "CSII", although I will refer to this as “insulin pump” throughout the remainder of my comments) overseas, there are more accurate CGMs, there are insulin pumps that shut of insulin delivery to hypoglycemic patients, there are mealtime insulin dosage calculating guidance wizards in meters for people who manage their diabetes with multiple daily injections (not insulin pumps) and more. Innovations are slow in coming and the options available in U.S. are falling behind.

The FDA and industry really must find ways to keep pace with other regulatory bodies around the world, such as the European Medicines Agency or Health Canada.  While I’ve seen signs of progress in this direction from the FDA, today, many companies apply for regulatory approval in Europe first because companies operating view the EMA’s approval process as more transparent, consistent and predictable than the FDA’s processes are.  My life depends on working with my healthcare team to use the best devices to help me manage my diabetes. If the best devices are not available in the USA, my care team cannot prescribe them.

Thanks you for the opportunity to comment.

{your name}

cc: {your Congressperson & Senators}

*****
LGS comment for adolescent parents

Hi my name is {your name here}. I live in {town state}. I have been living with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes -or- I am the parent of a child with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes. {I/he/she} was diagnosed {X} years ago. Living with diabetes is a daily balancing act that requires multiple devices to measure blood sugar and administer insulin. It is never easy and while the tools available are good they certainly can be better. Innovative diabetes devices are not an abstraction in my life, they are the means of staying alive and better tools will help {me/my child} live a longer and more productive life.  

Care options that physicians and patients can consider for type 1 Diabetes patients in the US lag behind the rest of the world. Uncertainty over regulatory processes here is a significant issue. Northwestern University reports that 76% of device manufacturers who replied to a survey on the FDA said the 510(k) process was unclear.

While the FDA, academicians and industry seek to find clarity on regulatory verbiage the lack of innovations in diabetes devices is costing American lives. One example in diabetes care is that Low Glucose Suspend devices are available in every developed nation other than the United States. A lack of clarity on how industry can apply to the FDA is part of the reason we do not have those devices.

Nocturnal hypoglycemia is killing Americans with Type 1 diabetes. The risk is particularly acute for adolescents facing hormonal changes that can significantly have an impact on glucose management. Unclear FDA process are costing the lives of American youth.

As the parent of an adolescent Type 1 child I find this delay and associated risk of life threatening  nocturnal hypoglycemia unacceptable.

The FDA must bring clarity and certainty to the US regulatory process. Robust pre-submission processes can facilitate approvals for innovative devices. The FDA must bring the clarity and transparency to the process that Northwestern demonstrated is lacking.

Thanks you for the opportunity to comment.

{your name}

cc: {your Congressperson & Senators}

****
Short and sweet AP based comment.

Hi my name is {your name here}. I live in {town state}. I have been living with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes -or- I am the parent of a child with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes. {I/he/she} was diagnosed {X} years ago. Living with diabetes is a daily balancing act that requires multiple devices to measure blood sugar and administer insulin. It is never easy and while the tools available are good they certainly can be better. Innovative diabetes devices are not an abstraction in my life, they are the means of staying alive and better tools will help {me/my child} live a longer and more productive life. .


The state of diabetes innovation is accelerating, as we move to more useful devices such as artificial pancreas and mobile devices that allow people with diabetes to integrate and manage their health with information from multiple diabetes tools the FDA will need facilitate bringing these innovations to physicians   and patients.

The status quo that devices are in use two to three years in other markets is unacceptable. The FDA should plan to use the pre-submission to bring the USA back to a position of leadership in seeing safe and effective devices come to market.

Thanks you for the opportunity to comment.

{your name}

cc: {your Congressperson & Senators}


*****
Sharper T1 comment with specific guidance language

Hi my name is {your name here}. I live in {town state}. I have been living with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes -or- I am the parent of a child with {Type 1 / Type 2 / LADA} diabetes. {I/he/she} was diagnosed {X} years ago. Living with diabetes is a daily balancing act that requires multiple devices to measure blood sugar and administer insulin. It is never easy and while the tools available are good they certainly can be better. Innovative diabetes devices are not an abstraction in my life, they are the means of staying alive and better tools will help {me/my child} live a longer and more productive life.  

As a diabetes patient in the United States, I am disappointed that innovations that could help my care team prescribe better self-care tools are available in other nations but not here. This is particularly concerning when these devices are designed in the USA. I fear that that gap between the introduction of innovative tools elsewhere and in the US is increasing not decreasing.

The FDA should proactively use the pre-submission process to close the gap between better care everywhere else and less innovative care in the U.S.  To do that the FDA needs to bring consistent regulatory practice to the pre-submission process and the process requires sufficient transparency so that it does not appear to work as a “black box”. Yet this draft guidance document itself is not completely clear. In one case it says the FDA does not view pre-submission responses to “decisional or binding on the agency.” Later the document says {specify page/line numbers in the draft guidance document, please}, “Modifications to FDA’s feedback will be limited to situations in which FDA concludes that the feedback given previously does not adequately address important new issues materially relevant to a determination of safety or effectiveness.”

