The Peter Attia Drive - #54 – Kevin Sayer, CEO of Dexcom： Continuous glucose monitors – impact of food, sleep, and stress on glucose, the unmatched power of CGM to drive behavioral change, and the exciting future of CGM

00:00:00.000 Hey everyone, welcome to the Peter Atiyah drive. I'm your host, Peter Atiyah. The drive

00:00:10.880 is a result of my hunger for optimizing performance, health, longevity, critical thinking, along

00:00:15.940 with a few other obsessions along the way. I've spent the last several years working

00:00:19.660 with some of the most successful top performing individuals in the world. And this podcast

00:00:23.620 is my attempt to synthesize what I've learned along the way to help you live a higher quality,

00:00:28.360 more fulfilling life. If you enjoy this podcast, you can find more information on today's episode

00:00:33.000 and other topics at peteratiyahmd.com. Hey everybody, welcome to this week's episode

00:00:43.360 of the drive. I'd like to take a couple of minutes to talk about why we don't run ads on this podcast

00:00:48.580 and why instead we've chosen to rely entirely on listener support. If you're listening to this,

00:00:53.820 you probably already know, but the two things I care most about professionally are how to live

00:00:59.060 longer and how to live better. I have a complete fascination and obsession with this topic. I

00:01:04.760 practice it professionally and I've seen firsthand how access to information is basically all people

00:01:09.920 need to make better decisions and improve the quality of their lives. Curating and sharing this

00:01:15.100 knowledge is not easy. And even before starting the podcast, that became clear to me. The sheer volume

00:01:20.380 of material published in this space is overwhelming. I'm fortunate to have a great team that helps me

00:01:25.800 continue learning and sharing this information with you. To take one example, our show notes are in a

00:01:31.600 league of their own. In fact, we now have a full-time person that is dedicated to producing those

00:01:36.260 and the feedback has mirrored this. So all of this raises a natural question. How will we continue

00:01:42.440 to fund the work necessary to support this? As you probably know, the tried and true way to do this

00:01:47.980 is to sell ads. But after a lot of contemplation, that model just doesn't feel right to me for a few

00:01:54.200 reasons. Now, the first and most important of these is trust. I'm not sure how you could trust me if I'm

00:02:00.400 telling you about something when you know I'm being paid by the company that makes it to tell you about

00:02:05.080 it. Another reason selling ads doesn't feel right to me is because I just know myself. I have a really

00:02:11.280 hard time advocating for something that I'm not absolutely nuts for. So if I don't feel that way

00:02:16.460 about something, I don't know how I can talk about it enthusiastically. So instead of selling ads,

00:02:21.580 I've chosen to do what a handful of others have proved can work over time. And that is to create

00:02:27.420 a subscriber support model for my audience. This keeps my relationship with you both simple and

00:02:33.480 honest. If you value what I'm doing, you can become a member and support us at whatever level

00:02:39.460 works for you. In exchange, you'll get the benefits above and beyond what's available for free.

00:02:44.300 It's that simple. It's my goal to ensure that no matter what level you choose to support us at,

00:02:50.040 you will get back more than you give. So for example, members will receive full access to the

00:02:57.520 exclusive show notes, including other things that we plan to build upon, such as the downloadable

00:03:04.240 transcripts for each episode. These are useful beyond just the podcast, especially given the technical

00:03:09.180 nature of many of our shows. Members also get exclusive access to listen to and participate

00:03:15.940 in the regular ask me anything episodes. That means asking questions directly into the AMA portal

00:03:22.660 and also getting to hear these podcasts when they come out. Lastly, and this is something I'm really

00:03:28.000 excited about. I want my supporters to get the best deals possible on the products that I love.

00:03:32.800 And as I said, we're not taking ad dollars from anyone, but instead, what I'd like to do is work

00:03:37.360 with companies who make the products that I already love and would already talk about for free and have

00:03:43.220 them pass savings on to you. Again, the podcast will remain free to all, but my hope is that many of

00:03:51.000 you will find enough value in one, the podcast itself, and two, the additional content exclusive

00:03:57.900 for members to support us at a level that makes sense for you. I want to thank you for taking a moment

00:04:02.960 to listen to this. If you learn from and find value in the content I produce, please consider

00:04:08.480 supporting us directly by signing up for a monthly subscription. My guest this week is Kevin Sayre.

00:04:14.140 Kevin is the executive chairman of the board of directors and the president and CEO of Dexcom.

00:04:18.900 During his tenure with Dexcom, he's been instrumental in leading the development of new technology,

00:04:23.260 including the G5, G4, and of course now the G6. If you've followed me for some time,

00:04:29.440 you probably know how much I love my Dexcom glucose monitor. I consider it to be one of the

00:04:34.520 two most important devices that I wear, and I wear it pretty much all the time. I would say

00:04:39.920 300 to 330 days a year I am wearing my CGM. It's offered me great insight, not just into the obvious

00:04:47.920 things like how does eating food X impact my glucose, although I still continue to learn a lot

00:04:55.440 through that lens, but also the impact of exercise, sleep, and stress on mitigating those things or

00:05:02.160 amplifying those things. For example, one of the things I've noticed much more recently is the role

00:05:09.260 that cortisol in the evening plays on my glucose. In this interview with Kevin, we talk about a bunch

00:05:15.280 of things. We talk about how we met and his path to becoming the CEO of Dexcom. We talk about how the

00:05:19.640 CGM technology works and what makes the G6 what I conceive to be is the best model yet. We talk about

00:05:26.240 the challenges of working in the US healthcare system after getting CGM insured. We talk about

00:05:30.660 developing an even smaller, more user-friendly, less costly product while maintaining performance

00:05:35.700 and accuracy. Kevin does a really good job of explaining his framework on what are the

00:05:41.880 constitutive elements that would drive a CGM device. You'll see where this performance and

00:05:47.100 accuracy become important. We talk about what's the next thing on horizon for patients with type 1

00:05:51.160 diabetes, the accuracy of the G6, software improvements for people with type 2 diabetes,

00:05:56.460 and the remarkable benefits of real-time feedback that drive behavioral change for anybody using this.

00:06:01.660 Talk a little bit about Dexcom versus the competitors. There's basically three large companies

00:06:06.220 that do this, Dexcom being one, Abbott being the other through the acquisition of Libre, and Medtronic.

00:06:12.000 And we talk about less invasive options that people have asked about a lot. Talk about the cost,

00:06:16.920 why you need a prescription, when there might be an OTC, that's over-the-counter option.

00:06:21.960 We talk about smartwatch integration, Bluetooth, exciting collaborations and partnerships,

00:06:26.660 and future places for CGM, such as in the hospital. We talk about lessons learned through failures

00:06:30.880 and successes. Before we get to this, I want to read a disclaimer that Kevin's team has asked me to

00:06:35.340 read, and that's of course because he's the CEO of a publicly traded company. This presentation

00:06:38.720 includes forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements included in this presentation

00:06:43.040 are made as of September 21st, 2018, that was the date of the interview, based on information

00:06:48.060 currently available to Dexcom and are subject to various risks and uncertainties, and the actual

00:06:53.180 results could differ. Dexcom undertakes no obligation to update such statements. With that said,

00:06:58.340 and without further delay, please enjoy my conversation with Kevin Sayre.

00:07:01.600 Kevin, how are you? I'm great. Thanks so much for making time. I don't often come into somebody's

00:07:10.200 office, take them away from their work, and ask them to sit down and talk. You know, our discussions

00:07:15.160 have been so interesting over time. I was thrilled when you asked me to do this. I can't imagine what

00:07:20.240 journey will go on as we talk for the next while, but I'm really looking forward to it. So speaking of

00:07:25.280 which, I think I've told the story a couple of times to some friends, how we met, but it's sort of

00:07:29.460 funny to me because anyone who knows me knows I'm, when I'm on an airplane, I'm there to mostly just

00:07:34.660 work, and I don't really talk to people. Occasionally, if somebody talks to me, I'll

00:07:39.020 certainly be polite, but I'm really focused. And so, of course, it was about three years ago,

00:07:43.780 you and I met on an airplane. The funny part to me is how it happened, which is I'm taking a little

00:07:49.880 break from work to look at one of my 12 favorite watch sites, and you look over. Do you remember what

00:07:56.260 you said? Oh, I do. I took my headphones off. I said, are you sure you want one of those?

00:08:01.720 You know, and I'm the same as you, Peter. I get on a plane, and my wife claims I am the most

00:08:05.820 unfriendly individual in the world because I sit down, I wait for that moment when I can open up

00:08:11.360 my computer, I'm hooked to Wi-Fi, I start working, and I'm thrilled. Or I just take a break from life

00:08:16.820 and watch something on the screen. So we hadn't said a word, and all of a sudden, you open up to watches,

00:08:21.860 and I go, I've got to talk with this guy. We've got to look at these things and make sure he picks

00:08:26.660 the right one. It was a very fun meeting, and then neither of us worked the rest of the flight.

00:08:31.800 Yeah, but the best part is we talked about watches for an hour, and then we're about an hour outside

00:08:37.480 of New York. And at some point, we literally hadn't talked about anything but watches, but I just sort

00:08:43.300 of said, oh, are you heading home or heading to work? And you said, oh, you're going to work. And then

00:08:47.020 it was like, what do you do? And then this is the part I don't think I told you. I had only heard

00:08:51.800 about Dexcom two months earlier from a guy named Jake Kushner. I don't know if you know Jake, but

00:08:56.480 Jake is a pediatric endocrinologist. Yeah. And so I was having dinner in Houston with Jake a couple

00:09:00.960 months earlier, and he was showing me his data on his kids with type 1 diabetes that are walking

00:09:06.420 around with hemoglobin A1Cs of 5.6. And he's saying to me, it's a game changer. We're done with

00:09:12.880 telling kids with T1D that 7.5 is normal. The new normal is 5.6, and we're having no hypo

00:09:18.700 events. And he goes, but we can't do it without this thing called CGM. And I was like, tell me

00:09:25.200 more. And he said, so we use this thing. I think it was the G5 that they were using at the time. And

00:09:29.280 I remember sort of thinking about it and going, God, that sounds so interesting. That's on my list

00:09:34.100 of things I need to learn more about. And then I ask you what you do, and this is what you – they

00:09:39.540 couldn't have made it up. No. And this is all we do here at Dexcom. And we do see remarkable

00:09:44.960 results in type 1 diabetes with these kids and with everybody who uses the technology.

00:09:50.360 Well, I've been wearing one now for almost three years. I think after that flight, you said, well,

00:09:54.040 you got to come in one day and we'll shoot the breeze. And within like a week, I was wearing one,

00:09:58.420 and I've never stopped. Well, and I also use you as a critique because if we give Peter technology,

00:10:03.780 you're a very, very good critic and very objective versus our diabetes patients who,

00:10:10.040 while they love the technology, it's life-saving for them. For you, you kind of look at it from

00:10:14.460 a different perspective. And I use observations like that all the time when I talk to engineers.

00:10:20.040 And as we design future products, I love different perspectives on things. And

00:10:23.960 one of the things in our culture that is very unique, we are very curious as an executive team

00:10:30.580 by nature. And curious is the word that I would use. We love to learn, explore. We all wear these

00:10:36.280 things. We all wear the new ones. In fact, I'm supposed to get a prototype of a new one next week

00:10:41.340 that's going to communicate with some other devices. It's really fun. And it does allow for

00:10:47.400 learning. It keeps your mind going very quickly. We put Peter on our G6 technology right as it was

00:10:53.220 approved. Yeah. Well, actually, I mean, I was on that G5X about a year ago, which was almost a G6 minus

00:10:59.580 the calibration issue. That's right. So now let's go back a little bit. What were you doing

00:11:03.840 before Dexcom? So if you go back in the history of my career, I started in diabetes in 1994. I met

00:11:11.820 an individual named Al Mann, who's one of the most remarkable entrepreneurs ever. And he had designed

00:11:18.040 the insulin pump that is now Medtronic Diabetes. And we had a glucose sensor there. That's where I saw

00:11:24.300 the first one. And I worked in diabetes there as the finance person and very much a business person

00:11:30.380 till we sold the company to Medtronic. I stayed on with Medtronic for a while. And we launched the

00:11:35.380 first continuous glucose monitor at MiniMed and Medtronic back in those days. And then I decided

00:11:40.800 I didn't love big company. So I left and I found a couple of other jobs that were interesting, but I

00:11:48.100 didn't love them. My job right before this company was culturally fascinating. It was a Singapore

00:11:52.640 headquartered Singapore public company, and I was head of the U.S. operation and the chief financial

00:11:59.400 officer of the entire company. But we had operations in China, Japan, and all over Europe. At the same

00:12:05.460 time, I joined the Dexcom board. My dear friend and associate from MiniMed, Terry Gregg, was the CEO

00:12:11.800 here. And as we wrapped our other company down, as it became obvious we weren't going to be a U.S.

00:12:17.760 presence, the opportunity came to move to San Diego and go to work at Dexcom. So I went home after our

00:12:25.740 board meeting in December of 2010 and told my wife, I think we're leaving our dream house here in North

00:12:31.780 L.A. We're going to go have another adventure. And we moved down here in June of 2011, and it's been

00:12:38.700 just a tremendous ride ever since. Now, between the time you spent at Medtronic, where you were a

00:12:44.240 finance guy, but obviously, as the listener is going to learn soon, you have pretty good technical chops

00:12:49.260 on this stuff. But you were working on CGM then, and you probably just by osmosis absorbed a lot of

00:12:54.560 it. But between what sounds like the mid to late 90s, and then your return here via Dexcom, were you

00:13:00.860 still in a CGM space? Nope. My position right after Medtronic was with a specialty laboratory

00:13:07.040 that ran esoteric lab tests and did that for a little while. And my company right before here,

00:13:14.080 the Singapore-based company, was a drug-eluting stent business. And we had a proprietary drug

00:13:20.160 formulation and a proprietary polymer that was bioabsorbable. So when the drug-eluting stent

00:13:26.800 was expanded into the vessel, both the drug and the polymer would absorb for better safety rates.

