Very exciting news in my opinion. Compatible with AndroidAPS opened or closed loop. No extra devices to carry. Although the risk increases, so does the reward…but also the risk of unintended consequences.
Would you consider using an insulin pump that can be remotely controlled via the internet or SMS?
0 voters
That may be useful for parents of children with diabetes, but I don’t want anybody to be able to remotely control my pump.
Quite a few times I’ve been at work and my wife, because she’s kept up late some nights, sleeps through alarms and Liam rises too high. It would be great to administer remote boluses…there would have to be some pretty amazing security within the system, though.
Anyone who uses openAPS already uses a protocol that can deliver remote boluses, even if they don’t realize it.
It’s really not fair that I put my vote in. I would not consider using an insulin pump—period.
They developed a long time.
I’m sure it has a secure design
.
If it’s controlled by a smartphone app, the smartphone should be used in a safe way only. No websurfing, no games,…
I say no only because that would be my first response until I knew for sure it was going to be secure. Already there has been talk of the ability to hack medical devices that can be remotely reprogrammed (my mom was hearing that about certain pacemakers; I believe the one she just had replaced was one that could be hacked). My dad’s a big tech guy, so we tend to be extra careful about cyber security.
For me - NO NEVER.
For my son - YOU BET! I would love that feature 
There needs to be some security built into the pump though - like setting maximum basal rates and maximum amounts you can bolus over a period of time.
I understand why some might be hesitant to go with it. After all, if it gets hacked, it could kill you.
But the potential is so HUGE, though! I would love to get my hands on one.
I haven’t quite figured it out.
What would be the benefit for Kaelan? Is it just so you don’t need to carry the PDM around? I would think doing a bolus remotely is dangerous regardless. Even if it is not hacked.
And if you don’t do it remotely, then why not use the dedicated device?
I mean, I can see if for younger kids who are not administering their own insulin, but for older kids and adults who can do it themselves, is the fact that it’s a phone helpful? Is it just not carrying the extra PDM device?
Other than for parents of young kids who can’t yet do their own dosing, my question is - how does it help you over what is currently available, or will be available very soon - a dedicated remote bolusing device like the PDM or OmniPod Dash system. Something that is a dedicated device that needs to be within close proximity and is not internet-connected so there is no worry of a remote attack.
Not looking at open or closed loops, just looking at the original question Bradford posed:
Not counting scenarios for young kids, and not counting the extra device you no longer need to carry, are there any other benefits?
It is all about closed loop control for me: OpenAPS
Ok.
I took the question differently.
Just looking at the question posed which was:
"Would you consider using an insulin pump that can be remotely controlled via the internet or SMS?"
Since it didn’t mention loops in the question, just the internet controlled device.
I guess I assumed that the title was included in the question 
I am worried about the hacking potential. But OPenAPS is such a great concept.
What if someone steals your phone and figures out your password? Or you lose your phone? It’s not just hacking that is a problem.
That’s why I answered no.
In the current arrangement, someone needs to either hack my pod/PDM device, and be within close proximity to me, or get my PDM and be very close - 4 feet.
In the new Dash system, it’s blue-tooth, so they still need to be close.
With the internet enabled thing, somebody that is anywhere in the world could be delivering insulin to you while you sleep.
Um…I think I’m gonna give that one a miss.
That’s what I mean by hacking: the big worry.
I could totally see some hackers getting a high by killing people through hacking their insulin pump or closed-loop CGM. There is that potential.
@Michel, without going into the details of openAPS (or AndroidAPS), suffice it to say that while yes, there IS a theoretical hacking potential, it’s not like Homeland – there are a lot of details you need to know about a person in order to be able to actually log into openAPS and remotely issue a bolus that you can’t just hack into like an ordinary website. So if I were, say, the president or something – yes I’d be very worried about these types of systems. But for the ordinary person (especially a child) using such a device, I think the hacking risk is very very low. And there are safeguards already programmed into the pump that you cannot manually override – such as a maximum bolus within a given amount of time, a maximum basal rate, etc.
I’m not sure how the protocol would work if you’re using a phone though. Presumably there is a different level of security involved in that – but that some of the same commercial encryption systems might then be available to you.
Maybe I’m overestimating the safety and underestimating the risk. I guess I just always consider the possibility that, for instance, the teachers at school could accidentally enter his BG reading as carbs into Bolus Wizard, that Samson could somehow butt-dial a bolus for himself, that someone could miss a decimal place on a bolus request or that his site could be ripped out and it could take a while for someone to notice, or his pump battery could die. Given that, to me the safety is really just bout the inherent slow onset of insulin combined with my constant monitoring on CGM… I have him in daycare that is a 3 minute drive away in part precisely because of these risks – so I can get to him and take him to a hospital if he had some kind of crazy insulin overdose or rush to fix his pump or give him an injection if his pump stopped delivering insulin.
For a person monitoring themselves, I can see additional risk associated with phone-based bolusing because a person can get distracted and then if no one else is monitoring them, they could become impaired before they can remedy the problem. But still, I don’t think this risk is worth staying up nights for.
In reality, anything is hackable. OpenAPS (as @TiaG mentioned) has built-in safeguards. That being said. If someone was dedicated enough–they could hack it. Also, they could probably hack the braking system in your car, your nest thermostat to ransom, or simply deactivate the fan in your computer so it burns up. These instances are obviously low, but not zero. Risk vs. Reward, I’m guessing none of these risks would cause us to not use the technology, but maybe I’m wrong.
I agree with both of you. I am excited about the Dana RS. But I do keep in mind hacking as a risk. In my business we hold a lot of customer data, and hacking is a daily way of the life around me – in the same way as, when you walk around a big city, you keep a sharp lookout on all conditions around you at all times, that’s how I am about hacking
I agree entirely.
Allowing an internet enabled device to have remote control of bolus capability is an unacceptable risk to me. Any possible benefits would not even enter into the equation.
