@Minty_One: $50 on ebay isn’t unreasonable. Having worked in the medical device field, near expiration is a non-issue, but I do wonder where they came from.
@airteluser: i think you’re making good points, but to the wrong audience. Non-diabetic athletes who are spending money to see how their body reacts to fueling & workouts aren’t in need of education to not eat a burrito at 10PM. They are likely to know pretty well the broad consequences of poor food choices, and even the day-to-day consequences. The data they’re looking for is much more nuanced, and for those seeking the last couple percent of performance gains, can make a real difference. You can certainly argue that for many, that money is better spent elsewhere for the same or better gains.
As for the economics of CGM’s, i’d love nothing more than if affluent athletes decided that a CGM was the best training tool since the power meter. Nothing drives prices down (in the long term) for new technology like high demand. Look at what happened with power meters. Right now the medical market for CGM’s is small, compared to that for training equipment. And it’s highly regulated. Both drive prices up, a lot.
If a significant sports-focused market emerged for CGMs, it wouldn’t take long for the medical companies to introduce sensors marketed to athletes. Initially, they’d be the same sensors as for the medical market, because it’s cheaper to just rebrand what you already have. Later, (if the market grows) there would be some sport specific versions created, free of the medical device regulation infrastructure, and thus cheaper. If the market gets big enough, there will be competition, and thus lower prices.
Ultimately, diabetics will figure out how to use the sports focused version for their own use (the key features for athletes and diabetics align nicely), and when the out-of-pocket cost for the sports version is lower than the insurance copay, there will be a mass-migration to these devices. This will benefit everyone.