00:13:32.260 But getting a stent approved in the United States was too big of a deal for a company as small as

00:13:37.960 ours. Well, especially when Abbott, Medtronic, J&J, and Boston Scientific, the four of them own the

00:13:43.880 entire market. The law of four. Medical device companies, you see technologies, you start with

00:13:49.380 a couple, they swell up to 10 or 11, and then you go back down to three or four.

00:13:54.360 So this is amazing. I didn't even know this about you. So once we're done with this podcast,

00:13:57.600 when we go grab coffee, we'll talk about my previous life where I had to know everything

00:14:01.960 about drug-eluting stents. I spent two months interviewing 150 interventional cardiologists

00:14:08.120 around the country when I was at McKinsey, trying to learn everything about this for our client,

00:14:12.960 which was obviously, I can't say who, but it was one of those four. And it was at the reintroduction

00:14:17.740 because remember there was a period of time when they had to go back to bare metal and then they

00:14:22.080 had to reintroduce. So fascinating topic. So basically you came back to this company and

00:14:27.860 what I assume you were bringing that was of most value was you understood medical devices,

00:14:32.380 you understand durable medical goods, you understood the law of healthcare. It wasn't that

00:14:38.300 you were the world's expert on CGM.

00:14:40.480 No, I'd been on the board and I really will never be the world's CGM technical expert. These guys here

00:14:45.920 are spectacular, but what I did bring, or at least I believe is very much that curious factor I talked

00:14:53.740 about and a very open and aggressive mind to grow our business. This company has gone through tremendous

00:14:59.000 change. I came in for a couple of reasons. A, Terry is exactly 10 years older than me and I was supposed

00:15:05.240 to succeed him at Medtronic and that one didn't work out the way we wanted to. And when I joined the

00:15:10.760 board, that was something we'd talked about early on. And I know, knew all these guys, I knew the

00:15:16.600 technology very well. I knew how bright they were. And I just thought it would be a tremendous

00:15:20.680 opportunity. Let's take another step back just for folks to give them a basic, because there's so many

00:15:26.580 questions I get asked about this. In fact, I, I went out to Twitter a week ago and said, you know,

00:15:30.920 I was going to be sitting down with you and hey folks, if you have questions, shoot them over. And I was

00:15:34.740 really amazed at how many people ask questions. And there are a lot of questions that I could answer

00:15:39.480 truthfully, but there are some that I can't. So I'm going to try to assimilate the question.

00:15:43.120 So I think the first question that I get asked a lot is, how does this actually work? In other

00:15:47.700 words, why is it that even if you don't look at CGM, if you just talk about point of care glucose,

00:15:52.300 why is it that with one prick of blood, you can measure something like glucose, but you can't

00:15:57.700 measure a number of other things? What is it about measuring glucose that enables that?

00:16:01.780 Well, our technology is designed to measure glucose only. And the way our sensor works

00:16:06.300 is there is a small wire that's thinner literally than a human hair or as thin as a human hair

00:16:12.020 that's inserted subcutaneously into your tissue. That wire is, is very special metal alloys and it's

00:16:19.120 coated with a number of membranes. That wire and those membranes then generate an electrochemical

00:16:26.780 signal that goes up into a transmitter that sits on top of the sensor. You, you, you've worn it,

00:16:32.400 you know what it looks like. And inside that transmitter is an algorithm that converts that

00:16:36.980 electrochemical signal to a glucose value. So that is the only thing that we have done with

00:16:43.100 this technology. There probably are other analytes we could take and develop enzymatic layers that

00:16:50.540 would sense that type of chemistry. In fact, you and I have talked about some of the things that

00:16:54.500 might be meaningful and useful over time, but we've grown so quickly. We just, we haven't addressed

00:16:59.720 those. But I think the key is it's, it's an enzymatic reaction. And I think that's the point

00:17:03.940 I try to make to folks is if there's an antibody that can be linked to it, if there's an enzymatic

00:17:08.580 reaction that can be done without multiple washes, that's the kind of stuff you can measure in point

00:17:13.300 of care. Whereas many things that are complex, you can't, you know, you can't measure, you know,

00:17:17.960 the number of lipoproteins or something like that because that requires NMR. It's a very separate

00:17:22.040 test. You can't even measure insulin. You're either going to do it through a radioimmune assay or

00:17:25.740 you're going to do it through multiple washes, something called an ELISA-based assay where you

00:17:29.940 have to rinse and repeat and stuff like that. So out of the gate, there are some things that can

00:17:34.700 be measured in a drop of blood, which again is different from what you guys are doing. And,

00:17:38.640 you know, glucose is one of them, electrolytes, lactate, beta-hydroxybutyrate, which you and I

00:17:42.680 have talked about a lot. So, I mean, I guess let's go back and so how deep is that, that little

00:17:48.560 filament that sits inside the patient? It goes in at a, at an angle. Now it sits in probably a half

00:17:54.220 inch under the skin. The insertion technology of the sensor, it goes in with a needle and the needle

00:17:59.880 comes out. There is so many engineering hours into the insertion of that sensor. And one of

00:18:06.660 the first things you notice about the Gen 6 product, it's an automated insertion. The needle is in your

00:18:11.780 skin, as the engineers tell me, less time than it takes a hummingbird to flap its wings a couple of

00:18:18.040 times. So it's in and out very quickly. So a patient doesn't feel it. And then the sensor rests in

00:18:23.680 the subcutaneous tissue. And you really don't feel that sensor at all.

00:18:28.060 I think I've commented to you probably the very first time I tried this, which was on the prototype

00:18:32.340 that with the G5, of course, you are the one as the patient who is responsible for the velocity

00:18:38.260 with which that needle goes in. And if you're a human being, which we all are, I think we're just

00:18:42.780 hardwired to do it a little slower than we'd like because it's so, you know, it's a little

00:18:46.900 uncomfortable. Look, it wasn't the most uncomfortable thing in the world, but it's...

00:18:49.980 If you're doing it, it's scary.

00:18:51.480 Yeah, yeah.

00:18:51.900 It is not an appealing thing. You look at that, our old device, which was very functional,

00:18:56.600 but you look at it and it truly looks like, I don't know if I want it. And we've had patients

00:19:02.500 send emails saying, I've stared at this thing for six weeks and I don't dare put it in my body.

00:19:08.040 We're not having that reaction with the new one.

00:19:10.260 Yeah. And I had that reaction with a number of my patients because as you know, a lot of the

00:19:14.860 patients in my practice, though they don't have type one or type two diabetes, like me,

00:19:19.420 they understand the value of even people with, you know, quote unquote, normal glucose levels

00:19:23.960 being able to track this. But occasionally folks would freak out and they'd say, you know,

00:19:28.420 we'd go through the, all the process of getting them a three month supply and they, you know,

00:19:33.180 they've already paid for it because of course their insurance isn't going to cover it. They don't

00:19:35.920 have diabetes, but then that needle just sort of scares them away. Of course, the other thing that

00:19:41.240 we speculate, or maybe it's not a speculation, maybe it's just a given is the lack of trauma

00:19:46.420 that's involved with the G6 insertion seems to make for a much more accurate device, which the G5

00:19:53.220 itself was remarkably accurate, but I don't know if it's anecdotal, but in my hands, at least the way

00:19:58.360 I track it, the G6 seems to be so accurate. It's almost hard to believe. There's so many elements

00:20:05.080 that go into the performance of a sensor. I believe the insertion process does make it more accurate,

00:20:10.000 but that G6 sensor has new membrane technology versus the old one. There's also a new algorithm.

00:20:17.800 In fact, one of the things that has made our company successful during this G6 project in

00:20:23.420 the middle of it, our algorithm engineers came and they said, we have a better way to do this,

00:20:28.560 but it's going to delay the project if we do it. We looked around the room and said,

00:20:33.260 but if it's going to be that much better, let's delay it and put it in. And so we did. And we made

00:20:39.080 that decision. That algorithm has helped tremendously with the accuracy. So all those

00:20:44.100 things together, the easier insertion, the new membrane technology, the new algorithm. I think

00:20:50.640 even the fact that it's flatter on the body and doesn't pull as much as is helpful as well.

00:20:55.180 I think on three occasions over two plus years, my kids kicked out my G5, you know, just, and

00:21:04.800 including once on the very first day I put it in, which really bummed me out when I picked up my son

00:21:09.660 and he obviously just not playing around. He horsing and he kicked me and the thing came out.

00:21:14.040 Whereas the G6, yeah, it's a lower form factor. And obviously this is only going to continue as the

00:21:20.640 evolution of these things goes. So you talked about a couple of other things that could be measured

00:21:25.440 besides glucose. Are there any that you think are commercially viable? There's lots that could be

00:21:31.860 interesting, but do you think there's anything else that's commercially viable?

00:21:34.620 We don't know yet, but we have so many markets to take our technology to now that we need to

00:21:42.440 capitalize on this opportunity and take care of the people that we serve and open the other markets

00:21:47.660 where glucose can just be a wonderful tool that we really haven't done that much of yet.

00:21:53.420 So approximately how many patients in the United States have type one diabetes or what

00:21:58.080 percentage of the population? How do you think about it?

00:21:59.540 About a million. Anything you read in the literature says anywhere from 1.3 to 2 million

00:22:05.760 in the United States. A common number is 1.5. And there are another 1.5 million people

00:22:12.000 with type 2 diabetes who intensively use insulin. So they are really in need of a continuous glucose

00:22:18.840 sensor to manage their health.

00:22:20.680 Now going back to those folks with type 1 diabetes, what percentage of them use one of the commercially

00:22:27.540 available continuous glucose monitors?

00:22:30.000 Most would estimate somewhere between 20% and 30% right now. And again, these percentages have

00:22:35.200 grown rapidly over the past couple of years as we've gotten better and as other products have

00:22:39.280 come to the market.

00:22:40.580 So you and your competitors, and I guess your main competitor is Abbott?

00:22:44.580 Abbott and Medtronic.

00:22:45.880 Yes.

00:22:46.060 The three of you collectively aren't even remotely close to saturating the most obvious market

00:22:51.540 for this product, which is type 1 diabetes.

00:22:53.460 That's right.

00:22:54.520 Again, hard to speak speculatively about what others think, but I assume everybody's also

00:22:59.280 looking at that second group you just mentioned, which is another market, which is the insulin

00:23:03.480 using patients with type 2 diabetes.

00:23:05.720 Yeah, in fact, when Medicare and CMS gave us approval in January of 2017, they approved

00:23:12.840 the use of CGM for intensive insulin using type 2 patients. And that was a step that we

00:23:18.560 really needed. One of the barriers, and it's not really a barrier, but it's very interesting

00:23:24.540 as you grow a business. And one of the fascinating things about our journey here, it makes such

00:23:30.300 common sense. Everybody thinks, well, everybody should just have this. And the insurance companies

00:23:35.660 were very well insured and very well covered, but it's not always easy to get. I was in

00:23:41.320 a state not too long ago, for example, where a patient had to document a certain number of

00:23:48.000 events where their blood sugars went below 50 before they can get a Dexcom, even if they

00:23:53.720 have type 1 diabetes.

00:23:54.840 Which is very dangerous for a type 1 diabetic.

00:23:57.340 Very dangerous for anybody. Yes. And yet, because of fear for spending money on devices and

00:24:04.580 treatments that aren't useful, payers are hesitant sometimes. Not all of them. We get

00:24:10.300 very, very good coverage, but it is cyclical. You know, a payer will cover us very well for

00:24:16.240 a two-year period and they'll look and, man, we've added so many people to this technology.

00:24:20.180 What are we doing? Let's slow it down. So they'll slow it down through criteria.

00:24:24.240 We have a full-on sales team that does nothing but call on those who reimburse for the product and

00:24:31.920 we try and make it as easy as we can. There are trade-offs for price and access and we try and

00:24:38.200 negotiate those things on a regular basis. I believe over time, at least 80% of the people

00:24:44.120 with type 1, and I've said this in public forums, 80% of the type 1 intensive population should be

00:24:49.660 using continuous glucose monitoring. Has there been an economic analysis done

00:24:54.580 ideally independently, but it might be done obviously by one of the companies or more,

00:24:59.880 that does the equivalent of what we would think of as an NNT for a drug trial? So for the listener,

00:25:04.720 an NNT is a number needed to treat. This is an analysis that's not done economically. This is

00:25:10.060 more of a life-saving. So how many patients do you need to treat with a certain drug to save a life?

00:25:14.300 But you can also start to do these things economically. And is there a question of how

00:25:19.240 many patients need to be on a CGM before you either save a life through a hypoglycemic event

00:25:24.740 or maybe a different analysis would be the cost of the CGM versus the cost of the complications

00:25:31.500 from mismanagement? So has any of that been done? We have done some economic models and studies in

00:25:37.380 that area. What we find is the major cost that CGM prevents is exactly what you talked about in the

00:25:43.280 acute setting. They prevent hospitalizations. So you end up with a specific set of patients who are

00:25:49.740 what are often called hypoglycemia unaware, who aren't aware when their blood sugars go low. The

00:25:54.940 CGM gives them alerts and alarms. And our system also alerts and alarms others who give care to those

00:26:01.000 patients to whereby they can be taken care of. That share feature is really one of the most

00:26:06.960 remarkable things we've done here. You could be in Singapore and your wife could be here if

00:26:13.160 you had type 1 diabetes and your blood sugars went low. Your wife would know. And she could call the

00:26:18.080 hotel and wake you up. And we hear stories like that all the time. Does Medtronic's product or does

00:26:22.820 Abbott's product do that? I believe Medtronic's new product does. I believe they do have some sharing

00:26:27.820 capabilities. But I know we pioneered it. We're the ones who got it through the FDA. And it took a lot

00:26:33.880 of effort. So that sharing capability is really good for hypoglycemia unaware. That category, one

00:26:40.820 hospitalization, I've seen numbers ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 for that one hospitalization. But

00:26:47.540 not everybody's hospitalized. We certainly save on the long-term complications of diabetes. And that has

00:26:53.220 been measured historically. And you and I have talked about this with A1C, which neither of us believe is

00:26:58.960 the perfect measure. But in our studies, we see at least a half a point drop over the course of a 12-month

00:27:05.780 period compared to multiple finger sticks. A full point drop for the patients, if you just look at

00:27:10.800 them independently, on continuous glucose monitoring use for a six-month period that is sustained. That

00:27:16.980 drop in A1C leads to reduced costs in the healthcare system. And there are very, you know, well-known

00:27:23.320 economic models to build that out. But here's where the rubber meets the road. A 25-year-old

00:27:28.800 probably isn't generating all those complications yet. And a 25-year-old is with an insurance plan for

00:27:33.920 two years before they move to their next job. And they're on another insurance plan for two years.

