First Automated Insulin System With 1-Year Sensor to Debut
A new partnership had led to the development of the first-ever automated insulin delivery (AID) system that incorporates a 1-year glucose sensor.
Sequel Med Tech, LLC and Senseonics have teamed up to feature the 1-year implantable Eversense 365 continuous glucose monitor (CGM) as a component of the twiist AID, which was cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in March 2024. In May 2024, the FDA deemed the Eversense to be compatible for use with insulin pumps, as are other CGM brands.
The twiist AID is approved for people aged 6 years or older with type 1 diabetes. However, the Eversense indication is for those aged 18 years or older, so that applies to the system as a whole.
The Eversense sensor is implanted subcutaneously into the upper arm by a healthcare professional, with the 1-year rechargeable transmitter worn above it. The sensor requires a once-weekly fingerstick calibration. The twiist insulin pump is reusable for up to 3 years, with a 300-unit reservoir that is replaced every 3 days with infusion set changes.
The twiist AID system is the first to directly measure the volume of microdosed insulin. The system is powered by the twiist Loop algorithm, which was based on the open-source Tidepool Loop. It automatically adjusts basal insulin delivery based on real-time readings from the sensor and predicted glucose levels.
The twiist system is set to be available in select areas of the United States during the second quarter of 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
7 minutes ago
- Forbes
How CPAs Should Speak To Clients As Crypto Adoption Accelerates
CPAs need to be educated on crypto to better advise clients CPAs have been discussing crypto for years, but given the rapidly (and positively) changing regulatory and policy environment it seems a good time to revisit what might sound like a straight-forward question; how should CPAs approach clients about cryptoassets? While in the past CPAs could have reasonably advised clients to minimize exposure to crypto since the regulatory environment was so uncertain, bankruptcies such as FTX dominated the headlines, and price volatility seemed ingrained into the asset class. Over the last 12-18 months, however, those narratives have changed significantly, with several developments making the crypto conversation between advisors and clients much more nuanced. Positive momentum on the legislative front at the federal and numerous state levels, the proliferation of spot crypto ETFs, the relaxation of previous strict language around including crypto into 401 (k) plans, the comprehensive repayment plans announced by the FTX estate, and the successful IPO of major stablecoin issuer Circle have all contributed to a more optimistic for crypto as 2025 continues to roll forward. Despite these developments, including the actions taken by the OCC and FDIC to allow more institutions to engage with crypto operations, the tax and accounting outlook for crypto has yet to significantly shift. Let's take a look at a few things CPAs need to keep in mind when discussing crypto with clients as positive momentum continues to accelerate. Given the nearly continuous flow of positive headlines around cryptoassets and the increased frequency with which investors of all sizes are allocating funds to said assets CPAs might very well be speaking with clients who fear missing out on these returns. That said, the investing adage that past success does not indicate future performance holds equally as true for crypto as any other asset class. For example, bitcoin has traded as low as $70,000 in 2025 prior to rebounding back about $100,000 beginning in May 2025; volatility remains an embedded part of the crypto ecosystem. For CPA clients seeking to integrate cryptoassets as part of a treasury allocation, accepting cryptoassets for payment purposes, or seeking to advise external clients whether crypto is a good fit for operations the pressure to invest in crypto can be significant. A responsibility of CPAs across the board is to make sure that any and all clients interested in crypto are only investing in these assets if the assets are well understood, and are a good fit for the business model of the firm. Despite the positive changes that have permeated into the cryptoasset sector the tax ramifications of these the fact remains that taxes are an obstacle to wider utilization of crypto for business purposes. Virtually every single transaction, transformation, or exchange that involves cryptoassets will create a tax reporting and potential tax payment obligation, and this has not changed even as the usage and adoption of crypto continues to accelerate. This is especially true for individuals that engage in higher volume trading or business activities, as several changes in particular will impact businesses using crypto. Specifically, changes that are related to IRS code section 6045 and 6050I, including the pivot to a universal wallet tracking methodology, are set to complicate the accounting for crypto transactions and gains. With further changes coming to the marketplace beginning January 2026, and while DeFi broker regulations (with an effective date in 2027) have been sidelined for now, the tax conversation around crypto is far from over. CPAs are already trusted as business and tax advisors, and especially as it is connected to crypto the value that can be added to a client via improved tax information is difficult to overstate. An often repeated issue and statement that can arise with the onboarding of cryptoassets is the perception that internal controls are less important since underlying blockchains are usually perceived as immutable and unhackable. Even if the blockchain itself has proven itself resilient and impervious to hacking attempts the multitude of hacks and data breaches that have occurred in the cryptoasset sector should serve as a reminder that internal controls are always important. Specifically the recent data breach at Coinbase should be illustrative to potential users and investors in crypto; even one of the most highlight regulated and well regarded institutions in the crypto sector suffered a data breach due to social engineering attacks on certain employees. For smaller institutions or entrepreneurs looking to gain exposure to crypto the importance of establishing and improving internal controls around cryptoassets and crypto policies should be an imperative. CPAs are well versed in assisting clients in the establishment and improvement of controls and control frameworks, and the importance of controls around crypto is no different. Crypto continues to make inroads across the economic board, and CPAs need to be well-prepared to discuss these issues with clients now and going forward.
