This work is part of a course where we are investigating ‘History of Human and digital’ by mapping histories of a technological artefact.
Writers : Baishnabi Monger & Sweta Bisht
Writers : Baishnabi Monger & Sweta Bisht
How Technological Evolution of Medical Devices shaped the Healthcare Policy in the US
A historical perspective on Blood Glucose Monitoring devices
Concept Note
“Reading between the Devices”, dives deep into the idea of the technological evolution of diabetes monitoring devices shaping the healthcare policy of the US government across several decades. The artefact chosen is in the form of a booklet and appropriated in the image of written policies and “how to use” manual guides that accompany the devices to the homes. To paint an overall picture of the landscape, a visual mapping across timelines is also presented.
The ubiquitous technology transcended the healthcare system a few decades ago, giving access and agencies to individuals at homes to mitigate life-threatening emergencies. It, however, comes with a considerable cost of maintaining and upkeep, prompted and promoted by the market agenda to stay relevant. Given this, Diabetes is a chronic and rampant disease that affects young and old and comes with a colossal monitoring dependency on the emerging tech. This complex idea of having technology other than entertainment gadgets at home was intriguing to uncover and historicise its evolution.
While rummaging through the history of innovation, diabetes monitoring devices quintessentially opened up discourses on public healthcare policy of the US government. The idea with these visual artefacts is to attempt at deciphering the history of Diabetes- the diagnosis, control (insulin) and monitoring to make connections to the present.
The artefacts glean essential information from different sources and reckon how the US public healthcare policies made the monitoring devices and the devices made the public healthcare policies in the US. Some of the questions that were asked while navigating through the historical references that informed our studies are-
Why was it necessary for these devices to emerge the way they have? What value add did these changing technologies bring to the table?, How did these devices enter the homes in the 1980s?, What contribution did the Great Depression offer to policies and current state of affairs?, Were the policies pro-people, companies/manufacturers or the government itself? Why is it that the drugs are expensive even after decades of manufacturing the first insulin? How have the policies evolved with technological advancement?
A few answers were staring right at our faces while the others were connected with the policies of the State that may or may not have made the monitoring devices. After the two major World events; World War 2 (1939–1945) & The Great Depression (1929–1930s) things didn’t quite go back to where they were. History accounts for the clinical bureaucracy in the great Britain post-war and the neoliberal ideological surge after the great depression in the USA determining the fate of diabetes monitoring devices among many others [1].
What has changed since then??
The evolution of self-care monitoring technology over several decades have changed the way Govt and Private companies aid self-care management at homes. Are they really aiding care at home? That is the question.
By 2012, the New York State declared Diabetes to be the most epidemic diseases plaguing the entire country. [2] The current state of affairs in the Public Healthcare domain in the USA, which is the existing remnants of the infamous Great Depression in the 1930s have given the Market Forces an undue foothold in this sector. Even the efforts of former President, Obama’s Affordable Care Act, 2010 hasn’t been able to rouse the system from its deep capitalist slumber to make a significant contribution to the life of many diabetic patients despite several ongoing attempts. What is the possible cause of it?
About the questions above, digging into the relationship between the changing milieu and government policies demanded our attention. The juggernaut of a few companies conspiring to dodge the patent systems while monopolising its content over twenty years gave way to the spiking cost of the devices. [3] The non-transparency of the US government’s policy favouring these companies created a conducive environment to exert their power on the people, who are already troubled by the insurance sharks.
Step Forward
Exponential data that these devices gather have pushed innovation at a dizzying speed urging people to fit their budget and care at the hands of these technological companies.
The data collected from these devices have taken a step forward and formulated policies to discard information asymmetry in Soda industries like Pepsico. The US government and FDA have demanded the proportion of sugar in the drink to be mentioned distinctly on the label of the drink signalling and informing people about their intake. [4]
This Sugar Policy is one of the cases that positively impact the public in the USA that could directly reduce the consumption of sugar while maintaining health in retrospect.
References
[1] Moore, Martin. 2019. “Introduction: Managing Diabetes, Managing Medicine”. Ncbi.Nlm.Nih.Gov. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK545880/.
[2] “New York City Diabetes ABC Profile 2011–2012 | Research Projects | Diabetes | CDC”. 2019. Cdc.Gov. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/research/modeling/states/newyork.html.
[3] Shure, Natalie, and Natalie Shure. 2019. “The Insulin Racket”. The American Prospect. https://prospect.org/health/insulin-racket/.
[4] “Changes To The Nutrition Facts Label”. 2019. U.S. Food And Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/food/food-labeling-nutrition/changes-nutrition-facts-label.