00:27:39.940 So we have to do a better job as a company documenting these economic benefits. We run more studies

00:27:45.420 to see how, you know, how much quality of lives improve, to see what we can prevent. We are currently

00:27:53.220 building outcome-type based models to whereby we can, look, we can go into an insurance company or a

00:27:59.820 payer and say, look, here's what we think we can save you if we can put everybody on CGM. But we're

00:28:05.340 creating a new industry here. It's a completely new business. So every day is a challenge like that.

00:28:11.940 And every day there's more thoughts and more things to address along those lines. The Medicare one is the

00:28:18.140 most interesting. I spoke at a conference on a January Wednesday where I told a group of our

00:28:24.760 investors we would not have Medicare approval for 18 months. And we got it Thursday.

00:28:31.280 That makes you look not terribly well informed.

00:28:34.260 That is correct. And the way it was approved, our device talks to a phone or a dedicated Dexcom

00:28:40.620 receiver. The way it was approved for the Medicare patients is they couldn't use the phone app.

00:28:45.620 Yet our Medicare patients are the ones most likely, other than children, to need to share the data with

00:28:54.300 somebody else. It took us, I want to say, 18 months. We finally got the phone use approved for

00:29:01.220 the Medicare patients. When you're creating an industry like that, there are all sorts of hurdles

00:29:06.160 that you run into that you don't contemplate. You just kind of have to react.

00:29:11.340 I mean, I think that's one of the challenges that folks face in this industry in general,

00:29:15.060 which is the policy piece of it is hard because you don't exactly know from a long-term planning

00:29:21.580 standpoint exactly what changes are going to come about. The challenge that you raised,

00:29:25.980 I think is, I'm glad you brought it up because I think it's one of the most misunderstood issues

00:29:31.820 in the US healthcare system. I grew up in Canada and I'm actually not incredibly that impressed with

00:29:37.120 the Canadian healthcare system. I know that's going to make me a lot of enemies out there,

00:29:40.000 but I don't think it's like a panacea. I don't think necessarily Canada is doing it right either.

00:29:43.400 But there's one thing that I think a single-payer system, at least one thing a single-payer system

00:29:48.560 brings over a system that we have in the United States, which is the incentive is aligned between

00:29:54.580 the payer, the patient, the provider over a long-term. It's easier to align incentives because

00:30:01.600 one way or the other, that payer is going to pay. It's pay now or pay later.

00:30:07.060 Yeah, that's right.

00:30:07.620 Which by the way, we were talking about children before we went on the mic and you had great piece

00:30:13.080 of advice, which I'm going to ask of you to share with others. But my brother's advice, which is,

00:30:17.460 my brother has five kids. His piece of advice is pay now or pay later. Pay now or pay later.

00:30:23.080 You can either discipline your kid when they're five or you're going to discipline them when they're

00:30:26.240 older. But this thing with healthcare is if you have that 25-year-old and the difference between

00:30:32.820 them having a hemoglobin A1C of 8% versus 6%, in the next year, it's nothing. It doesn't matter.

00:30:39.280 But in 20 years, it matters beyond words.

00:30:42.220 That's right.

00:30:42.400 And if you as the payer are on the hook for that one way or the other,

00:30:45.780 the economic model becomes so much more straightforward because you don't have the

00:30:50.380 portability of healthcare.

00:30:51.580 That's right.

00:30:52.780 Again, I'm not close enough to this to know if a single-payer system is even something that's

00:30:56.780 viable in the US. It strikes me as politically very unviable, but who knows? That said,

00:31:01.900 it's not what you're dealing with now. So you have a harder challenge to make the case

00:31:05.720 economically, I suppose.

00:31:07.240 No, we do. But again, we're covered by 99, literally 99% of all reimbursement authorities

00:31:13.960 where our coverage is a little spotty still is in the Medicaid programs. We've got several states,

00:31:19.040 but it's still, there's a lot of documentation required. We're covered where it gets difficult

00:31:24.840 is the documentation the patients have to provide or the physicians have to provide

00:31:28.760 and consistency of co-pays and things of that nature. We're also classified as durable medical

00:31:33.840 equipment. So our patients have a co-pay and a deductible, which leads to a very seasonal

00:31:38.920 business for us because in the fourth quarter, most of our patients are maxed out on their

00:31:44.360 deductible and co-pays and they want to buy everything they possibly can.

00:31:47.760 It's like Christmas.

00:31:48.460 It's like Christmas. So from October to the end of December here, it is all hands on deck.

00:31:52.980 That's interesting. What percentage of your patients, I'm guessing it's very small,

00:31:57.840 but do what me and my patients do, which is it's a cash pay business. There's no dealing

00:32:02.520 with insurance. It's directly from, you know, physician writes the prescription and the patient

00:32:05.920 comes straight to Dexcom.

00:32:07.620 Not very many. Again, like you do, we have cash pay patients and everybody in your system uses

00:32:13.100 prescription. It is important for the regulatory folks that I point that out. Not as many as we used

00:32:17.640 to. We used to have a lot of Medicare patients who paid cash.

00:32:19.920 I see.

00:32:20.840 But once Medicare covered, we actually had to refuse the Medicare cash patients

00:32:25.080 because if we took cash Medicare while Medicare covered a device, we were in trouble. And it took

00:32:30.700 them seven or eight months to figure out how we could ship and process this new product code. So we

00:32:37.060 had upset patients for, I don't know, somewhere between six and eight months before we could start

00:32:42.100 serving them properly.

00:32:44.840 The people who don't live in the United States that are listening to this are scratching their heads

00:32:48.600 thinking, what is going on over there? It is a, we have a really complicated healthcare system.

00:32:54.580 Yeah, we do.

00:32:55.420 But look, there are some things that I think it does well. And I think, you know, one of the things

00:32:58.520 it does well is it seems to set up an economic engine that allows for an innovation that I think

00:33:03.000 is hard to do outside of the United States.

00:33:05.020 Oh, I'd agree with that.

00:33:06.360 And I don't think it's a small accident that the disproportionate share of the innovations come

00:33:11.600 out of the U.S. So, you know, kind of going back to some of the technical stuff, you have a

00:33:17.620 partnership, you have a collaboration with Verily.

00:33:19.560 We do.

00:33:20.060 So tell people what is Verily, how does it have, what does that have to do with Google

00:33:22.940 and how did that collaboration come about and how does it work?

00:33:26.120 Well, the way it came about was interesting. Back in 2015, there was a healthcare group within

00:33:32.480 the walls of Google before Alphabet came around and they analyzed technologies where they felt

00:33:38.460 they could develop technology that would make an impact on future products. And they also analyzed

00:33:43.940 disease states where they felt they could use Google's or Google Healthcare's analytic

00:33:49.300 capabilities to develop better care models. Google has made a couple of attempts at healthcare and

00:33:55.620 they came down and met with us and said, look, we've looked at your product. We've looked at what

00:34:01.080 you do. We have a lot of electronics expertise. We have expertise in data analytics and a bunch of

00:34:06.260 other areas. We would like to partner with you. They also told us they were going to talk to other

00:34:10.460 glucose sensor companies as well. We looked at that and said, you know what, this Google is a big

00:34:17.500 company and they do a lot of things. And we looked at their concepts and their thoughts and they looked

00:34:25.300 at the problems different than we do. They look more at miniaturization and size and convenience

00:34:30.580 and the things that consumers look at. Because we as a company, again, serving our population of

00:34:36.920 people with type 1 diabetes, and anybody would tell you this, our core principle has been performance

00:34:42.200 and accuracy. Performance and accuracy, we always want to build the best. We were the first to be

00:34:47.420 connected. But as far as really getting the thing tiny or something that somebody without diabetes could

00:34:53.600 wear, that had not been a focus here that they could wear for fitness. So when they came down and

00:34:58.960 presented this to us, we decided that as an electronics and design partner that we would

00:35:04.780 like to work with them. So after several months of negotiations, we, not several months, a couple

00:35:10.460 of months, we signed up a deal and we're co-developing future products for Dexcom. Those products will be

00:35:16.140 Dexcom sensors. Those membranes and those algorithms that we've developed to make our sensor accurate

00:35:21.220 and perform very well will come from our core technology that we've always developed.

00:35:25.980 The electronic side and some of the communication and the Bluetooth and those other things have been

00:35:31.840 driven by the Verily engineers. That's where they have great areas of expertise. The overall package

00:35:37.700 and mechanical part of the system, we've done together. We've talked about this, Peter. We focus

00:35:42.740 on performance, patient convenience and usability, and then taking cost out of it. We kept all three of

00:35:48.960 those in mind as we did that.

00:35:50.760 Yeah, it seems to me, and I like your framework, right? So let me see if I remember what you said. It's

00:35:54.260 going to be performance, which is how accurate is this thing? End of the day, that's the single

00:35:58.480 most important thing. If it doesn't perform, who cares what else it does? Then the patient

00:36:02.680 experience. How big is it? How easy is it to use? How often do you have to change it? Do you have

00:36:06.580 to separate the sensor from the transmitter? You know, all those things.

00:36:08.600 What does the software look like?

00:36:09.860 Yeah, yeah. And then cost.

00:36:11.800 And then cost.

00:36:12.720 It seems to me, having been fiddling around with this thing for a while, that the step between G5 and G6,

00:36:20.240 you're now on the asymptotic part of the performance curve. There's not a lot of performance

00:36:24.480 gain at this point, is there?

00:36:26.500 There is some performance to gain. Boy, we spend a lot of time studying this and talking about this.

00:36:32.620 As far as just bringing the overall accuracy percentage down, there's not a whole lot to gain.

00:36:37.580 Where there is to gain on the performance side is bringing that curve of performance. You have a

00:36:44.440 bell curve of performance for every sensor, pushing that bell curve in to whereby every experience is the

00:36:49.720 same. Most of them are the same now, and we believe it's very consistent. But that consistency and

00:36:55.160 reliability enables us to do two things. Number one, it enables us to do very sophisticated things

00:37:00.860 with people who want to control their insulin dosage with our sensor, whether through an

00:37:05.900 artificial pancreas system or on their own using our data. But the other thing it enables us to do,

00:37:11.220 if that performs the same all the time, it will enable us to go out to broader markets.

00:37:14.740 Because people won't question or challenge the data. They will see it and go, okay, this is right.

00:37:20.400 This one works. We call it internally eliminating the outliers. And I know every company does this

00:37:26.340 with what they build. And so performance-wise, that's where we're headed there. And those are

00:37:31.540 the things that we look at in our meetings all the time.

00:37:34.180 You know, I don't even know if I told you the story. It's kind of funny. About a year and a half

00:37:37.900 ago, a mutual friend. So it's a friend that I introduced to you, but I won't call him out.

00:37:41.540 I'll keep his identity private. He introduced me to Andy Conrad at Verily. But it was through

00:37:46.440 some completely unrelated, there was a different reason for us to meet. So I'm up there. And I didn't,

00:37:50.840 I, at the time, I just, I either didn't know that you guys had worked with Verily or I just

00:37:54.560 hadn't put two and two together. So I'm sitting in his office and I see these mock-ups of things

00:37:59.380 that look like next-gen CGMs. And I said, Andy, what are those? And he goes, oh yeah,

00:38:04.640 we work with this company called Dexcom. And of course I lifted up my shirt and showed him my,

00:38:08.700 it was at the time it was a G5. And oh my God. I mean, it was, I felt like Dorothy. This was like

00:38:14.500 Oz. I couldn't believe what the future could hold. So going back then from a technical standpoint,

00:38:21.060 because you alluded to what the future could hold, right now you are measuring glucose in

00:38:26.900 subcutaneous fluid. Correct? Yes, that's correct. Not in blood.

00:38:30.220 Not in blood. People need to understand that. So even a relatively lean individual has enough

00:38:34.480 subcutaneous tissue that the risk of using this thing, it's like, is it an issue in kids? Because

00:38:39.840 I've seen some really tiny little kids with type one diabetes. Sometimes it is. And parents learn how

00:38:44.920 to make sure they insert it and that the needle doesn't go into the muscle tissue. There will be an

00:38:50.820 occasional instance where a sensor may go too far in the tissue. And, uh, but by and large,

00:38:56.620 no, it's very successful. There's a meeting in Florida every year, a group called children with

00:39:01.560 diabetes. And look at all the kids who wear this. It's not an issue for children. They do extremely

00:39:07.320 well with it. You know, and I think I'm, I don't know if I ever told you the story, but I was at a

00:39:10.820 swim meet. It was my daughter's swim meet. I had just finished my swim workout at the same pool. So I'm in

00:39:15.360 my bathing suit, finishing my workout as the kids are about to start the meet. And this kid comes

00:39:21.480 over to me and his eyes light up like saucers. Cause he's, he sees that I have a sensor on and

00:39:26.100 he's got a sensor on and he is tiny. He is the littlest kid I've ever seen. And he was like,

00:39:32.400 do you have type one diabetes? And I said, no, why? And he, and he looked, I didn't even realize

00:39:37.840 that what he was looking at. And I said, uh, he said, cause you're wearing the same thing I'm

00:39:40.800 wearing. And I said, Oh, Hey little buddy, let me tell you, I volunteer to wear this thing.

