Slashdot Mirror


iPods and Pacemakers Don't Mix

fermion writes "The Register reports a study that indicates that iPods and pacemakers do not get along. While there do not appear to be any long term effects, iPods disrupt the operation of the pacemaker. It is noted that such effects have not previously been observed as iPods do seem to be popular with the pacemaker-wearing population."

152 comments

  1. Frist Post by rts008 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I've already patented the iPacemaker add-on for the iPod!! w00t!

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:Frist Post by MrNormS · · Score: 1

      I hope it matches your heartbeat to the beat of the song you're listening to.

    2. Re:Frist Post by rts008 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, that's the problem with this thing.

      I originally tried it out with some favorite DeathSpeedMetal tunes, but alas, it induced extreme fibrillation- had to reload my iPacemaker with neil diamond. Now I can't even get out of my chair from in front of my computer.
      Oh well, nothing lasts forever. *sigh*

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    3. Re:Frist Post by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 0, Redundant

      That's the last black metal music I'll ever listen to then... if my heart beat that fast it would probably kill me...

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    4. Re:Frist Post by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Look at that guy dancing to his iPod..."
      "He's not dancing, he's having a coronary!"
      "Either way, he's got good rhythm!"

    5. Re:Frist Post by rts008 · · Score: 1

      "Either way, he's got good rhythm!"

      LOL! C|N>K Hope the keyboard dries out! LOL

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    6. Re:Frist Post by bccomm · · Score: 5, Funny

      neil diamond

      Still searching for that artificial heart of gold, eh? I know the feeling.

    7. Re:Frist Post by bccomm · · Score: 1

      Schmidt! Yes, I effed that one up.

    8. Re:Frist Post by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      By definition, pacemaker recipients have bad rhythm.

      Unless they're the animals used as test subjects in the 'dog lab.' Then they've just got bad luck.

    9. Re:Frist Post by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Hah Hah Hah LOL!

      Still able to fly over a curb, faster than a speeding tortois, able to leap a fire hydrant on one my GOOD DAYS, and to top it off...huh? what?... HEY YOU KIDS,GET OFF OF MY LAWN! Oh, where was I?...Nevermind!\

      (BTW: Date of Birth: 02/16/58: DOB != Older Than Dirt--please?!!!!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    10. Re:Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Heart of Gold" was Neil Young, jackass.

  2. iPods and pacemakers don't mix?! by Saint+V+Flux · · Score: 0

    Well what the hell is someone with a pacemaker doing jogging in the first place? It could kill them!

    1. Re:iPods and pacemakers don't mix?! by Babbster · · Score: 5, Informative

      Despite the fact that you've been modded into oblivion, I'll respond because it's a fairly common belief that people with heart problems requiring a pacemaker are always restricted in terms of their cardiovascular activity. In fact, pacemakers are often prescribed to treat symptoms such as exercise intolerance, and the patients who have them can often exercise just as vigorously as anyone else (barring other physical problems). A quick googling turned up this American Heart Association paper which details many of the common misconceptions associated with pacemaker use.

    2. Re:iPods and pacemakers don't mix?! by Babbster · · Score: 1

      Good, good. Glad to hear it. I'm sorry that I didn't get (and still don't get) your joke.

    3. Re:iPods and pacemakers don't mix?! by heinousjay · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think the problem here is simple: joke - funny = stupid statement. You got caught in the whirlwind is all.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  3. Ipod only? by yakumo.unr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Despite them being by far the most popular portable digital player, why would this focus purely on the ipod? how can they possibly be doing this, and it not be a problem for other players?

    1. Re:Ipod only? by megamerican · · Score: 1
      The mean age of the study was 77. I don't imagine many people at that age use mp3 players very often. You would think that they'd use other devices, but the iPod has such a large market share over anything else. Now that they know the iPod can cause problems for pacemakers, the next step would be to test similar devices. Why waste your time with 50 devices when you aren't sure if there will be a problem with one? The iPod is clearly the logical choice to start a study.

      You would think that after doing a study on iPods only and finding such surprising results that they would start studying other devices.

