Unmitigated gall

Unmitigated gall

To be honest we’re not sure why we continue to write about these morons at Nemaura Medical. Maybe it’s because they threatened to sick their lawyers on us, and we just can’t resist the chance to expose them for what they really are. Momma Kliff did not raise her son’s to be afraid especially when we have the facts on our side. As she said many times people with nothing will scream the loudest those who have the facts on their side don’t have too.

Check out the latest outrageous very loose with the facts claim made by the makers of the way cool whiz bang worthless sugarBEAT® – this comes their latest press release;

“Earlier this year Nemaura announced that following discussions with various healthcare insurers, it was planning head-to-head comparisons with one or more major incumbent CGM devices. The aim of these studies was to position sugarBEAT® as a cost-effective, flexible alternative to marketed invasive CGM, allowing continuous glucose monitoring on days the user chooses, and therefore, we believe, reducing the overall cost burden to users and healthcare insurers alike. Today, the Company reported early results comparing data between sugarBEAT® and a major incumbent CGM device, demonstrating sugarBEAT® accuracy comparable to the incumbent CGM device, using a single finger stick calibration. Further details can be viewed on a report published on the company’s website at: https://nemauramedical.com/publications/”

Being curious we clicked on the link and then took a look at this “study” called “Management of Type 2 Diabetes using non-invasive CGM”.

According to the presentation;

“To establish whether use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) a few days a week or month could lead to the same long term clinical outcome in terms of reduction in HbA1C and improved quality of life, as continuous wear of a CGM for up to 14 consecutive days at a time. The study would verify anecdotal evidence in literature based on intensive but intermittent glucose monitoring using finger prick testing.”

Ok let’s stop here for a moment as perhaps you are scratching your head as we were when we read that last line. “The study would verify anecdotal evidence in literature based on intensive but intermittent glucose monitoring using finger prick testing.” We had to read that a few times and even now after several reads it makes even less sense than the first read. So let’s see if we’ve got this straight, they are comparing a CGM to a conventional BGM when they are claiming that the established CGM’s Dexcom and Libre are too expensive.

The very next slide states;

“Invasive CGMs such as the Abbott Libre® and Dexcom® can be used by persons with Type 2 diabetes though the sensor wear time is up to 14 days and therefore the costs are currently commensurate with the 10-14 day sensor life. sugarBEAT® is a daily wear sensor and so the cost per use is limited to the cost of a single day sensor.

The use of intensive finger-stick testing on non-consecutive days is considered to resemble the use of a CGM on non-consecutive days. It is on this basis that it is postulated that sugarBEAT® has the potential to provide a superior mode of measurement, and tool with which to manage Type 2 diabetes, a condition which constitutes approximately 90% of the total population with diabetes.”

First someone should explain to these geniuses that cost per use is the equivalent to cost per day of the Dexcom or Libre. To explain it simply so these idiots get it let’s say the Dexcom sensor costs $60, therefore. It’s cost per day is $6 while Libre assuming a price per sensor of $50 would have a cost per day of $3.51 and just for grins and giggles since they are comparing a CGM to a BGM figure the cost per strip to be  50 cents and that 4 tests per day would be $2. Simply put if they are looking at a true cost comparison cost per day is the most accurate way to do this. Comparing the cost of a 10-day sensor to a single test strip is not an apples to apples cost comparison.

The next paragraph is priceless as they “postulated” they could do a better job than “intensive” BGM usage. Now we hate to break the news to these guys, but numerous real studies have already demonstrated the value of CGM. This is the reason CGM is becoming the standard for glucose measurement and why BGM is dying a slow painful yet profitable death. Simply put this is not news to anyone with a working brain cell but obviously is news to the folks at Nemaura. Draw your own conclusions as to what this says about the folks who did this “study”.

The next two slides review the benefits of intensive finger stick monitoring and is followed by this earth-shattering self-serving statement;

“With sugarBEAT® it may be possible to provide a CGM to the majority of persons with Type 2 diabetes at an affordable cost point.”

Frankly we aren’t sure whether we should be laughing, crying or both. Listen we’ve seen lots of bullshit in our day, but these guys are approaching the pinnacle in bullshit.

The next slide has to be seen to be believed as they are claiming their way cool whiz bang worthless sugarBEAT® is more accurate than what we aren’t sure. The slide states:

“Comparison of accuracy in terms of %MARD shown over 10-14 hours use per day. Finger prick taken with Accu-chek® blood glucose meter, on a minimum of 8 times and maximum 12 times per wear period / day.

Results indicate accuracy of sugarBEAT® comparable to one of the major incumbent CGMs.”

They conclude the following;

“There is compelling evidence from a number of studies suggesting Type 2 diabetes may be managed by CGM usage on non-consecutive days, leading to clinically significant outcomes.

sugarBEAT® is ideally positioned to cater for the Type 2 Diabetic population given it allows monitoring on non-consecutive days, making it an affordable solution.

sugarBEAT® accuracy is comparable to at least one major incumbent invasive CGM.”

To wit we say this is complete and utter crap with hype that would make Livongo blush. Hey at least the Livongo platform has proven it can work. They may play fast and loose with their revenue recognition method but the platform itself when used by a member as designed does work. Seriously we encourage you to see this bullshit for yourself which is why we made the sure the hyperlink to this “study” was active.

This presentation has more chutzpah and flaws than matzo balls in Momma Kliff’s matzo ball soup which was damn good. (Recipe available upon request)

It will be interesting to see what the company and their lawyers do now. Boys either put up or shut the F up and stop with this nonsense. Just remember that we are from that great city of Chicago and will bring a gun to a knife fight.