00:39:44.900 That's how cool it is to wear. Oh, that's great. Yeah. He loved it. He loved that there was some

00:39:49.000 adult who was wearing this, who didn't quote unquote have to wear it. But I was like, yeah,

00:39:52.580 we're the coolest guys here. I assure you. One of the most humbling things about this job

00:39:57.860 is when I go out to a diabetes function and meet the children or the adult patients, whoever, who

00:40:05.740 has had this device save their life or change their life the way that it has. They want their

00:40:11.760 picture taken with me. I said, how about we just take care? No, we want you. Nobody wants,

00:40:16.840 needs their picture with me. No, they want to take a picture. They are so gracious. They are so,

00:40:24.240 I know that they're so indebted to our company and it's really why we come to work every day.

00:40:28.380 What keeps us going? We had my favorite meeting ever. An 11 year old young man comes in,

00:40:34.200 we sit down and people come to San Diego on vacation and they come to Dexcom.

00:40:40.440 So we got Legoland, SeaWorld, Dexcom. And parents will bring their kids in and if

00:40:46.380 whichever the executive team is here, we'll take them on a tour of the factory and then we'll sit

00:40:49.960 in a conference room with them because that is the best market research in the world to sit and

00:40:54.160 talk to somebody who uses this each and every day. This 11 year old young man said, I have some

00:40:59.520 questions. And I said, okay. Tougher than any analyst. He pulls like a legal pad out of his

00:41:05.280 notebook, out of his backpack and he has 40 questions. He wanted to know the chemical composition

00:41:11.160 of the membrane 11. And we just looked at him and go, no, we're not going to tell you all those

00:41:17.640 things. But he had thoughtfully written out all these questions and then had several suggestions for

00:41:23.980 us. It's just amazing. And your story, it happens all the time. Yeah. It's, it's really special. And

00:41:30.340 I, you know, I do have a friend with type one diabetes and she did say something to me that I've

00:41:34.520 thought a lot about since she said, you know, Peter, you have the luxury of, if you don't want

00:41:39.880 to wear that sensor for a couple of weeks, you don't have to wear that sensor. She goes, I don't

00:41:43.320 have that luxury. Like, and again, she wasn't saying that to be critical of how much I loved using it.

00:41:47.980 She was just saying like, understand that my relationship with this CGM is different from yours. This is my

00:41:53.740 lifeline. For you, this is just a gain in your health, but it's not necessary for you to,

00:41:59.800 for you to function. And I, I was sort of humbled by that a little bit. And I realized, you know,

00:42:03.980 I can understand why someone who's got type one diabetes has sort of a, a different relationship

00:42:09.300 with this on both extremes. On both extremes. It, it is love a lot of time. It's sometimes hate.

00:42:14.780 And the hate I think is the, I have to do this. I have, I have to have this thing on me.

00:42:19.040 I had two close friends in residency who had type one diabetes and this was back in the wild west. I

00:42:25.360 mean, it was, I couldn't believe how archaic it was and how hard it was for them to manage

00:42:30.200 their diabetes. Cause you know, in a surgical residency, it's very difficult to predict when

00:42:36.940 you're going to eat. Oh yeah. And therefore it's very difficult to predict when you're going to use

00:42:41.680 insulin and which insulin you're going to use. And I remember one of my friends who's now a cardiac

00:42:46.040 surgeon in Minnesota, there would be times when he always had to have a thing of orange juice

00:42:51.460 and candies in the OR next to his pager. And you know, he would hopefully get to the point where,

00:42:57.740 you know, he could say to a nurse while he's operating, Hey, I need some orange juice quickly.

00:43:02.040 And she would bring over the orange juice and tuck the straw behind the mask and let him

00:43:05.980 sip some orange juice or stick a candy in his mouth or something like that. If he was, you know,

00:43:10.280 this was an operation that was supposed to be done in three hours and now it's five hours,

00:43:13.260 that kind of thing. We take for granted in many ways, like what this disease meant before banting.

00:43:18.380 Oh, I don't know how people did it. Well, they did it. They managed and people have lived long,

00:43:25.300 healthy lives, but this tool is so much better than what we had before. And the things that can

00:43:31.140 come in the future, we made an acquisition a couple of weeks ago. The next thing on the horizon for type

00:43:37.120 one diabetes, let me take a step back is to develop algorithms to go with the sensor. Because right now

00:43:42.340 we tell you your glucose value, we tell you your trend, we tell you how fast you're going up or

00:43:46.900 going down. We will give you alerts and alarms based on what's going on, but we don't tell you

00:43:52.780 what to do. And algorithms have been developed for automated insulin delivery that will automatically

00:44:00.660 do things for you. One product that we're partnered with is Tandem's new insulin pump and

00:44:05.780 it shuts off when your glucose goes too low and then turns back on based on sensor signals.

00:44:11.180 And the early read on that product from consumers has been wonderful from patients. But these

00:44:16.500 algorithms are getting more and more sophisticated.

00:44:18.740 Explain for the listener where that product sits. How does it actually work?

00:44:22.540 So there's an insulin pump that is on your body. It's about the size of a good old fashioned

00:44:28.120 pager that you used to carry around in your hand. And there's an insulin cartridge inside.

00:44:32.900 That pump contains software that regulates the delivery of insulin through that insulin cartridge

00:44:39.620 to a small infusion set that is usually placed on your abdomen, a little Teflon cannula that goes

00:44:45.600 under your skin. And the sensor resides another place on your body. And the sensor signal is read by that

00:44:51.740 pump, which then takes all the information about insulin that it knows how much has been delivered,

00:44:58.260 your glucose value, and will determine, at least for this system, if your blood sugars go too low,

00:45:04.860 it turns off insulin delivery for some period of time and then turns it back on when it sees the

00:45:10.680 trend that you're coming back up. Algorithms over time will do more than that. They can regulate your

00:45:16.760 insulin delivery all throughout the day, whether you're high or you're low, and detect things like

00:45:22.620 meals. I mean, this is very futuristic, but there are algorithms that will detect, okay, it's very apparent

00:45:28.580 that Kevin just ate. Let's put some insulin in here and see how it goes. There are algorithms, again, to

00:45:34.440 take care of you more during the nighttime. Because during the nighttime while you sleep, you're not

00:45:39.920 eating and you're not exercising. So there's not as many variables involved. So we acquired one of these

00:45:45.980 algorithms two or three weeks ago just because it's an asset we felt we needed to have and develop.

00:45:52.800 Not everybody uses an insulin pump. Not everyone will have access to that technology. It's not

00:45:57.640 inexpensive either. We think a lot of people will, but we also think we can take these algorithms and

00:46:03.220 apply them to people who use multiple daily injections as well to develop decision support.

00:46:08.600 You know, I always tell the engineers, I want the Staples button. I want the easy button. I want to

00:46:14.740 take a shot and I want to hit something and say, how much insulin do I take? Or I want at 10 o'clock,

00:46:19.640 I want to hit a button that says I'm about to go to bed. What do you predict is going to happen?

00:46:23.960 Those types of things are an engineer's dream, which is, again, why it's so fun to work here.

00:46:30.240 We have chemical engineers, software engineers, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers,

00:46:34.360 packaging, any engineer you could think of. Well, the algorithm guys, and along with the wonderful

00:46:40.400 asset we acquired, are going to look at developing those type of decision support tools to help make

00:46:45.340 this easier for patients to make good decisions. Now, the question becomes, how much benefit does that

00:46:50.640 add to their care? If they only go from 8A1c to 7.8, it's probably not worth it and nobody's going

00:46:57.400 to pay for that. But we think we can build a very strong outcome case over time.

00:47:02.180 But even if you went from 8 to 8, but reduced bad outcomes, like hypos.

00:47:07.420 Yeah, and reduced hypos. Yeah. That oftentimes happens. Your A1c may stay the same, but your time

00:47:12.840 hypoglycemic may go away.

00:47:15.800 That's the thing I was impressed with Jake's data way back, even before you and I met, which was

00:47:20.680 they dropped hemoglobin A1c, I want to say like 2% on average, but they reduced the hypos too.

00:47:27.140 Oh, yeah.

00:47:27.840 And that's the part that, like I remember in medical school, the standard teaching was,

00:47:32.080 you don't care about, the hypers are fine. Yes, you can go to hyper, but the thing that you have

00:47:36.640 to ward against is the hypo and you'll accept a higher A1c to do it. And I think the tide is changing.

00:47:41.620 I think people are understanding that because of how long a person is going to live with type

00:47:46.260 1 diabetes, the microvascular complications are real. And as you probably know, there are data

00:47:51.720 that actually suggest, and I saw this through Jake's work, that better glycemic control in kids

00:47:58.540 when they're young, these are not randomized. So there's an obvious confounder here, but it can

00:48:03.460 predict better intellectual performance in school and stuff like that. Now, again, the obvious

00:48:08.300 confounder there is maybe the kids that have better glycemic control have better glycemic control

00:48:12.980 because of some other variable that's impacting their performance later on, socioeconomic status

00:48:18.860 or the education of parents or the attention of parents. So there's lots of other things there.

00:48:23.020 I don't follow this literature closely, so it's possible that there's actually been a randomization

00:48:26.460 that would allow for determining that. But the other thing, we talk a lot about average blood glucose

00:48:31.960 and instantaneous blood glucose, but another variable that I find very informative is the

00:48:36.580 standard deviation. So every day, I look at my report. I always do the seven-day report. I want

00:48:42.300 to see the seven-day report every day, and that's showing me my average blood glucose for the last

00:48:46.340 seven days and my standard deviation. And then every month or so, I want to see my 90-day trailing report.

00:48:52.400 And you brought up hemoglobin A1c earlier. I'm one of those people for whom hemoglobin A1c is

00:48:57.640 categorically useless because I have beta thalassemia minor. So my red blood cells are very small. They stick

00:49:03.340 around for very long periods of time. My hemoglobin A1c on a blood test generally varies

00:49:07.980 between 5.6 and 6.0. Basically, I'm pre-diabetic on that test. But using CGM for the last few years

00:49:18.420 and calibrating it, because even the G6, I still calibrate every day just to-

00:49:22.960 We left that option in.

00:49:24.220 By the way, that is a very elegant option. That's basically when I took my Libre and threw it out

00:49:28.880 the door. Because I used to use the two in parallel, and I just gave up on the Libre because

00:49:33.860 you couldn't force the calibration. And it was so inaccurate. And you couldn't get real time. I mean,

00:49:38.540 there was just too many problems with it to even discuss here. But using these forced calibrations,

00:49:44.700 I realized this thing's plus or minus 3%. There are many days, Kevin, when it is the exact same number.

00:49:53.100 And I think to myself, this can't be happening. The meter says I'm 88, and I poke my finger,

00:49:58.460 and it says I'm 88. And I'm like, how is that even possible?

00:50:00.740 Yeah, we call that the unicorn.

00:50:02.680 Yeah. But I get a lot of unicorns. Today, before I came here, I did a calibration. And

00:50:08.280 I don't know, the device said 89, and I was 88 or something. I mean, it was staggering.

00:50:12.620 It's an interesting dynamic because you are very focused on accuracy. I would say the biggest

00:50:17.580 benefit of G6 to our users has been the accuracy without the calibrations. We had somebody in

00:50:23.580 yesterday who's been on our product for a very long time, one of our Dexcom warriors.

00:50:28.460 And I asked him how it was going, and he held his hands out to me, and he goes,

00:50:32.280 my fingers have not felt like this for 15 years. And that's how long I've had diabetes.

00:50:37.640 Well, that's another interesting point you bring up, which is when I do my fasts,

00:50:41.960 I'm calibrating twice a day. I'm checking ketones two or three times a day. Just 14 days of that kind

00:50:49.380 of checking, my fingers are all blue.

00:50:52.240 Oh, yeah.

00:50:52.720 And they hurt like crazy. And that's another realization for me, which is think of all those

00:50:57.600 kids, that that is their life.

00:51:00.460 That's right.

00:51:01.560 It sounds like, how big a deal is that? It's really painful. In fact, you start to lose sensation.

00:51:08.040 One day, I was upset about some clinical results I saw, because we were calibrating the sensor

00:51:16.140 with a meter, and it became apparent that the meter was off. So I got my car, I drove to the

00:51:21.920 drugstore, I bought three meters. And I stuck my finger 60 times in a day, 20 times with each of

00:51:28.400 the three meters. And I made my own little spreadsheet, recorded all the meters, recorded the CGM reading to

00:51:33.620 see what had happened. Because in the old days, when you had to calibrate this device twice a day,

00:51:39.500 a bad finger stick would set it off for a while. Now, we have since revised the algorithm to identify

00:51:45.480 a finger stick that we just think is inaccurate, and we'll wait a while and ask for another one if

00:51:50.460 somebody enters them. But it was very discouraging, because we'd submitted a clinical trial to the FDA

00:51:55.260 based on a meter from a large company that we were told was fabulous, and it turned out to be

00:51:59.260 high all the time. And that drives our accuracy level off.

00:52:04.620 Do you have a point of view about which of the commercially available drugstore meters do you

00:52:10.080 find the most accurate?

00:52:11.200 I wouldn't offer that. I have ideas. I think most of them are okay. I would tell you my experience

00:52:16.880 with meters is also about the consistency. So oftentimes, when I'm wearing our sensor and go

00:52:23.740 to check the accuracy, now, I don't enter the calibrations like you. I like to see what the

00:52:27.820 patient is experiencing. But I'll stick my finger twice in a row and get like, some meters, I'll get

00:52:32.820 a big difference. Others, I don't get very much.

00:52:34.820 And do you do two sticks or same blood?

00:52:38.400 I vary it.