Washington Post
26 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Video shows dolphin calf birth and first breath at Chicago zoo. Mom's friend helped
CHICAGO — A bottlenose dolphin at a Chicago zoo gave birth to a calf early Saturday morning with the help of a fellow mom, in a successful birth recorded on video by zoo staff. The dolphin calf was born at Brookfield Zoo Chicago early Saturday morning as a team of veterinarians monitored and cheered on the mom, a 38-year-old bottlenose dolphin named Allie. 'Push, push, push,' one observer can be heard shouting in video released by the zoo Saturday, as Allie swims around the tank, the calf's little tail fins poking out below her own. Then the calf wriggles free and instinctively darts to the surface of the pool for its first breath. Also in the tank was an experienced mother dolphin named Tapeko, 43, who stayed close to Allie through her more than one hour of labor. In the video, she can be seen following the calf as it heads to the surface, and staying with it as it takes that first breath. It is natural for dolphins to look out for each other during a birth, zoo staff said. 'That's very common both in free-ranging settings but also in aquaria,' said Brookfield Zoo Chicago Senior Veterinarian Dr. Jennifer Langan in a video statement. 'It provides the mom extra protection and a little bit of extra help to help get the calf to the surface to help it breath in those couple minutes where she's still having really strong contractions.' In a written statement, zoo officials said early signs indicate that the calf is in good health. They estimate it weighs around 35 pounds (16 kilograms) and stretches nearly four feet in length (115-120 centimeters). That is about the weight and length of an adult golden retriever dog. The zoo's Seven Seas exhibit will be closed as the calf bonds with its mother and acclimates with other dolphins in its group. As part of that bonding, the calf has already learned to slipstream, or draft alongside its mother so that it doesn't have to work as hard to move. Veterinarians will monitor progress in nursing, swimming and other milestones particularly closely over the next 30 days. The calf will eventually take a paternity test to see which of the male dolphins at the zoo is its father. Zoo officials say they will name the calf later this summer.
Forbes
38 minutes ago
- Forbes
Musk Follows Harvard In Biting The Hand That Feeds
Elon Musk and Harvard Both Bite the Governmental Hand that Feeds Them From an early age, children are taught essential lessons: do not play with fire, do not pet strange dogs, and if one cannot swim, stay out of the deep end. Another timeless rule—often forgotten by those in positions of immense wealth and influence—is this: do not bite the hand that feeds you. This lesson, while simple, has profound implications in the real world. It applies just as readily to billionaires and institutions as it does to children on a playground. Yet recent actions by both Elon Musk and prominent academic institutions—most notably Harvard, but also Columbia, MIT, and others—suggest that even the most successful individuals and organizations are capable of ignoring foundational wisdom. Harvard set the tone. Amid growing political scrutiny and a shifting cultural landscape, the university has drawn intense criticism over its handling of campus protests, particularly those involving slogans such as 'from the river to the sea.' The administration's decision to defend even the most controversial speech—widely viewed by many as antisemitic—has triggered investigations and jeopardized billions in tax-exempt status and government research funding. This raises a critical question: is this truly the hill worth dying on? Is preserving the right to controversial protest slogans worth risking Harvard's institutional future? It is doubtful that most students and faculty would knowingly trade funding, grants, and prestige for this fight. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has now followed suit—this time turning his attention toward President Donald Trump, with whom he has launched a high-profile and personal feud. What makes this move especially striking is that President Trump is not a distant figure or a fading influence. He is once again sitting in the White House, wielding executive authority over regulatory agencies, defense contracting, and infrastructure initiatives—all areas that directly affect Musk's companies. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI have flourished in part because of government partnership. SpaceX alone holds multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. Tesla has benefitted from years of energy subsidies and EV tax incentives. Picking a fight with the sitting president—regardless of personal conviction—puts this entire ecosystem at risk. And again the question must be asked: is this battle worth the damage? Whatever principle Musk may be defending, the consequences extend far beyond himself. Shareholders, employees, and retail investors—many of whom placed their trust and savings in his leadership—are the ones left exposed. The parallel between Harvard and Musk is striking: both have been immensely successful, aided in large part by government funding, favorable regulation, and public goodwill. And both have, for different reasons, chosen to confront the very institutions and leaders that have helped sustain their growth. There is precedent for how this ends. Jack Ma, once the most powerful entrepreneur in China, famously criticized the Chinese government. The backlash was immediate and absolute. His companies were dismantled. His IPO was cancelled. His wealth and influence evaporated almost overnight. Even in less authoritarian systems, the lesson holds: those who antagonize the systems that support them may not survive the consequences. While Musk's personal net worth has dropped from nearly $450 billion to approximately $300 billion, the impact is more symbolic than practical for him. But for millions of investors, employees, and stakeholders, these battles matter. Market volatility, regulatory backlash, and reputational risk all come with tangible financial costs—costs borne not just by Musk himself, but by those who have trusted and invested in his vision. The same applies to Harvard and peer institutions. Their leadership may believe they are standing on principle, but the price of alienating government agencies and key financial backers could reshape the long-term trajectory of these universities. The erosion of public trust, the loss of bipartisan support, and the potential withdrawal of federal funding pose existential threats. Leadership—whether in business or academia—requires more than conviction. It requires judgment, timing, and the discipline to separate personal ideology from institutional responsibility. Founder-led companies often outperform when leaders are focused, visionary, and measured. But when ego replaces strategy, the consequences can be swift and severe. No one is demanding absolute political alignment or silence in the face of controversy. No one is asking Elon Musk to wear a MAGA hat. But his recent actions have been so volatile, so self-destructive, that investors may soon be tempted to hand him something else entirely—a MEGA hat: Make Elon Great Again. In today's polarized environment, the margin for error has narrowed. And for those who owe much of their success to public support—whether in Silicon Valley or the Ivy League—biting the hand that feeds is not just unwise. It is unsustainable. ---------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