      --
      If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
    2. Re:Ipod only? by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here is a list of at least 30 common devices that would probably interfere with a pacemaker. This is nothing new. All pacemaker patients are told about this when they first get one. The iPod angle was just a way to get the story in the news.

    3. Re:Ipod only? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Maybe the iPod a large market share compared to any other single player, but I see a lot more people with portable CD players (discman) than with iPods. They aren't all specifically 1 brand or model, but they are a lot more prominent.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:Ipod only? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Get real! The idea of someone with a pacemaker dying with a Zune in their hand is laughable. If fact, such a person would more likely die from embrassment than a pacemaker failure.

    5. Re:Ipod only? by Misch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Jay Thaker, a student at Okemos High School in Michigan, co-authored the the report with a friend of his father, Dr. Krit Jongnarangsin, an assistant professor in the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine at the University of Michigan.

      High school student & assistant medical professor doing the study. Probably not a lot of money to go around and get lots of devices there. Probably used what they had on hand.

      --

      --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
    6. Re:Ipod only? by johnpaul191 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      as of last year i read somewhere that in the USA portable CD players (discmans) still outsold digital music players something like 5:1. not sure where they are going, i feel like i see digital players of some flavor everywhere i look.

    7. Re:Ipod only? by bay43270 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Patients aren't told as much as you would think. When my infant son got his, we were given a list that basically included anything wireless. It wasn't until we asked around a little before we got more reasonable information.

      With that in mind, this article taught me something new. I had always assumed interference was related to the wireless nature of pacemakers. My son's is regularly re-programmed via a wireless device set anywhere near his chest. I had assumed if there was a problem it would be related to whatever memory was being programmed. The ipod article suggests the interference is just an interruption between the device and its leads. They suggest the interference won't cause lasting problems once the patient is separated from the interfering device. That's not something that was in the 50 page booklet that they provided with the pacemaker.

    8. Re:Ipod only? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      they are cheaper by a huge margin.
      I'm sure that's got a lot to do with it.
      you don't need a PC to use a diskman, that too must count for many sales.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    9. Re:Ipod only? by vishbar · · Score: 1

      Get real! The idea of someone with a pacemaker dying with a Zune in their hand is laughable. If fact, such a person would more likely die from embrassment than a pacemaker failure.

      Well don't stop there! The idea of anyone, pacemaker or no, dying with a Zune in their hand is laughable! Actually....well, the idea of anyone with a Zune in their hand, living or dead, is laughable in itself :-).

      --
      Ride the skies
    10. Re:Ipod only? by Nalgas+D.+Lemur · · Score: 1

      I just saw someone with a Discman/portable CD player of some sort a day or two ago, and it occurred to me how few of them I see now. It really does seem like the vast majority of what I see these days is iPods and similar. I would say that maybe it's because I hang around nerdy tech people, except I usually see people listening to things like that while I'm riding the bus or subway, which have pretty much all kinds of people on them.

    11. Re:Ipod only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow....that is a pretty exhaustive list...
      what would be the motivation to getting a pacemaker, if you weren't allowed to live afterwards??

      why wouldn't pacemakers have been upgraded to adapt to our ever changing lifestyles? Ipods have already have like 5 generations....when can we expect a 2nd gen. pacemaker that is compatible with other electronic devices??

    12. Re:Ipod only? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Might wanna reread the column headers there. Most of "livin'" falls in the first column, which is labeled, "safe." I would assume safe means safe. I am curious as to why scuba diving would be verboten. It's not electronic, and if it's the pressure thing, then "travel to high-altitude biomes" should also be forbidden. Like, no more trips from LA to Aspen...