00:52:39.180 Okay. So here's a little tip that I've learned, and maybe you've already heard this from patients,

00:52:42.760 but by washing your hands before you do it, then using the alcohol, you can get some false

00:52:49.300 elevations if you have any food on your hands. So if you have just a little, you know, again,

00:52:53.240 like a crumb on your hand can actually raise the glucose. So, and I remember my friend in

00:52:59.540 residency, I don't, again, I'm glad I'm not identifying because I don't want to call him

00:53:02.800 out. I mean, he wouldn't even wash his hands before he'd be poking his finger because he

00:53:06.520 was just like, you know.

00:53:07.920 On the go all the time.

00:53:08.460 Yeah, on the go. It's like, I don't have alcohol pads. I'm just going to poke my finger

00:53:11.540 and, you know, but you know, those little things do, I think, add up to a little bit of benefit.

00:53:15.440 For what it's worth, I guess I can say what I like the most. For glucose, I like the

00:53:18.840 One Touch Ultra. I've switched to that. I used to use an Abbott meter or a different meter by,

00:53:25.440 I think it was by Abbott. And I don't know, I found the One Touch Ultra to be pretty darn good.

00:53:29.460 And I've done the same sort of experience, the thing you've done where I've gone multiple sticks,

00:53:33.160 multiple fingers, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Going back to finish the A1C thing,

00:53:37.480 my 90-day trailing average glucose under these very tight conditions shows an imputed A1C of 4.5 to 5.1,

00:53:47.620 depending on how tight my nutrition is. So in other words, my hemoglobin A1C is a full percent

00:53:55.260 higher. And that's actually posed real difficulties for me when applying for life insurance because

00:54:00.240 they say, you're a pre-diabetic. And I say, I'm not a pre-diabetic. And they say, yeah,

00:54:05.180 but your hemoglobin A1C is 5.8 or whatever it is. And I've had many interesting discussions with

00:54:11.320 the actuaries as I explain the limitations of hemoglobin A1C. But if I could be health czar for

00:54:18.820 a day and wave a magic wand, I would love to have something that meets all of your criteria,

00:54:25.040 right? So it does the performance, it's got the patient, it costs very little. But I really think

00:54:29.460 that if everybody had a CGM on every minute of every day in some completely fantasy-based way where

00:54:35.220 it doesn't hurt, it doesn't cost anything, but they had that data. It just drives such a behavioral

00:54:41.000 change. And I think that that's why the use of CGM, even without a deliberate intervention,

00:54:47.820 superimposed, improves outcomes. Because it is really hard to not pay attention to how activities

00:54:56.800 in your life, mostly food, but not just food, stress. It's amazing what stress can do to your

00:55:01.920 glucose level. I think one of the first insights I remember coming and talking to your team about

00:55:06.020 a couple of years ago was how high nighttime cortisol levels were raising my glucose levels

00:55:12.300 at night. I'd go to bed with a glucose of 90 three hours after eating dinner, and I'd wake up with a

00:55:20.080 glucose of 105. And once I started measuring nighttime cortisol levels by collecting urine overnight,

00:55:27.840 I could sort of correlate this amount of cortisol produced at night to how much that glucose level

00:55:33.660 would rise in the morning. And today I'll tell patients that fasting glucose is not nearly as

00:55:40.240 helpful as people think it is inside of a reasonably physiologic range. So someone who has a fasting

00:55:44.320 glucose of 130, that's a different situation. There's something going on there. But I have patients

00:55:49.320 that get very upset if their fasting glucose is 100 instead of being 90. And I say, it's very difficult

00:55:55.500 to understand what's going on there. That can very easily be explained by cortisol or hepatic

00:56:00.700 glucose output for some other reason that's not a function of insulin resistance. So that's why I

00:56:06.100 just think that these tools are so valuable. And like even yesterday, I was on a late flight coming

00:56:10.260 back from, I was in Chicago, and I just hadn't eaten much. And my flight was delayed. That's the other

00:56:15.880 thing. So I went into like the little store near the gate, and they don't sell anything but crap.

00:56:20.180 I mean, that's basically. Absolutely. Yeah, yeah. And I've already, like there are certain

00:56:25.480 snacks that I love, and they're kind of my comfort food when my flights are delayed. Like I feel like

00:56:30.040 I deserve a treat because I'm stuck in the airport. And I bought one. I bought my treat. My treat is

00:56:36.680 trail mix. I love me some trail mix.

00:56:39.020 Oh, trail mix. Trail mix will spike you as fast as anything you can eat.

00:56:42.120 Yep. So I get on the plane, and I buy the big trail mix because I don't do anything in moderation.

00:56:46.320 So it's got, you know, it's full of M&Ms and raisins and peanuts and little whatever.

00:56:51.680 And I get on the plane, and I'm looking at the bag, and I'm looking at my glucose,

00:56:57.120 and my glucose level's great. And I just decide I'm not eating it. So I didn't eat it.

00:57:02.280 Oh my goodness.

00:57:03.280 But I promise you, if I didn't have that CGM, I would have eaten it. But I just didn't feel like

00:57:07.980 looking at that glucose of, because I know I've done it in the past. I eat that whole bag of trail mix,

00:57:12.240 my blood glucose will be 130, easily.

00:57:14.840 Oh, then that shows what good shape you're in, because that'll get me up to 150 or 160.

00:57:20.000 It'll get me higher. The worst glucose experience I've ever had was in an airport.

00:57:26.720 And I had been with investors all day long, and I had not, my glucose hadn't spiked at all,

00:57:32.980 because when I sit in those meetings all day, I don't eat very much. And I'm in the airport,

00:57:36.940 and I'm in Boston. I say, you know what? I'm going to try something here. The yogurt covered

00:57:43.660 raisins in the little thing where you turn the wheel like the bubble gum machine, got myself a

00:57:50.200 cup of yogurt covered raisins. I think there's some chocolate raisins in it too, and ate the whole

00:57:55.660 little cup of them. And I'm telling you, that was my only ever above 200 glucose spike in my life,

00:58:02.600 and it only took 30 minutes. It just, right up as fast as possible. And it came down very quickly

00:58:09.060 as well.

00:58:10.180 Yeah, and then it overshoots. It probably came down to 60.

00:58:12.320 And then it overshot, and I was, yeah, overshot down in the low 70s, because I'd put so much

00:58:17.900 glucose into my body, that's how my pancreas reacted. But all of our bodies behave differently.

00:58:23.800 We've talked a lot about type 1 diabetes today, and one of our visions going forward is to get into

00:58:29.280 other conditions. And you're certainly a pioneer in this, and really one of our first. We've started

00:58:35.960 doing work in type 2 diabetes. So again, let's paint a picture. We've talked about kids with type 1,

00:58:41.860 adults with type 1 who have to deal with insulin their entire lives or they die.

00:58:45.960 And the device is a love-hate relationship because it always reminds them.

00:58:50.580 Now let's look at somebody with type 2 diabetes. They're my age, 60 years old, may have had type 2

00:58:56.740 diabetes for 5 years. All they do is they go to the doctor, they get some pills, they get a meter,

00:59:01.280 they go home, and nobody tells them what's going on. And they say, you need to eat less and exercise

00:59:05.120 more and take your pills. And after 5, 10 years of this, all of a sudden your A1C's at 11, and what do

00:59:13.200 you do? So we start adding more drugs. And you can turn on the television anytime you want to.

00:59:20.800 And you can see more type 2 diabetes drug advertisements probably than any other

00:59:24.540 pharmaceutical product. Because these drugs are expensive and there is a big population here to

00:59:30.560 be addressed. So we start prescribing other compounds, hoping the A1C will come down. And it might come

00:59:36.340 down a little bit. It might not. And if it doesn't come down enough, we prescribe another compound

00:59:41.680 and another compound and another compound. And some point in time, that patient gets the dreaded

00:59:47.520 information they've got to go on insulin. But type 2 diabetes, I'm not as near as scientific as you,

00:59:53.300 but it's almost not diabetes. It's almost a completely different disorder with all the

00:59:58.120 insulin resistance and all the other things that go on in your body.

01:00:02.240 Yeah. The biggest disservice that I think has been done to this field, this is hyperbolic. I mean,

01:00:06.940 there have been many disservices. It's the fact that we refer to them both as diabetes. Now,

01:00:11.500 I understand why historically that's the case, but you're absolutely right. Type 1 diabetes and type 2

01:00:15.680 diabetes are so different. And I try to be disciplined about always referring to them that way and not just

01:00:21.440 saying diabetes because it really does a disservice to them. What you point out is very important,

01:00:27.400 Kevin, which is that the real problem in type 2 diabetes is that we have fixated so much on

01:00:34.140 just the glucose and not worrying about how we get there. So when you use a class of drugs that

01:00:40.320 increases endogenous insulin production and or when you use more insulin, what you reduce is the

01:00:46.480 glucose and what you reduce are the microvascular complications. You do not save lives. They're

01:00:51.400 still getting cancer. They're still getting heart disease. They're still getting Alzheimer's disease

01:00:54.960 at a much higher rate. The challenge in type 2 diabetes is the combination of the hyperglycemia

01:01:01.740 with the hyperinsulinemia. So the therapies that save lives in type 2 diabetes would be things like

01:01:08.080 metformin, where you're actually fixing the glucose side of the equation and not just adding more

01:01:13.300 insulin to the system. The SGLT2 inhibitors, these are the things that are getting the glucose out of

01:01:18.040 the system, which actually brings me to a question based on something you said earlier.

01:01:23.000 Is there any way it is algorithmically possible to estimate, let's say, the average insulin that a

01:01:32.120 non-diabetic would make over the course of the day based on glucose if you had some data points? So if I

01:01:37.100 came to Kevin and said, look, let me go and get under test conditions, certain levels of glucose and

01:01:43.580 insulin that are associated, we develop a, you know, a kinetics model for it. And then by tracking my

01:01:51.080 continuous glucose data over time, could we ever try to estimate what my insulin levels are in between?

01:01:56.540 We have some studies that are very preliminary and I really can't talk too much about it, but we do

01:02:02.620 believe that it's possible to measure how quickly insulin reacts and how much by the slope of the

01:02:10.200 glucose curves, but not at our five-minute measurement intervals. So we're looking at other ways to record

01:02:16.420 data, to develop algorithms to do that, but it's very preliminary right now. I think over time, and

01:02:24.400 this gets back into another thing that Dexcom will do over time, we have an open architecture platform as

01:02:29.860 well. So we've developed APIs to whereby we will provide data to other software platforms if they

01:02:36.640 can analyze glucose values better than we can. One drop, there are a number of them. They haven't

01:02:42.540 produced a lot for us commercially, but we've made the decision that this is the type of company we

01:02:47.300 want to be because we just can't do everything. I think over time, that might be something that

01:02:53.480 we'll look at, but it also might be something somebody might be able to look at better than us.

01:02:57.660 Your raisins one, by the way, is so funny because I've had a number of those experiences. My similar

01:03:03.200 to that one where I was shocked was grapes.

01:03:06.900 Oh, grapes are awful for glucose values.

01:03:09.440 No, I had not eaten anything in about 18 hours.

01:03:12.580 And you had grapes with the glucose sensor on.

01:03:14.780 I had grapes, and I was so pissed off. I was like, I thought the thing was broken. I was like ready to

01:03:20.800 rip it off my body. I was like, there is no way my glucose is this high after a... I haven't had a grape

01:03:25.760 since. That was about six months ago. And I was on an airplane about a month ago, and they had like

01:03:32.520 a snack tray, and it was like some cheese, a strawberry, and some grapes. And it had like

01:03:37.740 five grapes. And I was actually really hungry. I ate everything, but I didn't eat the five grapes.

01:03:42.160 Now, I'm sure the five grapes wouldn't have done anything, but I'm boycotting grapes. I am done

01:03:46.840 with that what I call quasi-fruit.

01:03:49.180 Well, I have not eaten many yogurt-covered rice since that episode in Boston either. So there you go.

01:03:55.080 But see, that's my point, right? I think

01:03:56.860 CGM has the potential to change the way people eat more than any other technology I have

01:04:02.460 ever laid eyes on. I'm heavily biased. I mean, I've stated my bias many times.

01:04:06.860 I'm a very big proponent of CGM.

01:04:09.040 But I also believe in real-time feedback.

01:04:12.220 I think it's very difficult to curb a person's behavior

01:04:15.180 when the feedback loop is so long. And the weight on the scale,

01:04:19.240 the blood test that you get at your doctor every six months, those things are valuable.

01:04:24.820 They help. But nothing trumps the 30 minutes after I eat the chocolate-covered raisins.

01:04:30.880 A, I see what it looks like. And now I can correlate that feeling of,

01:04:34.960 I feel like crap an hour later because my glucose has gone from 200 to 60.

01:04:40.520 That's a crappy feeling. That's not physiologically reasonable. And now people see why.

01:04:47.320 So over time, where this gets very interesting is that core technology platform I talked about

01:04:52.720 where we make products that perform well, that patients will use, and that cost less,

01:04:59.080 never goes away. But there's a software element to what we do that we can change dramatically

01:05:04.520 given the experience we want a patient to have or that a patient needs.

01:05:08.480 And again, I'll give you the perfect example. Our type 1 patients, the alerts and the alarms

01:05:13.500 at nighttime while they sleep are absolutely critical. But somebody with type 2 diabetes

01:05:19.200 who's taking these compounds, that may not be as critical for them. But what would be critical

01:05:25.300 is an analysis at the end of the day where we compliment somebody on,

01:05:30.720 gee, you kept your glucose within range extremely well. Our insights, as we look back,

01:05:36.100 what did you eat for dinner today? Or integrating the CGM data into a food database to whereby

01:05:42.340 you take pictures of what you eat over time. And when you go back, you look at that food and say,

01:05:47.920 wow, I ate those scrambled eggs this morning and my glucose values didn't go up. Maybe scrambled

01:05:53.160 eggs for breakfast is a good thing for me. And then you take a picture of pancakes.

