I'm not sure - saw this link too: http://www.myomnipod.com/pdf/14276-AW%20Siphon%20Effects%20Study%20Reprint%20R1%2001-10.pdf
I found it curious but I had all but forgotten about it. If you get your hands on raw data, I will be very interested to see your review!
wow, so omnipod (the pump manufacturer that came out with the "least affected by position" claim by this uber-science group, has a link on it's website. =) gee i wonder if the data and the data purveyor are related?
In my defense I have just been pissy lately due to overwork, undersleep, and modicum pay. ;-) I really put an effort out there to not reply to "crisis awareness" alerts like this but it caught me off guard and I hit send instead of the little x in the upper right corner.
BTW, the rollercoaster thing is real, it has to do with the pump position relative to acceleration. it's real in terms of a possible (although highly unlikely) unintended bolus and it would be really rare to have anyone get a bolus this way. I think the CDE who said it's a pump physical damage thing may not have taken physics.
the pump position thing means that the hydrostatic head, caused by a reservior being above the infusion site, can and does overcome the resistance (friction) if the dual o-rings in the reservior plunger. I aint buying it. plus I dont know what kind of infusion set they used... the quickset is vented to prevent siphon. so I call shenanigans on the whole thing. I am not going to do another tirade or dissertation, I swear.