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    13. Re:Ipod only? by Xaker · · Score: 1

      Agreed. EMI is nothing new. I am unsure how some 17-year old got an article everywhere considering that it's not really "news". I figure he picked the main topics that people want to hear about death/danger + popular technology (iPod)

    14. Re:Ipod only? by magicchex · · Score: 1

      Kid goes to my high school and professor goes to my University. Crazy world... my brother will be graduating from Okemos in a couple weeks while I should have graduated from Michigan a couple weeks ago, but am a couple years behind. Great high school by the way, but they spent way too much money building it and now the district is hemorrhaging money,

      --
      How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
    15. Re:Ipod only? by BootNinja · · Score: 1

      They're probably being purchased in and shipped to Nigeria with stolen credit cards.

    16. Re:Ipod only? by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      as of last year i read somewhere that in the USA portable CD players (discmans) still outsold digital music players something like 5:1. not sure where they are going, i feel like i see digital players of some flavor everywhere i look.

      Yeah, and the most popular bras are not the sexy ones worn by Victoria Secret model hotties either. They are Wal-mart specials that could double as a hammock.

    17. Re:Ipod only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite them being by far the most popular portable digital player, why would this focus purely on the ipod?

      You're kidding, right? Cost? Availability? The fact that you have to start somewhere?

      Next you'll be complaining that they only tested current models of iPods and not older models...

    18. Re:Ipod only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be ridiculous. Everyone knows that pacemaker interference occurs on the non-brown part of the EM spectrum.

    19. Re:Ipod only? by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      you can get a cheap portable cd player that also plays CD-R, CD-RW with mp3's, maybe even wma. Like $20 or something. Great way to cheaply add mp3 to a car, eh?

      Also I seriously doubt a cd/mp3 would ever have DRM. (unless it was a sony...)

      Walmart has (or used to) have them.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    20. Re:Ipod only? by marklar1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The patient brochure you were given is designed to educate new "owners" of the dangers. No, they don't go into great detail as to why things are warned, they just warn there. The majority of our patients can't/won't/wouldn't be able to follow complex explanations of behaviors. They would also be less likely to get through ANY of the manuals and information if it looked like the technical manuals for one of these devices.

      The explosion of Cell phone devices has caused manufacturers to pay greater attention to EMI...and about 3-4 years ago the first of the big 3 manufacturers started advertising/marketing their engineered resistance to cell phones.

      If memory serves me correctly, the The energy field falls off at a proportion to the square of the distance. Patients used to be advised to carry their cell phones in the breast pocket of a jacket opposite their implantation site (about 90+ percent left shoulder in the US). They were further cautioned if they felt dizzy that the POTENTIAL effect of a phone would be obviated holding at arms length.

      Implantable pacemakers/defibs don't sense the type of EKG that you would see as gathered from surface leads. They try to make sense of the hearts intrinsic rhythm/activity from sensing at the tips of the leads. Different leads, different sensor technologies, and different algorithms for analysis all can play a part. Furthermore, the connectors on the heads of the devices are standardized to accomodate interchanging leads from other companies--and like all "standards" this one has evolved in generations...and has meant good things for patients BTW.

      The first pacers just had a minimum rate...ie. wouldn't let the heart rate drop below 60. Subsequent generations added "rate smoothing"...ie if your heart was beating at rate above 60, the pacer would allow for the subsequent beat to be no longer than a fixed or programmable percentage than the prior beat, to regularlize heart rate during activity or strain. The latest devices use either vibration sensors, or accelerometers, optionally combined with minute ventillation (breathing rate sensors measuring changes in impedance in a separate/non-pacing signal conducted from the tip of the lead back to a sensor on the generator) to vary rate according to exertion levels.

      Most patients see their doctor one to three times in the month post operatively, then follow up with an annual (single-lead pacer), biannual (dual-lead pacer), or quarterly (AICD / defibrillator). This is a good time for patients or family members to ask questions. At a great percentage of these followup appointments, a representative of the company is often there. The programming interface, features, and diagnostic/therapeutic algorithms vary consideratbly from company to company, device to device, and there are devices going back up to twenty years!!! Old flask-sized devices in patients with minimal usage just ticking away.....

      The Pacemaker companies (3 majors in the US) have done a good job in educating customers, providing 24 hour hotline technical support by phone and on pager response via sales and clinical reps... the level of accountability, the level of service, and as part and parcel the level of education of the sales/clinical team has few peers in ANY industry.