01:05:56.380 And the next time you sit down to eat, if you take a picture of those pancakes, you get reminded,

01:06:00.900 you know, you had pancakes a month ago. And that may not have been the outcome that you're looking

01:06:06.100 for. And I think this is the kind of stuff Neutrino is working on. And I agree that that stuff is so

01:06:10.800 powerful. I feel like, you know, people assume I know a lot about food because of, you know,

01:06:15.320 sort of the work I've done and the things I've talked about and written about. And, but the reality of

01:06:19.100 it is, I'm still humbled by how much I don't know, because it's not just what you eat, but it's the

01:06:24.800 physiologic state you are in when you eat it. It's very different what happens if you eat a bowl of

01:06:29.800 pasta after you've exercised, you know, 30 minutes after a hard workout versus, you know, eating it

01:06:36.280 after having not exercised. It's a very different glycemic response. Stress, we've talked about this

01:06:41.340 and it can't be understated. How much higher my glucose levels are when my sleep is crappy.

01:06:45.900 Oh, or the correlation between high glucose levels and crappy sleep. Because if you go to

01:06:53.060 bed with very high glucose levels after eating a very high carb dinner, I've seen a direct

01:06:58.340 correlation between my sleep and my glucose values. Yeah. Personally. Anyway, I can't make this case

01:07:02.980 enough. Now we talked about, there are a couple other companies out there that are doing this. Is

01:07:06.380 there any publicly available information that compares the performance and fidelity of the Abbott

01:07:11.780 product or the Medtronic product to your current product? We all have accuracy tables in our user

01:07:17.840 guides, but they're biased towards the way that companies want to project themselves. We have

01:07:23.600 studies that we've published comparing ours to the other products. We maintain our performance all the

01:07:28.860 time. Yeah. It's not subtle in my hands. I mean, I've been pretty vocal about it. It's not a subtle

01:07:33.260 difference. And it isn't. We perform extremely well across all the range of glucose in the low and in

01:07:37.920 the high range. I won't speak as much to the other guys. Our patients know. Our patients know what a

01:07:43.900 Dexcom is versus the others. And we can live with that one. Do you think that you will be able to

01:07:49.000 maintain performance as the sensor gets smaller and smaller? So in other words, is there a day when

01:07:54.080 there's going to be a one millimeter sensor? So something that really doesn't even get into the

01:07:57.860 interstitium, but is still sort of in the dermis itself that can perform this well? Or is there

01:08:03.640 just a technical limit to being able to do this without accessing interstitial fluid?

01:08:08.200 For us today, we've only gone down to the interstitial fluid. We have looked at technologies

01:08:12.120 that would go down more shallow. We have within our R&D group, an advanced technology group who

01:08:18.140 looks at nothing but things like that. Our second Verily product, one of our goals is to have a

01:08:23.260 shorter sensor and to make it smaller. But there are complications of a shorter sensor.

01:08:28.440 What do the membrane layers look like? So you can get an extended wear on a 14-day sensor.

01:08:32.540 How's the electrochemical reaction on a longer life sensor if it's shorter versus the one that

01:08:39.260 we have now? So we go through a lot of trial and error as we look at these things to determine what

01:08:44.580 is the best combination of all of these features. I think we'll have a shorter one. Right now,

01:08:50.860 we're very comfortable with the interstitial fluid.

01:08:52.980 If the pain of insertion is effectively eliminated, which it is, once it's in there, I don't actually

01:08:58.820 know the difference between it being in me versus on the skin. And I've played with other sensors out

01:09:04.440 there that there are some that are as short as 400 microns.

01:09:07.460 There's some very short ones. And we evaluate those technologies. We look at them.

01:09:12.020 One of the beautiful things of being a public company and having resources is if we saw one

01:09:15.940 that we thought was remarkable, we'd talk to them and see if there's something we can do to further it

01:09:20.520 along. But right now, we're comfortable with what we're doing and what we have.

01:09:23.940 Now, another question I get asked a lot is why can't this be done optically? Why can't this be

01:09:29.700 done the way a pulse oximeter where you put it on your finger? So for someone listening to this who

01:09:34.860 doesn't know what that is, but if you've ever had surgery or anything like that, when you're

01:09:37.740 under anesthesia, there's a little device they usually put on your finger or on your earlobe

01:09:41.380 and using light, it's actually measuring or estimating the saturation of oxygen. And can't we

01:09:48.380 just do that to measure glucose? Are there limitations to this that are just too great?

01:09:52.680 It has been tried on numerous occasions to do that. Several technologies have tried non-invasive

01:09:58.840 sensors. In fact, the first glucose sensor that I saw somebody wear, other than one we developed at

01:10:04.620 MiniMed and Medtronic, was one called the GlucoWatch, which actually was a watch that sat on your wrist

01:10:10.020 and would take fluid out of your skin through reverse anephoresis and measure it that way.

01:10:17.160 Wow.

01:10:17.640 It would leave a red mark on the outside of your arm and it was hard. We've seen a lot of

01:10:23.240 non-invasive glucose sensors and people call our sensor invasive because there's a needle and a

01:10:28.940 needle that goes in your body and comes out and a sensor that remains. So oftentimes people say,

01:10:33.880 we're going to develop something that is non-invasive. If it's two inches by three inches and sits on

01:10:39.540 the outside of your body and you can say, yeah, it was non-invasive. Well, how do you find invasive?

01:10:44.740 To me, invasive is does it invade your lifestyle and does it produce the result that you're looking

01:10:50.680 for? A lot of people have worked on that type of thing. They've worked on just measuring on the skin.

01:10:57.420 There's one company that has one that measures in your tears that you put inside your eye that I've

01:11:02.460 seen.

01:11:03.580 Are these accurate?

01:11:04.520 Not accurate enough and none of them have been to market yet, but only time will tell. People will

01:11:09.780 continue to look, but they're not solving the fundamental problem. I'll go back to those three

01:11:14.940 things we build our product around and I'll add a fourth. If it's accurate, if you solve the accuracy

01:11:20.600 problem, if you make it more convenient and solve the convenient problem, if you lower the cost,

01:11:26.500 and finally, if you can produce a healthcare outcome, you have something that's meaningful.

01:11:30.940 Well, not having the little wire in your skin while one can try and paint a horror story around that,

01:11:37.740 it's not really that invasive to your body. So anything that comes has to solve one of those

01:11:44.420 problems better than the technologies that are on the market. And if somebody can do that with an

01:11:50.680 infrared sensor, optical sensor, then we've had a wonderful technological step and we'll all figure

01:11:58.460 out where we move from there. We just haven't seen anything yet that's accurate enough, performs well

01:12:03.520 enough. Yeah. I suspect it's going to depend heavily on how much this stuff matters and meaning how much

01:12:10.000 accuracy matters. Obviously for me and for my patients, that's the highest priority. And what

01:12:15.460 you give up right now is cost. I think of the four metrics you just identified, the place where this is

01:12:21.180 by far the biggest barrier is the economic barrier. Is the economics. I would agree. So on that thread,

01:12:27.860 anyone listening to this who says, gosh, I got to have a CGM, they have to go get a prescription

01:12:31.100 from their doctor and very likely they're going to pay out of pocket for it. Unless they have

01:12:35.780 diabetes. If they have diabetes, they... Including type 2? Depends. A few payers cover type 2,

01:12:41.740 not many, but a few. Do you have the liberty of saying which payers? Do you know which payers cover

01:12:45.460 type 2? Not off the top of my head. Because it's going to depend by region as well. It's very regional.

01:12:50.720 And most of the type 2 patients are patients who use intensive insulin, such as the CMS Medicare

01:12:55.480 patients. And this gets into our payer negotiations. Sometimes we sit and we discuss,

01:13:02.240 we want to make this easier for everyone to get. We want to cover type 2s. We want to cover type 1s.

01:13:07.060 We want all these things. And they go back to their economic models and say, well, we can't do all

01:13:12.040 those things, but we can give you this and we can give you this for the type 1s. And it is very much

01:13:17.360 a business negotiation. And then based on your insurance plan, typically our patients pay 20% of the

01:13:23.360 cost. Standard copay for durable medical equipment. And depending upon the timing of the year, if you

01:13:29.040 buy it the first of the year and their copayments and their deductibles have not been met, it's more

01:13:33.200 expensive for them. And is the cash cost fixed across the country or is that regional?

01:13:37.080 We have cash prices here that are pretty much national.

01:13:40.440 You can say what the cash price is?

01:13:41.280 I don't even... I'll be honest with you. I don't even know what they are.

01:13:43.500 I should know this. My office does all the buying. The sensors come in boxes of threes, right?

01:13:48.580 Three sensors.

01:13:49.040 And we typically buy them nine at a time. So that's about a three-month supply because it's 10 days per

01:13:53.720 sensor. That's 90 days. You know what? I used to do the math on what are you paying per day. I'd

01:13:58.400 amortize the whole thing over a per-day cost. Does nine bucks a day sound about right?

01:14:04.280 That's about right as to what somebody pays on the outside.

01:14:06.820 Yeah. I think that's what we pay. Nine or 10 bucks a day.

01:14:09.940 Between nine and $11 a day. We say on our earnings calls, for example, our average price per sensor is X.

01:14:15.880 We used to be only seven-day sensors. So our average price is always between $70 and $75

01:14:20.980 that we have recognized in our revenue. Our 10-day sensor, we have different models as we've gotten

01:14:27.040 that reimbursed. That cost per day has to come down.

01:14:30.900 What do you think, or have you guys done an internal analysis that says, look, at this point,

01:14:36.600 this is a product where if we have 1% of the population has type 2 diabetes, you've obviously

01:14:42.140 built a very successful company where your customer base is 1% of the US population or

01:14:46.380 less. You've got a type 2 diabetes population that I think would benefit from this as much

01:14:51.040 as the type 1 population would, even though, as you've pointed out eloquently, different

01:14:55.380 diseases basically. So that takes you to 10% of the population. Then you've got the pre-diabetic

01:15:00.960 population.

01:15:01.800 Another 10.

01:15:02.660 Exactly. But then you've got like sort of half the people are kind of, I hate the term wellness,

01:15:07.760 but these are people that we're trying to optimize health for and they don't have a disease,

01:15:12.000 but it's not just that we're trying to prevent them from getting diabetes, but we're trying

01:15:15.360 to figure out if you can actually, you know, make them live longer through better glycemic

01:15:19.380 control. What do you think, or what's your intuition about what does that need to cost

01:15:23.640 per day to make that group say, look, out of pocket, I'm going to pay for this. Because

01:15:27.620 there's no way an insurance company is going to pay for, you know, healthy people wearing

01:15:31.060 these things.

01:15:32.180 We drive those discussions all the time. It's interesting. I had a discussion with a payer once

01:15:37.560 and I said, look, we want this to go to everybody that uses insulin intensively. Tell me what

01:15:44.340 the price is. Just tell me what to make it. Give me a number. And the response I got was

01:15:51.360 how low would you go? So I don't know what a person would pay out of pocket because all

01:15:56.620 we do is speculate on these kinds of things. Is it $25 for a two-week sensor? Is it $50 for

01:16:01.540 a two-week sensor? A lot would depend upon the information and the things that you learn

01:16:06.000 from it. There's a whole regulatory process we'll have to go through to get a health and

01:16:10.700 wellness product. For example, our device is a prescription device now. We've been very

01:16:15.140 clear in our discussions. Your patients who use this in its non-diabetic state, they have

01:16:20.580 a prescription from you and you pay cash for that.

01:16:22.600 And we write them a new prescription every three months.

01:16:24.380 And they get it. To make this a non-prescription product, there's a lot of steps we'd have to

01:16:29.780 go through at the FDA. And one of the things that we look at with respect to our human factors

01:16:36.440 and our software design, if it weren't on prescription, what would that software experience

01:16:41.220 have to look like?

01:16:42.440 So let's explain for the listener why that's the case. So right now, everything we've talked

01:16:46.620 about, as you said, is still a medical device.

01:16:49.100 It is a class two medical device.

01:16:50.780 A physician writes a prescription. And I'm only just talking about the cash patient. So this

01:16:54.480 is not about insurance anymore. Physician writes prescription, patient gets it filled,

01:16:58.180 and their all-in cost is about nine bucks a day to wear this thing. And they are seeing

01:17:03.200 the exact same data using the exact same device with the exact same algorithms that a patient

01:17:09.060 with type 1 diabetes is using.

01:17:10.220 And the exact same, yeah.

01:17:10.920 Everything is the same. I am using everything that someone with type 1 diabetes is using.

01:17:15.220 So explain, Kevin, why if tomorrow a little elf jumped out of your desk and said, voila, we

01:17:22.260 can make this thing for a dollar and just say that the dollar was the price where like at a

01:17:27.640 dollar a day, you could penetrate this new market, that the FDA doesn't say, great, go ahead,

01:17:33.520 go start selling it. Like there's a fundamental issue. What is that issue?

01:17:36.640 We have to go through clinical trials, particularly if we're labeled for use for people with diabetes,

01:17:41.460 to demonstrate the accuracy and consistency of the product across all glucose ranges.

01:17:46.500 The FDA, in all candor, has been very progressive with Dexcom. I mean, we're the first company ever to

01:17:51.460 go directly to the phone. We're the first company to share data. We're the first company ever to have a

01:17:56.700 sensor perform at the accuracy levels that we have. Most every first with the FDA in our industry

01:18:02.200 has come through us partnering with them. Most recently, they created a new category for continuous

01:18:08.800 glucose monitoring, and this is in the intensive diabetes world, called ICGM versus CGM, where they set

01:18:14.520 accuracy standards, where their products have to demonstrate on a statistical basis they perform.