Industry needs regulatory clarity to safely speed effective life saving devices to market. Pre-submissions should be a tool to facilitate that end.

Thanks you for the opportunity to comment.

{your name}

cc: {your Congressperson & Senators}

August 30, 2012

The FDA Comment that Got Away... or Maybe Not

I like to see the DOC represented on FDA dockets that impact living with diabetes with comments. I think living with and self managing diabetes gives  patients insights into care that only patients know. So when a FDA docket get by me without my seeing it I am disappointed at the lost opportunity. One such lost opportunity was the Draft Guidance on Mobile Medical Applications. The docket was open this time last year.

I had a very pleasant chat with one of the FDA media specialist and she said that, yes the docket is closed but comments can still be made. Obviously comments will not have the same value to a close docket. So this is what I will send, late. Very late.

Consideration of the Regulation of Mobile Apps and Diabetes Care

The FDA has proposed guidance for the regulation of mobile medical apps. The draft is significant to people living with diabetes, in no small part this is because the FDA makes numerous specific references in the draft to diabetes care. Clearly then the agency sees diabetes as an area where mobile medical applications bring vale. The FDA Draft specifically speaks to diabetes care and blood glucose testing with strips, the analysis of information and an app controlling an insulin pump. 

Areas of the FDA draft where I think there may be a concern for people with insulin dependent diabetes.
  • The draft does not create a regulatory path for applications that process information from all the different devices people with diabetes use daily.
  • The draft reaches beyond mobile by suggesting regulation cloud based applications, if they are viewable on mobile devices. 
  • The draft is not clear about the distinctions between logging and analyzing data, particularly from the perspective of diabetes logging. 
  • Good apps are needed to improve quality of live. Failure to regulate in a timely fashion is a public health risk.

Multiple Devices
Effective care for people living with diabetes, particularly type 1 diabetes (YT1D), balances a variety of diverse things. Blood sugar is influenced by food, insulin and activity. Beyond the absolute level of blood sugar a trend, up or down, and the rate of that change also has an impact on diabetes management decisions. Different devices help people assess each of these different aspects of living with diabetes. The vast majority of the time T1D patients take self management actions independently based on data from multiple devices based on the training they have received from their health professionals. 

The draft says, “The FDA plans to address in a separate issuance mobile medical app intended to analyze, process, or interpret medical device data (electronically collected or manually entered) from more than one medical device.” This is particularly significant for the diabetes community. As mentioned above people with diabetes use multiple devices routinely throughout everyday to analyze how to manage diabetes. We use blood glucose meters, continuous glucose sensors (CGM), insulin pumps and carbohydrate food indexes. So while this draft makes specific examples of individual diabetes care apps, the integration of information from the multiple devices mentioned in the draft into one app is specifically excluded from the guidance. 

I see the next significant increase in the improvement in the quality of life for people living with diabetes coming from this integration of diabetes data with mobile devices. I see an increased amount of time in target rages and decreases variability in blood glucose through the integration of diabetes data from multiple devices. The fact is each device is used for only a part of the balancing act that is life with type 1 diabetes. Patients continually juggle blood sugar levels, the direction of change in blood sugar, insulin carbs and activity. An effective diabetes management app will consider the same multiple sources of information that people balance now. This draft specifically precludes applications that interpret data from more than one device. That exclusion maintains a status quo of regulatory uncertainty in the development and commercialization of tools for better diabetes self management.  

Artificial pancreas projects are being developed at a number of research facilities and health care firms. They will rely on data from CGM to control insulin pumps. The advanced logic of these devices may well be processed in mobile devices. These systems are in development and their commercialization will depend on the Agency being prepared to consider them as apps that interact with multiple devices. Yes the Agency is developing AP guidance. 

Low Glucose Suspend, a stepping stone to artificial pancreas, is available in virtually every market but the Untied States. However industry could not bring it froward for regulatory consideration in the USA because the FDA was slow to develop LGS guidance to evaluate it. The Agency should avoid following that unfortunate precedent, specifically where a lack of multiple device mobile medical app guidance inhibits AP.

Cloud
Cloud based diabetes software offers great potential for housing and considering data collected from multiple diabetes devices. The draft attempts to define what constitutes a regulated mobile medical application. In doing so they include applications that, “can be executed (run) on a mobile platform, or a web-based platform, or a web-based application that is tailored to a mobile platform but is executed on a server.”

This seems to allow regulation of cloud based computing platforms as mobile devices because the user has mobile access to output from that cloud system. That seems to be an excessively broad inclusion of essentially all cloud based systems as mobile. However in another section of the draft the FDA notes that it was previously determined that, “it would be impractical to prepare an overreaching software policy to address all the issues related to the regulation of all medical devices containing software.” It seems that reasoning should be applied to the cloud as a software containing entity. The attempt to regulate cloud based software, that can be seen on a mobile device, is also impractical. 

Log
The draft makes the distinction that apps that log general health and wellness information not intended for treatment are not regulated. In diabetes there is not a distinction of logging general health and for treatment. Further the distinction between logging and analyzing logged information is not clear. Many people with diabetes log blood glucose information as there is no manipulation of the values, the same values are simply visually represented. The display of that information as a table or a graphic such as chart should viewed similarly as displaying log information. Charts are simply a means of viewing logged numbers. A chart is not an analysis. This is particularly true when the device that an app connects with, such as a blood glucose meter, may already provides charts of the logged data.