      Further, the pacemaker companies direct clients are the physicians and hospitals. They buy the device, and install it, and should be the primary line of information and service of the device. The companies have done an amazing job in educating and including patients where the hospitals and doctors don't really have widely-available, ,efficient mechanisms to do that in place.

      Beyond what is produced by the manufacturers, there are many widely available books on pacing and defibrillation, as well as electophysiologic "EP" testing that start with the fundamentals--you can follow along with if you have a decent basic science background. A few of the standard intro texts are:

      K Ellenbogen: Cardiac Pacing

      R Fogros: Electrophysiologic Testing

      Best of luck to you and your son.

    21. Re:Ipod only? by Mhtsos · · Score: 1

      From the link: Avoid: Stun guns.

    22. Re:Ipod only? by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      Despite them being by far the most popular portable digital player, why would this focus purely on the ipod? how can they possibly be doing this, and it not be a problem for other players?

      Remember, this "study" was run by a 17-year-old. We know very little; my guess is that it was a high school science project where the student visited his grandparents at a retirement home.

  4. wait a min by wizardforce · · Score: 1

    The interference usually just caused the equipment to misread the heart's pacing, but one case caused the pacemaker to stop working entirely. none of the symptoms are life-threatening, and the pacemakers returned to normal when the iPods were shut off.
    I wouldn't be so sure about that, what concerns me is that it can cause the pacemaker to misread the heart rhythm, the actual heart rhythm can be disrupted if the pacemaker doesn't work right- and if it happens during driving or something like that it xan be life threatening.
    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:wait a min by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      ...and if it happens during driving or something like that it xan be life threatening.

      Everybody who uses their iPod while driving is life threatening.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:wait a min by Atheose · · Score: 1

      So you're saying you know more than a professor in the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine at the University of Michigan? No offense, but I think I'll take his word for it rather than yours.

      Wow, slashdotters are getting more arrogant every day.

    3. Re:wait a min by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      my grandmother had a problem with her heart, she had A-fibs [heart beat very erratic, dangerous] it didn't take much to set it off, and when it did she would get disoriented, and couldn't walk or drive safely when it happened. by the number of people that have a similar problem it would be irresponsible to say it doesn't pose ANY risk. as a professor of Cardiovascular Medicine he should have known better.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  5. No way in heck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This study is prima facie complete BS. iPods emit less RF than pretty much anything else in the environment around you. They have to meet FCC Part 15 and other international standards, just like any other device.

    If someone's pacemaker is acting up, it had better not be an iPod causing it, or that person had better move into a Faraday cage.

    File this under "OMG cell phones kill bees!!!11!"

    1. Re:No way in heck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct.

    2. Re:No way in heck by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First off, the various standards only set a maximum limit for interference. It is practically impossible to eliminate it entire and the iPod certainly emits its fair share. Secondly, since the heart's electrical signals do not generate very much current, the pacemaker's sensing leads are necessarily very sensitive. They are so sensitive that they will pick up interference from nearby EMI sources. It's a known problem with the fundamental concept of a pacemaker. The manufacturers do their best to protect against it, but mostly the only thing you can do is maintain physical distance.

  6. iPods *do* seem to be popular? by The+Iso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "It is noted that such effects have not previously been observed as iPods do seem to be popular with the pacemaker-wearing population." Is this a typo?

    --
    "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
    1. Re:iPods *do* seem to be popular? by fractoid · · Score: 2
      Yes.

      The reason why it this hasn't been caught before?
      "Most pacemaker patients are not iPod users," Jongnarangsin said. ®
      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    2. Re:iPods *do* seem to be popular? by resequenced · · Score: 1

      I was wondering the same thing. I'm guessing it was meant to say "do not".

      Though, it could be emphasis that the issue is more prevalent with newer generation iPods, and noting that despite their popularity the effects hadn't been observed before. I don't think it'd be note-worthy to say "We didn't notice because people with pacemakers just never used iPods."