01:18:20.800 And you have to have a certain number of values in a study in the low range, in the high range,

01:18:26.360 in a certain number of points to statistically prove that that product is capable of doing the

01:18:31.520 things that we want it to do. In our intensive world, that's dosing insulin, either through a manual

01:18:37.400 calculation or thinking by a patient. But also with this ICGM category, which stands for interconnected,

01:18:44.140 we can connect to other devices. And they've made an easier path for other devices to connect to our

01:18:50.020 product. So for example, if you have an insulin pump and an algorithm, and would like to run that

01:18:55.520 algorithm of glucose sensor, your regulatory path with Dexcom is just to show you get the signal.

01:19:01.040 You don't have to do a study to show that Dexcom's accurate. We're done. It's interconnected.

01:19:06.480 And Tandem's recent approval is along those lines. But if you're displaying a glucose value,

01:19:11.720 and that is a real-time glucose value, and that is where we've been in our discussions with the FDA,

01:19:16.300 hey, that's a class two medical device. And as of today, that requires a prescription.

01:19:22.560 At some point in time, again, as we look to the future, and as you and I have talked,

01:19:27.460 I'd like a device we could sell over the counter, or we could sell through nutrition programs

01:19:31.900 that a patient couldn't use to dose insulin. But what would be the real-time feedback you'd give

01:19:37.080 somebody?

01:19:37.580 So explain why that's necessary. That's what you just said is the important point,

01:19:42.060 which is if you want to sell this over the counter, the FDA is going to say it cannot be

01:19:48.680 used by someone to dose insulin.

01:19:50.680 For today. For today. And maybe that will change over time. But for now, those are the rules. And

01:19:56.220 those are the rules that we play by.

01:19:57.720 And that's very important for, I think, people to understand, because that's one of the questions

01:20:00.800 I get asked the most, which is, why can't this thing just be over the counter now? I'm willing to

01:20:06.640 pay the full price. Why do I have to? Because not every patient has a physician who understands

01:20:11.920 the benefit of this. And I know, just from what I see on social media, a lot of people

01:20:15.800 go to their doctor and say, hey, you know, Dr. So-and-so, please write me the prescription.

01:20:20.680 And he or she says, what the hell for? Get out of here.

01:20:24.400 Yeah. What are you talking about?

01:20:25.440 Yeah. And so now that patient who's actually says, look, I'm willing to make an enormous

01:20:29.280 investment in this because it's my health and I believe that this is going to matter.

01:20:32.540 Well, they can't do it. So what I'm hearing you say is, there's one regulatory path that

01:20:39.940 says, maybe down the road, the FDA says, you know what? This will no longer be something

01:20:44.960 that requires a prescription. If the patient's willing to pay for it, the patient can have

01:20:48.840 it.

01:20:49.560 I can't speak for them, but they have been so progressive with us so far. What we would

01:20:54.940 literally have to present, again, is a case as to how somebody would never harm themselves.

01:20:59.180 And remember, there's a needle involved in inserting our product as well. There may be

01:21:03.540 standards and rules around needles, things like that. So I can't speculate how we get

01:21:08.420 there, but I think over time, that's something we would like to take on. But again, it would

01:21:14.040 not be a device used for diabetes treatment. It'd be a device used for other things. We'll

01:21:18.780 have to figure out what that looks like. We don't know yet.

01:21:21.340 And what you were alluding to a moment ago was the other option for making this OTC is not to

01:21:28.880 take the same device and just deal with the FDA changing a rule, but it's to create a device that

01:21:33.940 would fit into the current sort of regulatory environment, which says the device would basically

01:21:39.820 have to be dumbed down. You'd basically have to strip functionality out of the device, right?

01:21:44.460 Strip functionality and the user experience. Yeah. Not necessarily accuracy, not performance,

01:21:51.160 but strip down the information that's presented to the individual.

01:21:54.220 So the ways that that can be done is one, you could make it such that they don't get real-time

01:21:58.840 information. Because if you don't have real-time information, if you see the perfectly accurate

01:22:02.480 identical data a day later, it doesn't help you dose insulin. Another way is, as you said,

01:22:07.620 you just show ranges.

01:22:09.340 Colors. The circles on your Apple Watch.

01:22:11.580 I don't wear one of those things, but...

01:22:13.540 I know you don't. You and I both like to wear our regular watches. I do wear the Apple Watch

01:22:18.940 frequently just to see what the user experience is.

01:22:21.760 Okay. So what do the circles do on that?

01:22:23.760 It's for training. You track how many times you stand up, how many steps you take a day.

01:22:27.600 I see. Okay.

01:22:28.740 They have some very simple measures. It's right there. It's pretty easy to see and very easy

01:22:33.540 to use.

01:22:34.140 This is a totally unrelated question. Does the Apple Watch have a little app or plugin that allows

01:22:38.580 you to put the face of really cool watches on it so that you... Like if you really want

01:22:42.980 to have a paddock, you could have like a little paddock Apple Watch. Because I mean, that would

01:22:47.300 be easy to do. You just need a picture of the paddock and you could have it like looking like

01:22:50.840 a... Pick your favorite GMT or whatever.

01:22:54.400 See, Peter, we start talking and it gets back to watches and other businesses we'd like to

01:22:58.260 go start and do. I don't know that that exists, but that would be fun.

01:23:01.680 Who... Why haven't... Apple, if you're listening to this...

01:23:03.820 Maybe somebody has.

01:23:04.600 Yeah, yeah. Someone's got to have developed a plugin that allows you to have any watch

01:23:07.700 you want as your Apple Watch.

01:23:08.900 As your Apple Watch.

01:23:09.520 Apple Watches cost, what, a few hundred bucks?

01:23:11.500 Yeah.

01:23:11.700 But you could put the face of a million dollar watch on it if you want.

01:23:14.720 Well, and what we have found within our company and with our patient base, there's a very high

01:23:19.380 number of Apple Watch users because our device goes from the phone and then the phone,

01:23:24.280 there's a watch app.

01:23:25.220 Oh, so I didn't even... Because I don't use the thing, I've never noticed that.

01:23:27.440 Yeah, there is a watch app and then we are developing a direct-to-watch transmitter communication

01:23:32.580 protocol. What that would do for a patient, again, the new Apple Watches have cellular

01:23:37.300 capability as well, as will some of the Android Watches and some of the new Fitbit products.

01:23:42.800 But with that direct cell capability, that watch then can become a patient's receiver and the

01:23:48.740 data could still be shared. You wouldn't have to have it go to your phone. And again, we're

01:23:53.840 thinking about those criteria I talked to you about earlier. As far as convenience, it's a lot

01:23:58.420 easier for some of our people to pull their sleeve up and look at their glucose than to get their

01:24:03.240 phone out during an important meeting or to even take their phone to bed. They could wear their watch

01:24:09.200 to bed.

01:24:09.680 Well, that's another new thing I like about the G6 a lot. We didn't talk about this. With the G5,

01:24:14.920 I had to keep my phone in my room to see all my nighttime data. The G6 seems to store the data

01:24:22.200 so that if I keep my phone in the office, it backloads my file.

01:24:26.880 There is some backloading if you do lose connectivity. The transmission range of our product,

01:24:33.720 I believe it's labeled for 20 feet. And if we've learned one thing about going to the phone,

01:24:39.040 Bluetooth is not an exact science. And I think we've all experienced that where some headphones

01:24:44.100 connect really well. Other headphones do not. Sometimes you get your car, it works.

01:24:49.060 Sometimes it doesn't. It is very hard to explain.

01:24:51.740 But is that why you went with Bluetooth as opposed to near-field communication?

01:24:55.020 We went with Bluetooth because we didn't want our patients to have to put the phone close to the

01:24:58.620 device. We wanted the continuous feed. I think there is a place for near-field. And it's quite

01:25:04.000 possible we'd have both chips in a future one. But for now, we're very BLE oriented. And it works

01:25:10.860 pretty well. Are there any, and again, I want to be sensitive to what you can and can't talk about

01:25:14.860 publicly. Are there any other partnerships or collaborations that you're able to speak about

01:25:18.680 that are maybe interesting to consumers, especially in this sort of non-diabetes, non-type 1, non-type

01:25:25.080 2 market for the people like me who are thinking about this for quote-unquote wellness?

01:25:30.500 Well, nothing real concrete. I will tell you that Apple has been a wonderful partner for us in

01:25:35.580 getting the device to the iPhone and getting our apps working on Apple Watch. In fact, at the

01:25:41.000 developer conference one year, we got a VIP invitation. Our head of R&D couldn't go, so I

01:25:46.260 went. And Peter and I are dressed differently. I'm a total business person, and Peter's Peter. And so I

01:25:52.580 show up at the Apple developer conference in my sport coat, in my shoes. And of course, the guys next

01:25:57.560 to me are in shorts, and they're way younger than me. And they're looking at me like, who's this?

01:26:02.100 Who's this? Nobody dresses like this here. And I'm sitting there feeling pretty uncomfortable. And

01:26:07.960 they came out and talked about Apple Watch. And lo and behold, Apple's got Dexcom Watch on the screen

01:26:13.720 up there. And I elbowed the kid next to me. I said, do you see that? He said, yeah. I said,

01:26:20.260 I run that company. I thought I was pretty special for the day. Our partnership with Verily includes

01:26:28.520 work with a company that they have called OnDuo that is developing treatment for type 2 diabetes

01:26:34.200 and developing apps that combine everything they've learned about diabetes with a lot of

01:26:39.720 Google technology. And they're in pilot phases with various payers on the type 2 side. We're

01:26:45.440 also doing a lot of work with UnitedHealthcare on type 2 diabetes. And I think in the future

01:26:51.320 with them, we're also going to develop some pre-diabetes models as we take this Gen 6 technology

01:26:56.880 out. You know, we've talked about going to the consumer. Peter, you wouldn't have taken

01:27:02.280 G5 to a consumer anywhere. It's too hard.

01:27:05.300 Yeah, I had a hard time getting patients to do the G5.

01:27:09.600 G6 is, it's not all the way there, but it's close. There are things we can do to make it

01:27:15.580 a little bit easier, like pairing the device with the transmitter and some of the other things

01:27:19.820 that have been inherent within our system. But it's close. As we get this thing closer to

01:27:26.160 consumers, I think you'll see us try more things, more and different things. A couple

01:27:31.360 of other applications where we'd love to take our continuous glucose monitoring technology

01:27:36.160 where it's not. I've had numerous physicians ping me on LinkedIn saying, why aren't you in

01:27:42.420 the hospital? Why aren't you in the hospital?

01:27:45.700 That's a good question. Why aren't you in the ICU of all places, right?

01:27:48.640 We tried many years ago. We had a joint venture with Edwards Life Sciences. And then the FDA was

01:27:54.300 extremely strict on accuracy and performance. And by the time we built what we built, it just,

01:28:00.860 it didn't work out. Our technology has come so far and we've learned so much through projects like

01:28:06.460 that in the past that we will make a run with G6 in that type of market to help patients. I mean,

01:28:13.080 think about it. You connect the Bluetooth to the nurse's station. I was in one medical center where

01:28:17.640 patients in the ICU are tested every 30 minutes. 48 finger sticks in a 24-hour period.

01:28:23.380 Not uncommon. Intensive insulin therapy, of course, has had its ups and downs resurgence in the

01:28:28.860 literature, in the critical care literature. But basically, there was a paper that came out in 2001

01:28:33.580 or 2002 in the New England Journal of Medicine that really changed the face of how glucose and insulin

01:28:39.760 levels were managed, or glucose levels were managed using intensive insulin therapy in the ICU.

01:28:43.540 That has been questioned. Obviously, there have been subsequent trials that have suggested that

01:28:47.640 maybe the benefits on the glucose side come at the cost with an insulin side, et cetera. But

01:28:52.340 you're absolutely right. Now, that reminds me of something, though, which is

01:28:56.160 acetaminophen, Tylenol, has an effect on the performance, at least of the G5.

01:29:01.380 Not G6.

01:29:02.500 Oh, it doesn't have the effect anymore.

01:29:04.000 It does not affect G6. We ran a very, very, very large study and put a lot of acetaminophen

01:29:11.320 into patients to whereby we have no contraindication for acetaminophen anymore.

01:29:15.200 So that's interesting. But the G5 would over or underestimate?

01:29:18.940 It would go high.

01:29:19.860 It would overestimate.

01:29:20.520 It would go up a little bit.

01:29:21.100 Yeah. So one of the challenges, I suspect, in the ICU patient is all of the drugs that

01:29:26.080 they're on, also they third space like crazy. So their interstitium looks totally different

01:29:31.440 from a normal person's interstitium. It's almost like there's a whole new calibration, right?

01:29:35.620 We're going to have to go run some studies. But that being said, I'll go back to what

01:29:41.600 you said your friend told you, you can pay me now or pay me later. If we can get this

01:29:46.180 in the right configuration in the hospital on most every patient, at least every patient

01:29:51.020 over 50 that comes in, forget whether they don't have diabetes. That hyperglycemia effect

01:29:57.360 on healing, we know, is a very difficult thing. If we can get it on everybody and make this

01:30:02.580 affordable and fit within the normal workflow of the hospital, that's a tremendous market

01:30:08.520 for us. Another place we haven't been or been labeled, and you're going to be a little

01:30:12.340 bit, probably chastise me after this. We've never been labeled for gestational diabetes.

01:30:18.040 We had this discussion once. I didn't realize you weren't actually labeled, but I have a patient

01:30:22.500 whose fiance is pregnant and she had a device in and it turned out she had an old device.

01:30:29.460 So she had the device and then never used it for, with one pregnancy, then used it with another

01:30:34.440 and it wasn't working. And we did some troubleshooting and to make a long story short,

01:30:38.420 she said, well, I called Dexcomer, but they said it's not approved for gestational use.

01:30:43.200 And I remember saying, what would be the difference?

