Study shows CGM technology could add months to lives of thousands with type 2 diabetes

A new study suggests that thousands of New Zealanders with type 2 diabetes who rely on multiple daily insulin injections could gain roughly three months of additional life by using continuous glucose monitoring technology instead of traditional finger-prick blood tests. The research, led by Associate Professor Ryan Paul, an endocrinologist at the University of Waikato and Health New Zealand, alongside collaborators in the United States and the United Kingdom, found that the devices not only extend life expectancy but also allow people to spend more years free from the serious complications that typically accompany poorly controlled diabetes.

The technology works through a small sensor placed under the skin that tracks glucose levels around the clock and transmits the data to a smartphone or receiver. Unlike finger-prick testing, which captures only isolated snapshots of blood sugar at the moment of the test, continuous glucose monitoring shows the complete picture of how glucose levels rise and fall throughout the day and night. The sensor lasts at least ten days, meaning users need only one finger prick every two weeks rather than up to four daily. Paul emphasized that this real-time information fundamentally changes how people manage their condition. When glucose levels drift too high or too low, the device alerts users immediately, allowing them to adjust their food intake or activity on the spot rather than waiting hours for the next scheduled test.

The cost-effectiveness argument is particularly compelling when set against the broader burden diabetes places on New Zealand's health system. Health New Zealand spends over two billion dollars annually on diabetes care, with more than eighty percent of that budget devoted to treating complications—laser surgery and eye treatments for vision loss, dialysis or kidney transplants for renal failure, and amputations for foot disease. A continuous glucose monitoring sensor currently costs between twenty-five and fifty-five dollars per week for those paying out of pocket, a significant expense but one that generates downstream savings by preventing these far more costly interventions. As prices drop with increased market competition, the technology becomes more accessible.

The disparity in diabetes outcomes between Māori and Pacific peoples and European New Zealanders underscores why this technology matters urgently. Māori and Pacific people are at least two and a half times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes, to experience complications from it, and to die from it. More starkly, young Māori and Pacific people with diabetes die twenty to twenty-five years earlier than their European counterparts without the disease. Paul described what he calls an intergenerational cycle: babies born to mothers with gestational diabetes face a very high likelihood of developing type 2 diabetes themselves by age thirty, which then increases the risk for their own children. This pattern affects both fathers and mothers, creating a compounding health burden across generations.

Paul stressed that type 2 diabetes, particularly when it emerges in younger people, behaves aggressively and demands intervention. The technology could be especially cost-effective for young Māori and Pacific people with the condition. He acknowledged that widespread misconceptions about type 2 diabetes—that it is entirely self-induced and therefore undeserving of technological support—persist in public conversation. But the evidence tells a different story. Between fifty and seventy percent of obesity and type 2 diabetes risk is genetic. Beyond genetics, New Zealand faces what Paul described as a perfect storm: the rising cost of living makes healthy food expensive, physical activity rates are declining, and the environment itself promotes weight gain and metabolic dysfunction.

New Zealand already leads the world in providing continuous glucose monitoring access to people with type 1 diabetes. The next step, Paul argued, is extending that same access to people with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy. The study demonstrates that the technology works, that it saves money in the long run, and that it could add meaningful years of life and health to thousands of New Zealanders—particularly those communities bearing the heaviest burden of the disease. What remains is the policy decision to make it available.