- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
TECH NEWS
Abbott Libre Sense ©INEOS GrenadiersSupersapiens comment on UCI ban of blood glucose monitoring devices from in-competition use
Among a selection of minor changes published last week, the UCI has introduced rule 1.3.006bis, banning the in-competition use of devices that capture information on metabolic values including, but not limited to glucose and lactate.
> Supersapiens app promises easier energy management for athletes via blood glucose tracking
The announcement will come as an unwelcome one for Supersapiens, an American brand that, using blood glucose monitoring technology from Abbot, has been making real-time information on a rider’s blood glucose levels easily available, with the data accessible via a smartphone app as well as on cycling computers.
Supersapiens has been rapidly expanding the number of professional cycling teams that it is working alongside, but the UCI’s ruling will mean that its product cannot be used within any sanctioned event.
In a statement to road.cc, a spokesperson for Supersapiens said:
"While we haven’t received anything official from the UCI around this topic as yet, we are extremely proud to be acknowledged by the UCI's Innovation Manager and former world champion, Michael Rogers, with such a powerful endorsement of Supersapiens as a training tool. We respect the decision of any governing body as it relates to their competition rules and remain committed to redefining the preparation of cyclists at all levels. We have appreciated the partnership through to this decision and will look forward to working closely with the UCI in the future, sharing research and insights from our global network of researchers and innovators, as we continue to help athletes go faster longer."
The UCI has not commented on the reasoning behind the decision to ban the devices which are now widely available to professional and amateur cyclists alike.
> What does the UCI-accredited sticker on your bike mean?
Other commenters questioned what this rule change will mean for diabetic races, where this technology has been used as a vital medical aid for a number of years. The tech regulations (which you can read here at your leisure) do contain a section regarding derogations, however, which could see diabetic riders exempt from the ban.
For the professional teams that have partnered with Supersapiens, this makes the blood glucose monitor a training-only device and, strictly speaking, amateur racers will be required to remove the devices too.
On brand. If they can’t understan’ it, they ban it.
— Jonathan Vaughters (@Vaughters) June 6, 2021
The EF Education-Nippo professional cycling team’s general manager and former professional rider, Jonathan Vaughters, was non-too-pleased with the decision, highlighting the UCI’s apparent fondness of banning innovative technology.
While the UCI has banned the Supersapiens devices from its competitions, the opposite can be said of Ironman triathlon, who earlier this year announced Supersapiens as an official supplier.
We are currently awaiting comments from both Supersapiens and the UCI, and will update as and when we hear back from either.
Latest Comments
- IanMK 4 sec ago
I think TVP have improved their response I recent months. They definitely had a problem with staffing this time last year. I'm getting some...
- Timbobean 20 min 22 sec ago
As a bit of an aside, what is everyone's experience with phone thefts from mounts such as these? Is it as common as phone snatches out of people's...
- chrisonabike 52 min 48 sec ago
Something Something Brexit... ? (sorry) Anyway I think they should try calling them "loveable neighbourhoods".
- Flintshire Boy 2 hours 1 min ago
[Sorry - wrote mine before saw yours! You make the point much better than I.] .
- grOg 4 hours 41 min ago
Where does it state in the article that Ashley purchased the stock? it does state that Ashley bought the brand and intellectual property, not the...
- rogerwb 7 hours 22 min ago
Jump off the bike and run across. I cycle in trainers though.
- momove 8 hours 25 min ago
Cheers for the lesson! Wasn't expecting one so was pleasantly surprised, especially getting to find the origin of "laconic"!
- ktache 9 hours 11 min ago
Isn't it a rights issue?
- Daddy Feebs 10 hours 15 min ago
If anything, it looks a bit like an SL6
Add new comment
29 comments
I have no views on the technology, but if it stops Supersapiens running their ads on road.cc I shall be happy - they spread all over the screen and cover the text.
As someone with Type 1 Diabetes who uses the Libre Sensor system, here's some information. There are currently two versions of the sensor in the UK and talk of a third version coming soon:
V1 - Either the Abbott supplied reader or a smartphone (with an appropriate app) must be placed near the sensor to get a reading
V2 - As V1 except the new sensors will send out a warning for readings beyond a Low or High value (set by the User). This is the version I have only just started to use - it's difficult to get a new prescription during a pandemic. Also, Abbott have prevented third party apps reading this version of the sensor. In fact, I tried using the Supersapien app with my sensor without success
V3 - Will send out continuous readings to the 'reader'. It isn't yet available to NHS patients with Diabetes (as far as I know). However, this must be what the Supersapien app is working with, for it to be any use during exercise/racing.
It's strange if I'm right - profit before medical benefit!
You're incorrect on a couple of points in your premise...
The Libre 'Sport' Sensor (used by Supersapiens) is not rated for medical use, so even if they wanted to the NHS could not fund it's use for diabetics without first running it through their own approval process. This seems unlikely since the current units are perfectly adequate for hte required function.
The NHS decides what they make available for prescription users, not the company making/selling the product. Although they probably receive 'bulk-buy' pricing deals on everything they buy, the NHS is probably paying a higher price due to the 'Approved for Medical/Clinical Use' label.
Is it in invisible ink?
Will Ineos suddenly have lots of diabetic asthmatics in the team?
I think you're confusing them with Team Novo!
Who else thinks the UCI have missed a chance here? They should have said riders can wear whatever monitoring equipment they want as long as the UCI get to access the data. I'd have thought the UCI would have mandated the use of something like this and then they could use it to catch dopers.
More than likely Supersapiens were approached by the UCI to become a certified supplier of equipment (like frames and other kit) and they refused to pay.
The UCI seem to be quite a backward looking, parasitical governing body. I'm all for pushing technology in all forms as long as it benefits the rider/sportsperson. As Formula E becomes more popular, the battery technology and other components will be used in E-biles in the years to come.
How would glucose levels catch dopers ?
I would almost guess this is going to fall apart at some point soon - certainly to the point that there will be TUE's for the devices. It only takes 1 Pro to be diabetic (are there any today?), and the UCI doesnt have a leg to stand on under UK disability descrimnation legislation and I bet the equivalent legislation in the EU too.
I dont know but I'm willing to bet that a Pro's "trained in" responses to Glucose is already pretty abnormal - such it wouldnt be that hard to argue they have some form of diabetes - rather like a number of the pro's have Asthma today.
A whole team
https://www.teamnovonordisk.com/
Seems a pity to ban technology that might well have uses on normal life - ambulatory monitoring for some health conditions could be very useful.
I didn't realise the UCI's jurisdiction was so far reaching.
E-bikes are very useful for those with some health conditions, too, but I have no problem with the UCI trying to keep them out of competition.
Likewise testosterone supplements, EPO...
That said, this decision seems a bit knee-jerk.
I was thinking more along the lines of the old excuse for F1 - that the tech developed for racing ended up in road cars, to everyone's benefit. Not that it happens much any more.
I do get that this is still a useful training aid (and, somewhat obviously, that the UCI jurisdiction is limited) but there's so much more publicity in racing. Just as we see power stats on amazing rides in races, perhaps we could see glucose levels and other stuff too.
Imagine if ambulatory monitoring really took off and could help millions of people stay healthier - if a sensor could earn of some heart attack pre-cursor and tell a patient to sit down and calm for help, for example. This just seems a backward step.
These monitors and cycling aren't really analogous to F1 and trickle down, quite the opposite in fact.
R&D for this kind of tech generally stems from healthcare, where it's of enormous interest and as such there's the money to develop it. Supersapiens just found a niche an existing tech in endurance sports. I don't know whether the UCI are right to ban it or not, but in the grand scheme it's pretty irrelevant.
I'm really hoping this drives the price of continuous glucose monitoring down so that my diabetic father will start using it, and we can check on him remotely. He's had a couple of scary episodes. But he's in the US, and his insurance pays for test strips, not continuous monitoring, so he'd have to pay that out of pocket.
That's bad luck. He'd be able to get them on the NHS here.
So it is seen as beneficial to ban something that measures what is going on inside an athlete's body? Surely a better approach for UCI is to allow devices so long as data is properly stored and shared as part of a biological passport. No idea if Glucose levels are affected by banned substances but mine are often affected by other prescription meds from time to time.
Can't say I follow sports, but I'd have thought gauging how much you have in the tank, when to hang back, when to go for broke, is part of the skill of the athlete. Doing it all by transducers diminishes the athlete.
See also... powermeters
I think the main benifit of this product, like powermeters is in training rather than racing.
"hang on, please dont attack. My gel has not been fully absorbed yet..."
I cant see the suppliers being overly upset by this.
Seems like overkill to me. I dont see it as comparable to the Nike shoes athletics is currently struggling with or the Sharkskin swimming skins that were eventually banned. The cyclist has still got to translate their metabolic levels to speed/endurance on the road.
I agree with the UCI, turning riders into robots. Imagine getting shouted at from the team car, "rider 3 you need another 20 grams of what is in your left pocket before the next hill, chew twice"
No different to 'Rider 3 you need to do 400 watts for the next 5 minutes' etc. that they already do
Ultimately the bigger teams already do this. It's how Chris Froome fuelled the insane Giro breakaway - they'd already measured his metabolic rate and calculated precisely what he would need to eat to meet his power demands. https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/team-sky-data-release-shows-chris-froomes-power-giro-ditalia-attack-fuelled-lose-weight-race-385048
They should either acknowledge that they really want to return to the 1920s and give every rider the same 15kg steel single speed, or they should accept that technology is moving on. They didn't ban power meters. It leaves the UCI looking a bit luddite-ish.
I think this is exactly this; they are probably the worst sporting governing body in regards to technology. Some of the manufacturers/ tech companies must shake their heads in disbelief and the attitudes at the UCI.
I've always assumed the UCI see it as their job to ensure that cycle racing is about who are the best cyclists, rather than who builds the fastest bikes, with the biggest research budgets. And also to ensure that success is not about who will endure the greatest risk to life and limb.
That means a conservative approach to technical evolution, so that every team can keep pace with the leading edge of bicycle technology. Possibly they are too conservative, but the general idea seems right to me.
Many people would strongly disagree with that assumption.
Look at the stupid sock length rule, for example. Or how UCI-legal TT bikes are not the same as rules for triathlon or the CTT's rules for UK time trials, and the whole fuss and noise about whether an item is considered a 'fairing' (Ganna's front wheel at the Giro). The rules about UCI approval for frames. There are plenty of other examples of their arbitary stance on any number of issues.
Meanwhile other possibly more important matters (e.g. rider safety) are batted away with a deft swish of the hand.
Is in-race blood glucose monitoring really any different from a power meter or HR output or GPS on a bar-mounted head unit or the much-discussed use of race radios?
How far do we restrict technology? Do we return to non-indexed downtube shifters, external cables, 21mm tubulars worn around the body or tucked under the seat and a frame pump to be carried at all times? Do we ban gels and energy drinks and make them eat bananas and drink flat Coke?
Personally I'd be happy to see riders forced to race a TT without a power meter but only because I want them to have to ride using PE or 'feel' and we can see more quotes like "I blew up on that long hill" or "I didn't push enough in the headwind section". Maybe even prevent them seeing any data so they have to judge that by course knowledge and the race organiser's occasional distance markers.
Even if we did any of those things then the teams with the biggest budgets would still hire the best riders, use the latest technology and knowledge to win, whether that's BYO mattresses, a month-long training camp on Tenerife, double the number of support vehicles or the use of 3D printed bike components.
There will never be a genuinely level playing field.
That one single question is the whole crux of it for me. I think the problem is, no one, including the UCI, has a good answer for it at the moment. I think the Luddite thing is probably deliberate ... wanting to keep cycling as purely about what an individual rider does on the bike as it can be, and not being clear on what they should and should not allow in order to do that.
It is not that they are opposed to technical innovation, they just don't want the technical innovation to have too much effect on the racing.
Alternatively, they are just making it up as they go along ... that is probably nearer the truth.