Some devices are coming to market that do preform rudimentary analysis. For example some blood glucose meters now identifying blood glucose trends. The display of that information to an app is simply a second screen.  As such that second screen should be viewed as an accessory to the original approved device and not an independent regulated device. 

Failure to Regulate
The proposed guidance states, “The FDA believes that this subset of mobile apps pose the same or similar potential risk to the public health as currently regulated devices if they fail to function as intended.” It is significant the Agency considers the risk of a lack of devices. The agency should expand on that  logic. Yes, there is a risk if devices are not available and that lack of a devices is a potential public health risk. 

The FDA should consider the risk of a lack of devices stemming from regulatory uncertainty as urgency to develop the regulatory frame work for devices that can improve the quality of life and even possibly save lives.

Therefore I see the lack of diabetes apps as a public health issue.  So too is the lack of guidance for integrating multiple devices in an app. Consider for example that the diabetes community has mourned numerous children and teens who have died in the recent years ‘dead in bed.” Most likely due to extended over night hypoglycemia. These deaths should be considered as the outcome of the Agency failing to act to bring tools like low glucose suspend into the regulatory structure here in the United states. In that context the Agency should consider the lack of guidance for apps that “analyze, process, or interpret medical device data (electronically collected or manually entered) from more than one medical device” a public health risk. 



Possible form letters form this. 
Warning My Spelling May Vary!


The Honorable (You Congressperson or Senator here)
(Their address)
Washington, DC Zip

Dear (You Congressperson or Senator here),

The FDA is currently in the process of finalizing guidance for industry on how they will regulate Mobile Medical Applications (see http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm263280.htm.) I (my child) live(s) with diabetes. 

Effective care for people living with diabetes, particularly type 1 diabetes (YT1D), balances a variety of diverse things. Blood sugar is influenced by food, insulin and activity. Beyond the absolute level of blood sugar a trend, up or down, and the rate of that change also has an impact on diabetes management decisions. Different devices help people assess each of these different aspects of living with diabetes. The vast majority of the time T1D patients take self management actions independently based on data from multiple devices based on the training they have received from their health professionals. 

The draft says, “The FDA plans to address in a separate issuance mobile medical app intended to analyze, process, or interpret medical device data (electronically collected or manually entered) from more than one medical device.” This is particularly significant for the diabetes community. As mentioned above people with diabetes use multiple devices routinely throughout everyday to analyze how to manage diabetes. We use blood glucose meters, continuous glucose sensors (CGM), insulin pumps and carbohydrate food indexes. So while this draft makes specific examples of individual diabetes care apps, the integration of information from the multiple devices mentioned in the draft into one app is specifically excluded from the guidance. 

I see the next significant increase in the improvement in the quality of life for people living with diabetes coming from this integration of diabetes data with mobile devices. I see an increased amount of time in target rages and decreases variability in blood glucose through the integration of diabetes data from multiple devices. The fact is each device is used for only a part of the balancing act that is life with type 1 diabetes. Patients continually juggle blood sugar levels, the direction of change in blood sugar, insulin carbs and activity. An effective diabetes management app will consider the same multiple sources of information that people balance now. This draft specifically precludes applications that interpret data from more than one device. That exclusion maintains a status quo of regulatory uncertainty in the development and commercialization of tools for better diabetes self management.  

Please connect the FDA and urge them to develop guidance for mobile medical applications that integration and manage the multiple devices diabetes patients use to self manage the condition. 


The Honorable (You Congressperson or Senator here)
(Their address)
Washington, DC Zip

Dear (You Congressperson or Senator here),

The FDA is currently in the process of finalizing guidance for industry on how they will regulate Mobile Medical Applications (see http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm263280.htm.) I (my child) live(s) with diabetes. 

Cloud based diabetes software offers great potential for housing and considering data collected from multiple diabetes devices. The draft attempts to define what constitutes a regulated mobile medical application. In doing so they include applications that, “can be executed (run) on a mobile platform, or a web-based platform, or a web-based application that is tailored to a mobile platform but is executed on a server.”

This seems to allow regulation of cloud based computing platforms as mobile devices because the user has mobile access to output from that cloud system. That seems to be an excessively broad inclusion of essentially all cloud based systems as mobile. However in another section of the draft the FDA notes that it was previously determined that, “it would be impractical to prepare an overreaching software policy to address all the issues related to the regulation of all medical devices containing software.” It seems that reasoning should be applied to the cloud as a software containing entity. The attempt to regulate cloud based software, that can be seen on a mobile device, is also impractical. 

I support practical regulation of medical devices. I worry that impractical regulation may delay life saving advances. I particularly a concerned that innovation created by American firms are delayed from entering the market here due to impractical regulatory rules. The diabetes community has seen such delay. Please contact the FDA and express my appreciation for practical regulation of mobile medical applications but not what the Agency itself has called overreaching.