01:30:46.820 And I'm very proud of my people for saying the right thing. It's just, we haven't run a study in

01:30:52.120 gestational diabetes. We'll have to run a study there to get that label. One of my daughters-in-law

01:30:57.020 contracted gestational diabetes while pregnant with twins. So her OBGYN wrote a script and we

01:31:03.800 procured a Dexcom for her. And he just looked at it and said, this is remarkable. We should all be on

01:31:10.480 this. And this gets back to A1C and other measures. As we look at evolving this Gen 6 technology,

01:31:16.940 one of the things that we look at as this product is a diagnostic as well. Right now you drink that

01:31:22.740 real sugary drink, go way high, you go way low. It's kind of awful. What about a blinded sensor

01:31:28.780 on somebody for a week? Yeah. Infinitely better. And then develop the algorithms to see what we can

01:31:34.700 predict with respect to gestational diabetes. Those are the type of studies that we want to run in the

01:31:40.420 future and the way we'd like to go about that market. And there's others as well. Again, I'll go

01:31:45.660 back to your health and wellness one. Combining this with some of the nutrition apps out there,

01:31:51.280 the Weight Watchers app, combining if that had glucose data and you ate your points per day and

01:31:57.720 you ate your 32 points today, but your glucose values were still high, maybe we take you down to 26

01:32:02.700 and vice versa. You can see how that can integrate with it wonderfully and integrate without showing

01:32:10.880 a glucose value that you can dose insulin off of. I just think in the end, it's a much better metric

01:32:16.040 for health. And I think health matters more than weight. Weight is correlated with health,

01:32:23.900 but the correlation is not exceptional. It's reasonable, but it's so far from great. And

01:32:33.020 my prediction would be when those trials are done, your standard deviation of blood glucose over a three

01:32:40.440 month period is going to tell you infinitely more than whatever the fluctuations were in your weight.

01:32:46.960 And it's frankly going to help you identify probably the type of weight that matters more.

01:32:51.900 Obviously there's been a big discussion about the difference between subcutaneous fat and visceral

01:32:55.620 fat. You could have two people that weigh exactly the same and you could even have two people that have

01:32:59.980 a similar mass of fat, but where that fat resides probably tells us much more about their metabolic

01:33:04.740 health. So I don't know. Like I said, if I could be czar of whatever for a day, I just don't see why I

01:33:11.480 wouldn't want someone to have this information continuously in real time, every minute of every

01:33:16.180 day under any physiologic circumstance, because what you learn and not just someone who's got type

01:33:22.940 two diabetes or type one diabetes or gestational diabetes, it's going to alter your baby. It comes

01:33:27.100 back to the airport stories, you know, when we're in these environments that are at our worst. And you learn

01:33:33.080 other really interesting things. I mean, these things, you know, you get a sense of how much even exercise

01:33:38.420 can transiently raise your blood glucose, but what the benefits are after the fact, which is your ability

01:33:44.120 to dispose of glucose goes up significantly.

01:33:46.840 Yeah. I get about a 30 point spike in a workout, but for the rest of the day, my average glucose is about 10

01:33:52.880 points lower. Yeah. It's so amazing to think that such a simple biomarker is glucose, something we

01:33:59.660 take for granted on every chemistry test we do on patients. You know, no one goes to their doctor and

01:34:05.640 doesn't get their glucose measured, but what the utility of that is when you can measure it every

01:34:10.440 five minutes. Kevin, this has been super interesting. I want to be respectful of your time. I know we don't

01:34:16.120 have all day here and you have to get back to work. One of the stories you just told that I love so much

01:34:20.980 that I didn't know was the going to the pharmacy, getting three of these things and poking yourself

01:34:25.540 60 times. To me, that's like, you know, Dexcom is a pretty big public company. Your market cap's

01:34:30.740 like what? $12 billion? $12 billion. Yeah. And, but yet you're still kind of a startup company

01:34:35.520 because that's a startup CEO move. It really is. And I've had to learn to be less startup

01:34:41.940 as we've grown. We've all grown with the company, but that culture. And again, one of the things that I

01:34:47.440 manage as CEO here is we've had to bring in skills and supplement our management team

01:34:53.080 from that startup mentality to the midsize company mentality to whereby we have more structure and

01:34:59.500 systems of a large company. So we're trying to mix all of those things together. We just had our

01:35:05.260 employee survey and it's interesting. I read every comment. It's almost 200 pages of comments. I read

01:35:11.720 everything all the employees write, the good ones, the bad ones, and the funny ones. I will not quote

01:35:16.900 the funny ones, but there, there, there's some pretty hilarious things people say. The most

01:35:22.620 contradicting comments are, we all need to go back to being a startup versus we need more structure to

01:35:30.120 be bigger. And both are true. Both are true. The, the nimbleness of a startup in an industry where

01:35:37.060 you're creating everything is absolutely essential. You've got to remain nimble. You've got to be willing

01:35:42.840 to fail. You've got to be willing to start over. You've got to be willing to do what's right.

01:35:48.320 Conversely, that big company structure where you have systems and, and balances and checks to make

01:35:54.820 sure you're doing the right thing. And you start watching dollars more is a different culture. So

01:36:00.480 we're mixing those two together. We're kind of like a mixed family here. We will have added more

01:36:05.300 than 1500 employees in the last two years. Wow. I didn't realize you were that big.

01:36:10.020 I was employee three, about 300 in 2011. I think we have 2,500 full-time employees and several hundred

01:36:18.180 temps. We do a lot of our manufacturing work temp to hire and bring them in and grow and shrink with

01:36:24.980 volume. There was a temporary workforce, but no, we have that many people. Can I add one more question

01:36:29.140 for your internal survey that I think will produce awesome, interesting results? Every month have a,

01:36:35.280 or every quarter or whatever frequency makes sense, have a tell us your best surprise glucose spike

01:36:40.780 story. Because I mean, honestly, this, the grapes, the stupid chocolate covered M&Ms, whatever. I mean,

01:36:47.580 I think, I mean, there's going to be the obvious ones. Like I ate a bag of Swedish fish. Look what

01:36:51.860 happened to my blood sugar. But there's these surprise ones either in the velocity of glucose escape

01:36:56.980 or the peak. Because I'm guessing most of your employees are wearing these things, right?

01:37:00.800 No, no, no, no, no. There's too many of us. There's too many of us now. But you know,

01:37:08.340 if we run an internal study under IRB protocol and everything, we will recruit volunteers within

01:37:14.000 the company. We have several people with type 1 diabetes that work here because they can lend us

01:37:19.060 perspective for our patients that we don't have on our own. So that's important to us as well.

01:37:24.440 A lot of it wear them. And a lot of the things that we learn are through those in-house studies

01:37:29.400 and through that in-house wear process. You said something a second ago about

01:37:33.420 failing quickly. You have five kids, right? I have five sons.

01:37:37.740 And just before we were getting ready to start, we were talking about our kids. And you asked me if

01:37:42.240 I wanted some advice on being a parent, to which I couldn't say no. Of course I did. Do you remember

01:37:46.840 the advice you gave me? I do. And I was recounting a story of how things have changed. There's a big gap.

01:37:53.260 My oldest is 15 years older than my youngest. And there's an eight-year gap between number four

01:37:58.140 and number five. But what I told you is we can't be afraid to let our kids fail.

01:38:05.120 I know I'm going to sound horribly mean, but everybody getting a ribbon and everybody getting

01:38:09.240 a trophy. I once told a coach to cut my son so he would learn something. If he wasn't going to play

01:38:16.300 him, go ahead and do that. We learn in life as much from our failures as we do our successes.

01:38:21.720 Sometimes we learn more. And sometimes they motivate us to be great and motivate us to do

01:38:28.020 great things. But we oftentimes as parents shelter our kids so much from that, what appears to be

01:38:34.540 traumatic. And I'd given that advice to somebody who didn't have any children. He came in my office.

01:38:39.500 He goes, give me one bit of advice. And I said, all right, I'll give it to you. Because we just try and

01:38:44.720 manage and regulate everything so much all the time. And look, I will tell you with number five,

01:38:50.020 I did a lot more of that than I did with number one. Number one would tell you that I was very

01:38:55.160 tough on him, but I let him carve his own way. And it's a good thing to let him learn.

01:38:59.460 Last question, Kevin. Is there a failure that you point to in your professional life leading up to

01:39:05.280 where you are today that has taught you more than the others about what you're doing now?

01:39:10.820 Boy, that is a great question. I would tell you one in particular at a corporate level. I'm going

01:39:19.860 to go big picture. I was at one company where I knew exactly what to do. And it was really the

01:39:30.200 only course of action that would have made that company successful. And I presented to my board and

01:39:34.460 they said no. And I then rolled up my sleeves and worked hard for several months and several months

01:39:41.940 and several months. And I still got the answer, no. And I finally left after beating my head up

01:39:49.120 against the wall. And that taught me a lot of lessons. Number one, to be better prepared in how

01:39:55.040 I give my message. And I attribute prayers like that to me. I don't blame the others. To be better

01:40:00.980 prepared on how I deliver my message to be more thoughtful. But if the situation isn't going to

01:40:06.320 work out, and what I ended up doing, and my wife would tell you this, my commute was five miles at

01:40:11.240 the time. It's the most miserable I've ever been in my entire life. She would look at me and say,

01:40:16.660 what on earth are you doing? I'm going to fix this. And we're going to get this. And I couldn't win.

01:40:22.780 So I left. And that was the one time where it felt like I didn't get done what we could have got

01:40:28.340 completed. But I didn't see all the signs on the wall. So I've looked at ways I can be better from

01:40:34.900 that. When I see something strategic like that, I do more homework. We have the people around us do

01:40:40.900 more homework. We're more thoughtful. So that's one of them. We've all had numerous little failures.

01:40:46.900 Sometimes, again, our failures are our biggest blessings. I would say the failure that's been my

01:40:51.820 biggest blessing are all the jobs I didn't take. Because you get opportunities and you get mesmerized

01:40:56.940 with an opportunity. I'm going to go do this. And countless times in my life, those didn't work

01:41:01.640 out. And then lo and behold, an opportunity comes along and it's, wow, I'm so glad that didn't work

01:41:07.800 out. And then you learn so much from that. Now, and I would say the other thing that's important as

01:41:13.700 far as success, you're only as good as those people that are around you. And it becomes clearer and

01:41:19.780 clearer to me the longer I work. This team we have here at Dexcom, they are committed. They work hard.

01:41:25.300 We are all engaged in our business each and every day. I never go to a meeting with another company

01:41:31.460 where their people are as engaged in what they do as ours.

01:41:36.160 Well, that's an interesting point to end on because I do think that Dexcom, obviously I'm

01:41:39.780 very biased. I've been very, very vocal about my bias to Dexcom over the other two, Abbott and

01:41:45.200 Medtronic. But I think you guys have an advantage that on the one hand is a disadvantage. Let's be

01:41:50.360 honest. Diversification, right?

01:41:51.880 Those companies have a million products to fall back on. CGM is but one of a hundred things they

01:41:57.280 do. But that disadvantage is actually your biggest advantage, which is everybody shows up to, and I

01:42:03.260 feel like I know half the staff here. I'm here so often shooting the breeze with you. There's

01:42:07.840 something to be said for, what's the expression? You burn your ships, right?

01:42:10.960 That's right.

01:42:11.280 Yeah, yeah, yeah. You guys have burned your ships. You're all in on CGM.

01:42:14.280 We are.

01:42:15.180 Well, Kevin, I want to thank you very much for your time, for your insights, and for your

01:42:18.760 friendship. It's been amazing to think that we met on that airplane almost three, four years ago.

01:42:24.800 And to this day, we manage to do a good job of not talking watches, this whole thing. Once we turn

01:42:29.240 the recording off, I want to talk to you about the one I'm wearing right now, which I think you're

01:42:32.400 going to love.

01:42:33.140 It is beautiful.

01:42:33.860 Yeah, thank you. I wore it today because I knew I was going to see you.

01:42:36.780 Okay, great.

01:42:37.280 This is what watch idiots do. We do show and tell.

01:42:40.520 Does your wife make fun of you as well?

01:42:42.480 Oh, that's ridiculous. Now, I've learned a good trick, which is you start giving your

01:42:47.460 wife nice watches, and she now understands and appreciates why a Daytona is a nice watch

01:42:53.460 and what Paul Newman meant and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and all those other things.

01:42:57.560 So now she's a little bit more tolerant of my nonsense.

01:43:01.480 All right.

01:43:02.640 All right, Kevin. Have a great afternoon.

01:43:04.360 Thank you, Peter.

01:43:04.780 Thanks so much for your time.

01:43:05.520 We'll see you.

01:43:08.180 You can find all of this information and more at peteratiamd.com forward slash podcast.

01:43:13.460 There you'll find the show notes, readings, and links related to this episode.

01:43:17.580 You can also find my blog at peteratiamd.com.

01:43:21.040 Maybe the simplest thing to do is to sign up for my subjectively non-lame once a week email

01:43:25.540 where I'll update you on what I've been up to, the most interesting papers I've read,

01:43:29.320 and all things related to longevity, science, performance, sleep, etc.

01:43:33.060 On social, you can find me on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook, all with the ID peteratiamd.com.

01:43:39.080 But usually Twitter is the best way to reach me to share your questions and comments.

01:43:43.100 Now for the obligatory disclaimer.

01:43:44.680 This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute the practice of medicine,

01:43:49.860 nursing, or other professional healthcare services, including the giving of medical advice.

01:43:54.980 And note, no doctor-patient relationship is formed.

01:43:57.920 The use of this information and the materials linked to the podcast is at the user's own risk.

01:44:02.720 The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice,

01:44:07.500 diagnoses, or treatment.

01:44:09.200 Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice for any medical condition they have

01:44:13.780 and should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such conditions.

01:44:18.860 Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I take conflicts of interest very seriously.

01:44:23.080 For all of my disclosures, the companies I invest in and or advise,

01:44:26.920 please visit peteratiamd.com forward slash about.

01:44:32.720 Thank you.

The Peter Attia Drive - May 20, 2019

#54 – Kevin Sayer, CEO of Dexcom： Continuous glucose monitors – impact of food, sleep, and stress on glucose, the unmatched power of CGM to drive behavioral change, and the exciting future of CGM

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript