Will the Apple iWatch save your life by prediciting a heart attack?
Apple is known to be considering a Healthbook in iOS 8 that would keep track of the number of steps you took on a certain day, your heart rate, blood pressure, calories burned, and possibly your blood glucose. The readings would come from sensors employed on the iWatch that would capture measurements in real time.
Apple executives have allegedly been meeting with the FDA to discuss the Cupertino based firm's entry into the market for applications that monitor health related metrics. By offering potentially life-saving technology on its smartwatch, Apple could have a leg up on its rivals. The company has been hiring experts in such fields as sleep related disorders and those who are exercise physiologists. The latter "oversee the analysis, improvement, and maintenance of health and fitness; rehabilitation of heart disease and other chronic diseases and disabilities; and the professional guidance and counsel of athletes and others interested in sports training."
source: SFGate via RedmondPie
13. akki20892 (Posts: 3411; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
Nature and human made are totally alternative things. Nature is unpredictable, sometimes technology makes stupidity.
15. sarb009 (Posts: 286; Member since: 15 Jun 2011)
But it's price will give you heart attack for sure
2. apple4never (Posts: 944; Member since: 08 May 2013)
Now thats what innovation, keep it up apple
9. afegit (Posts: 37; Member since: 12 Feb 2014)
yeah. it actually woudnt kill the cancerous company that is Apple
11. iphoneplz (Posts: 10; Member since: 12 Feb 2014)
at least Samsung is trying to help fight cancer by finding ways to collect data about it
12. afegit (Posts: 37; Member since: 12 Feb 2014)
yeah i think thanks to this samsung will cure cancer in 5 years! and then my dream of sammy being best company in world will come true
4. networkdood (Posts: 6267; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Leave to the media to perpetuate the smart watch nonsense...
5. verbalize (Posts: 82; Member since: 03 May 2013)
It's great to see a company who thinks out of the box and produces technology that has many benefits instead of boring same old things that your phone already gives you.
6. apple4never (Posts: 944; Member since: 08 May 2013)
exactly, like the gear and smart watch don't do anything special. this makes sense and like I've said before, i like where apple is going
8. SAO101789 (Posts: 123; Member since: 10 Feb 2014)
I prefer my colorful neff digital watch. If my phone vibrates or rings I'll know and I eat healthy so I'm trusting my life to a doctor not a watch
10. rodneyej1 (Posts: 3534; Member since: 06 Jul 2013)
Nevertheless, I'm gonna get a smart watch asap.
14. willard12 (Posts: 764; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
It's good to see apple is thinking of new ideas. But I'm not sure Apple would risk lawsuits from someone or their family whose iwatch failed to provide them early warning. Also, what person between 18-35 would buy a device because of it's ability to predict heart attacks?
17. KillgoreTroutTime (Posts: 269; Member since: 06 Jan 2014)
Over weight people? Besides, it not like that is the only thing it does.
18. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Plus, depending on how the device is marketed, they will have to navigate FDA medical device regulations. If they are able to connect the dots, Apple could have a huge market what with the aging population. Stay tuned. Challenges beget opportunities and what-not.
20. PBXtech (Posts: 973; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
The FDA is a panel of doctors that receive "donations" from corporations, who in turn get their products passed. Don't think so? Look at the recent pharmaceutical commercials and listen to all the side effects from the drugs that the FDA said were safe to take. Some of these drugs the FDA says is safe to use have more damaging drawbacks than the illnesses people take them for. Gotta love the FDA, always looking out for our safety.
A re-write or loophole in the imminent future to allow things mentioned in this article wouldn't surprise me one bit.
23. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Regardless of your personal opinion of the FDA, once a widget falls under their regulatory purview, they control whether it goes on sale or not. There are countless examples of devices whose sale in the U.S. has been banned by the FDA.
If Apple is going to be selling the iWatch with features that cause it to fall under the medical device regulations, the FDA will determine whether it can be sold in the U.S. There is a huge market opportunity. The challenge for Apple is whether they can connect the dots.
26. networkdood (Posts: 6267; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
DroidDoug - actually, PBX speaks the truth, not an opinion - the fDA is pretty much a useless part of the gov't - the do no testing as they rely on the testing of those who want the product out on the market - it was how the main ingredient in NutraSweet got pushed out to the public, even though it failed its tests, miserably...
28. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Enough with the opinionating. Here is a link to the FDA approval process:http://www.fda.gov/drugs/devel
opmentapprovalprocess/The test data supplied by industry must meet established protocols for validity. If industry doesn't follow the rules and submits invalid data, products get pulled from the market and all of the investment made goes down the toilet.
You would be more on point if you were to complain about the length (and cost) of the approval process acting to keep promising new drugs off the market.
32. PBXtech (Posts: 973; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
"The center doesn't actually test drugs itself, although it does conduct limited research in the areas of drug quality, safety, and effectiveness standards." From the link you provided.
The process is flawed, too many dangerous items get approved. It's just like any other government operation, not enough people and too much work to do on a regular basis. The end result, things fall between the cracks.
33. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Imagine how many dangerous items would get approved absent FDA authority to approve items. We can debate whether something should/shouldn't have been approved, but there is an approval process. Which was the point of my original post - if Apple plans on releasing an iWatch with functions that fall within the FDA's regulatory authority, Apple will need to meet certain requirements before the iWatch can be sold in the U.S.
There is a huge opportunity for a non-invasive monitoring device. For example, if Apple has found a way to accurately monitor blood sugar levels without having to draw blood samples, Apple could be on their way to another $100 Billion in their cash account. But, before they can make any claim to being able to monitor blood sugar, they are going to have to convince the FDA.
29. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Also, the prime risk with Nutrasweet is that under certain conditions, it will degrade to formaldehyde, which is quite toxic. Nutrasweet continues to be sold because the conditions necessary for the degradation don't normally occur in the distribution chain. Can they occur? Yes, but only under extreme circumstances, which aren't the norm.
Informed use. Nutrasweet fills a need for diabetics. It isn't the only option (saccharin has only had one example of toxicity, and that likely resulted from the massive quantity that was fed to the test animals).
16. KIANO (Posts: 67; Member since: 13 Feb 2011)
iPod came as the 'ultimate digital pocket device'. Then came the iPhone as the 'ultimate digital entertainment pocket phone'.
So an iWatch will be the ultimate health-monitoring wrist-device? That's interesting... Preferably to say that an iWatch may have some features for sport activity and on-the-go or hand-free activity.
21. Augustine (Posts: 702; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Aren't draconian regulations in place to stifle such kind of innovations?
24. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5719; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
IDK about the stifle part of your question. But yes, there are regulations in place in the U.S. that cover medical devices. Apple will need to comply with those regulations if they want to sell an iWatch that has functions that fall under the regulations for medical devices.
22. LuckyS (Posts: 52; Member since: 07 Dec 2013)
I will get heart attack if I read another article like this. Dear mother of holly ilies.
27. networkdood (Posts: 6267; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Wow - nice to see people's weak minds succumb to the thought that they have to obtain a smart watch...
31. willard12 (Posts: 764; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
One example for the simple-minded; in the state of Hawaii (where I reside) it is illegal to touch your cell phone while driving. It is a $200 fine and a mandatory court appearance. You can't simply pay the $200. A smart watch allows a user to control their music from their wrist that is already on the steering wheel; never touching your phone. You can see and respond to texts messages without even looking at your phone. If you avoid 1 ticket, a smartwatch has paid for itself. It's not a pet rock. And I'm sure you felt the same way about tablets.
30. RandomUsername (Posts: 452; Member since: 29 Oct 2013)
I think it will cause a heart attack by looking at the price tag...