Good news.

I just hope such useful medical technology doesn't remain permanently anchored to a platform that many can't afford and insurance is unlikely to cover (iPhone + Apple Watch or comparable Android/Samsung implementations).

Edit: updated to include other mobile platforms which have/are probably developing similar functionality.

Don't the new smasung watch do the same thing?

For the same price, yeah

Still gonna be orders of magnitude cheaper than this:

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/experimental-gene-therapy-reverses-sickle-cell-disease-years

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/sickle-cell-cure-will-be-cost-effective-if-health-disparities-considered-study-2022-12-13

It could help. And then again it couldn't.

An Apple Watch isn't a medical device and they know it.

Any claim of medical help using an Apple Watch is spurious and possibly legally actionable.

Assuming it's no longer considered experimental, I would expect private insurance and/or Medicare/Medicaid to provide coverage for that, even if it is more expensive.

The problem with asking private or public insurance to cover an iPhone/Apple Watch or comparable Android/Samsung implementation is that those devices are not limited to only the "fit for covered purpose" functionality.

Edited my comment to reflect that.

I'll have whatever Macrumors is having, must be some good shit.

Oh ok

> According to a study conducted by researchers at Duke University's Day Hospital (via MyHealthyApple), the Apple Watch could help treat vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs), a key complication caused by sickle cell disease that often hospitalizes patients due to severe pain. The research indicates that machine learning using the Apple Watch's collected health data can discover trends to predict pain among people with sickle cell disease, which could provide an early warning signal and enable treatment via painkillers and saline hydration before it becomes more severe.

Assuming you didn't actually read the article and aren't actually in the legal profession.

A study, conducted by researchers, says "hey we may be able to use this to do this!"

Not Apple saying "use our watch to treat sickle cell!" at all. It's researchers saying the device may assist with early warning signs.

You are simply incorrect. There is more than enough evidence of medical benefits to having an Apple Watch.

>Assuming you didn't actually read the article and aren't actually in the legal profession.

I read the article. I don't have to be a legal expert or any other kind of expert to express my opinion, which is what I did. What's the point in you even stating this unless you're a legal expert yourself because you're rendering your own opinion here as well.

>A study, conducted by researchers, says "hey we may be able to use this to do this!"

A study was conducted using their watch as a data collection tool and nothing else. They were probably paid for the brand mention. Basically they used the watch as a sensor, that's all. A different brand watch could be used in exactly the same way or perhaps some actual medical sensors so there's nothing special about that claim, it's simply branding.

>Not Apple saying "use our watch to treat sickle cell!" at all. It's researchers saying the device may assist with early warning signs.

I didn't say Apple claimed anything. I said that claims of this thing being medically beneficial were spurious and possibly legally actionable.

It's a sensor, that's all.

It's like wearing a stethoscope and claiming that it's saving your life.

K

They’re a lot more affordable than most medical devices. The fact they’re mass produced to the numbers they are likely helps in making them more affordable. Classifying them as medical devices for certain diseases should be considered if they can reduce the costs of other treatments and lead to better lifestyles for patients.

why haven’t i read yet that apple watch can cure cancer, hiv and hemorrhoids? let’s make these ads more interesting, please.

Agreed.

A sensor that tells you if you might be having afib. Right just like a stethoscope does.

>A sensor that tells you if you might be having afib.

Yeah a sensor in the actual medical device called an AED - Automatic Electronic Defibrillator - determines that, not an Apple smartwatch.

>Right just like a stethoscope does.

The stethoscope is useless without a trained professional using it because anyone else is simply guessing at what they hear.

An Apple Watch has sensors that can help in predicting afib, smoothbrain.

>An Apple Watch has sensors that can help in predicting afib

The article does not cover afib at all. What are you talking about? I only engaged with the AED because it's an actual medical device, which an Apple watch is not.

>smoothbrain

Sophomoric insults are a sure sign of a loser losing an argument.

Have a great day.

If you don’t know what the Apple Watch does why are you saying it has no medical benefits? If you don’t understand what I’m trying to say then I’m sorry no one can help you be better informed.

Not to mention pulse ox and how much that does help a person with sickle cell tracking and predicting their vocs.

>If you don’t know what the Apple Watch does why are you saying it has no medical benefits?

I know what an Apple watch is and what it's capable of doing. I said it's not a medical device. Medical benefits are a different story. Many non-medical devices have medical benefits. There's a big difference there.

Do you generally reply to people without actually reading their words? I said nothing about medical benefits.

Excuse me. I used the more sensible phrasing. You said “medical help”

Do you generally forget your own words shortly after writing them?

>You said “medical help”

No, I didn't say that either. You're trying so hard to shoehorn words into my mouth and you're failing because this is text.

The entire gist of my statements are that an Apple Watch is not a medical device, shouldn't be trusted as one, and people referring to it as such should not be trusted either.

You've literally made up everything else here.

https://i.imgur.com/2dq9R15.jpg

Here’s a reminder where you say “medical help”

Also, feel free to explain what I made up if you can remember. You can scroll up if you need a refresher.

[removed]

Becuase while Apple is making great strides in the medical department becuase of the sensors, advertising them as some medical device that can save or help keep your life great isnt a smart move.

You can buy a pulse oximeter for less than £10 and they have existed for decades. Pathetic that people think tacking a sensor onto a several hundred dollar device is some revolutionary medical advance. Get a grip.

[removed]

Good lord, look at your profile asking the internet about drug dosing. Get a grip.

As opposed to dying? Or more expensive dedicated equipment?

FWIW, the debate between you and u/FSYigg is a little weird because you're both half right and half wrong.

You don't need an AED to detect AF. You just need an ECG. AF is diagnosed from irregularity and atrial activity as P waves, which the very basic-level ECG capabilities of the Apple watch are very capable of doing. A clinician can also fairly reliably detect the signs of AF with a stethoscope, although formal diagnosis would need to be confirmed by an ECG. More widely, cardiac problems generally need a 12 lead ECg, which the apple watch does not do. An apple watch can definitely detect AF. But it shouldn't be relied upon for formal diagnosis.

In other words, it's not a "medical device" in the sense that no doctor is likely to begin treatment for AF based on your own findings from a watch, but they would take a watch ECG seriously and reliably enough as a sign that further investigations are needed.

How long before Republicans ban Apple watches?

I know. I wasn’t trying to open that can of worms. All I said was that it can be medically benifival and can help in finding afib as it has for people I know. The watch detects a change and pings the wearer to get looked at.

Or less expensive dedicated equipment.

Indeed.

[removed]

And then again it couldn't.