Discovering Blood Chemistry: Simplifying Testing with Compact Devices

  • Thread starter Thread starter WCOLtd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blood Chemistry
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility and challenges of developing compact devices for comprehensive blood testing. Participants explore the potential for such devices to simplify the process of obtaining various blood test results, including glucose, iron, and other elements, without the need for traditional laboratory methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express curiosity about the possibility of compact devices that can test for multiple blood components easily, suggesting that current methods are cumbersome and time-consuming.
  • Others highlight the complexity of blood testing, noting that many tests require trained personnel and specific procedures that may not be easily replicated in a compact device.
  • One participant mentions that while blood glucose monitors are common, expanding this technology to test for other substances like iron and lead would be more complicated and costly.
  • Concerns are raised about the interpretation of test results by individuals, questioning whether laypersons could accurately respond to potentially critical health information.
  • A participant discusses the potential benefits of affordable compact devices in developing countries, emphasizing their role in facilitating quicker diagnosis of serious diseases.
  • Another participant references the Theranos scandal, indicating that while there is interest in advancing blood testing technology, significant challenges and risks exist in achieving reliable results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that while there is potential for compact blood testing devices, significant technical and interpretative challenges remain. Multiple competing views exist regarding the feasibility and practicality of such devices, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific testing methods, the variability of blood composition, and the potential for higher error rates in compact devices compared to traditional lab testing.

WCOLtd
Messages
108
Reaction score
1
I have this curiosity about how easy or difficult it has to be to find out everything that is in a person's blood. Through all the tools we have available today, would it be possible to find out what is in our blood? From TSH to blood sugar, to cholesterol, isn't there a simpler way of finding out what a person's levels are than going to the hospital, having your blood drawn and waiting a few days? Why can't devices that allow us to check our blood sugar also test levels of iron, lead and calcium and whatever else? Is it possible to do all these blood tests on a compact device?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Sure, your GP, family doctor, or whatever it is where you live, they can take a blood sample and give a detailed analysis of the sample.
That takes trained people to do their stuff though and it takes time, we don't have star-trek tri-recorders yet.
 
Because of the prevalence of type I & type II diabetes, there are a maqny brands of available blood glucose test kits (require finger prick) and even wearable monitors that check blood sugar. Most of these devices are expensive, so people do not run out and buy them for fun.

But. More importantly, are tests for TSH every day necessary for a large number of people? And most especially if you got results could you interpret them correctly? Probably not. How about creatinine, or potassium? Would you respond correctly to some result with otherwise dire consequences?

My answer to those questions is: no. Which is the real reason those kinds of devices are not commonplace. Some do exist, at least experimentally.
 
WCOLtd said:
Why can't devices that allow us to check our blood sugar also test levels of iron, lead and calcium and whatever else? Is it possible to do all these blood tests on a compact device?

Testing for blood sugar usually involves putting blood on a little strip that has been impregnated with chemicals which react with glucose. I guess you could have strips which have different chemicals on different areas to test for other things, but this is more expensive, more complex (for both the strips and the detector), and requires more blood.
 
WCOLtd said:
I have this curiosity about how easy or difficult it has to be to find out everything that is in a person's blood. Through all the tools we have available today, would it be possible to find out what is in our blood? From TSH to blood sugar, to cholesterol, isn't there a simpler way of finding out what a person's levels are than going to the hospital, having your blood drawn and waiting a few days? Why can't devices that allow us to check our blood sugar also test levels of iron, lead and calcium and whatever else? Is it possible to do all these blood tests on a compact device?

Much of blood testing is done in an indirect manner, which can involve many different types of complex procedures. The specimen must often be manipulated and may need different control measures- it can get laborious, lengthy and very exacting, multiple procedures may be required. Thyroid testing usually involves 2 separate assays for T3 and T4, and even the methods and scale range is dependent upon the particular lab that is testing and the specimen itself changes the procedure. Heck, some labs have their *secret* recipe dyes for staining slides (another diagnostic method is simple light microscopy). Though, testing for iron levels is more straightforward, when I was pregnant they often pricked my finger during visits and a nearby machine give results on the spot. Also, a blood sample from one area of the body does not guarantee that the composition is uniform throughout the body at that moment. The composition can vary and depend on other factors (like time of day, intake of food/fluids, etc.).

If it were actually possible to place some methods of testing on one compact device: An affordable compact device like this would make testing for deadly diseases like malaria, sleeping sickness, and ebola in third world countries much more accessible and affordable. It is not uncommon for travel time, self-denial, affordability, and many other reasons to put off a person even when they are very, very sick (in any country, really). But, if dispersed heavily enough that most of these people had at least a community or familial access to the devices, then positive results from the device would most certainly motivate them to seek treatment. I recently watched a documentary where a young mother did not seek treatment until after at least a week of watching her infant display signs of sleeping sickness, he was near death upon arrival. Any disposable device like this will have a much higher error/failure rate than a lab, which carries a liability so risky that most westernized nations would not even bother, but if it is the only real option to save lives, then I can see it being valuable in this case. It would allow for a quicker intervention of deadly diseases (increasing survival chances), which prevents transmission and make it easier to identify more exact locations of outbreaks in an area - if used for that alone, could save hundreds of thousands of people all over the world each year. I would rather these people receive such a device first. I have the time to wait. Too many do not. If it were remotely easy to make some types of blood testing compact, then we would see it being used in areas such as this (there are a lot of people working on these problems).
 
Fervent Freyja said:
Though, testing for iron levels is more straightforward, when I was pregnant they often pricked my finger during visits and a nearby machine give results on the spot.

Indeed. That's exactly what they do when testing my iron levels when I donate blood.
 
It should be noted that one of the big scandals in the biotech industry is around a start-up company, Theranos, that aimed to do just what the OP suggested—develop a technology that could run hundreds of diagnostic tests on a single drop of blood. The company raised a ton of venture capital and began a partnership with Walgreens to sell its tests to customers. However, amid scrutiny that http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2110977, Theranos has more recently faced allegations of fraud and federal investigations over whether its technologies actually work:
Theranos promised the world cheap, painless http://www.wired.com/tag/diagnostics/ taken from a single drop of blood. Those promises have been cast into shadow by allegations in the Wall Street Journal and other news outlets that the company’s tech does not work. The Theranos saga has stirred up a bunch of attention, so it was only a matter of time before the feds came knocking.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/theranos-investigated-fraud-weird-private-company/

So there are definitely people interested in improving blood tests, but doing so may be more difficult that one might think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WCOLtd

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
11K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
325K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
Replies
8
Views
2K