      --
      rsdn
    3. Re:iPods *do* seem to be popular? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly rabbit! iPods are for kids!

    4. Re:iPods *do* seem to be popular? by gsslay · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be slashdot without some error somewhere.

      This one completely negates everything that is written previously, so must be in line for some kind of prize. But I guess a study that's sloppy science deserves a sloppy write-up.

  7. (no subject) by blhack · · Score: 1

    This is actually quite startling. What exactly inside of the ipod is giving off interference that effects the pacemaker? Is it the hard disk? If so, there is most likely quite a few more devices that could cause disruption.

    Clearly this is a covert terrorist attempt by toshiba against bush!!!! Toshiba KNEW bush would buy an ipod, and thats why they included the secret ray gun device emmitter in their hardrives!!

    -toshiba killed my best friend
    --I am an american
    ---I am an american
    ----I am an american

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    1. Re:(no subject) by k_187 · · Score: 1

      I thought Cheney was the one with the pacemaker?

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    2. Re:(no subject) by blhack · · Score: 1

      I see this plot goes much deeper than i could have even imagined.

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    3. Re:(no subject) by zurtle · · Score: 1

      The Americans invented the secret Reagan a long time ago.

      BZZZT F-tang F-tang

      --
      Couldn't stand the weather
  8. Misquote in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTA:

    "Most pacemaker patients are not iPod users,"...

    Shouldn't the summary read:

    "...iPods do not seem to be popular with the pacemaker-wearing population."

    Just an observation to clear things up, as I don't think my grandfather will ever rock out to an iPod.

  9. iRobot by ghoul · · Score: 2, Funny

    In further investigation it was found this effect is present only in the new fifth generation iPods when the red light is on. Apple has denied plans for world domination by sending signals to iPods to control peoples minds. "Ridiculous", said an Apple spokesman "Our brain control waves are on a totally different wavelenth than the heart stopping killer waves" Inestigators have also come across reports of a single iPod mini going around turning off the waves

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  10. Returns by Joebert · · Score: 4, Funny

    And why are you returning this product today sir ? Has it quit functioning properly ? Would you like to trade it in for a new one ?

    Nah, it killed grandpa, I want my money back.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    1. Re:Returns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >And why are you returning this product today sir ? Has it quit functioning properly ? Would you like to trade it in for a new one ?

      >Nah, it killed grandpa, where'd you get more of this?

      fixed

  11. must be a slow news day.... by blankmange · · Score: 3, Interesting

    so this is a valid study? a 17-year-old high school student tested 100 pacemaker-wearing subjects with only iPods (and no other MP3 devices)..... yeah...

    --
    ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
    1. Re:must be a slow news day.... by networkzombie · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you kidding? Let's send an iPod to Dick Cheney ASAP! Wait... am I posting anonymously?

    2. Re:must be a slow news day.... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Actually, he already has one.

      But I like the conspiracy theory!

    3. Re:must be a slow news day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to suggest pummeling him with a few hundred high velocity iPods, that old bastard is a toughie.

  12. where's all the EM noise coming from by uncreativ · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Is the electromagnetic noise coming from the hard drive? Wouldn't many other devices, besides just iPods, cause the same kinds of problems?

    I can understand microwaves and particle accelerators :) causing problems with folks who have pacemakers. It would appear they should be concerned aout much more. I would think manufacturers of pacemakers have some responsibility to make their devices handle the everydy environment they work in. Do cell phones break pace makers? Those who have pacemakers just aren't able to avoid electronics.

    1. Re:where's all the EM noise coming from by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I work for a pacemaker company and have personally seen the vast amount of engineering and V&V that goes into a new pacemaker. Pacemakers aren't just slapped together by a 4 or 5 guys in a weekend, and the FDA says "Yeah that looks about right." They are built over the course of years, by teams of dozens and dozens of hardware and software engineers with a mind numbing amount of V&V. Then the FDA goes through their literally thousands of test results with a fine tooth comb.

      That said, I think the biggest problem I could see happening is if an external device somehow managed to fake out a "wake up and communicate" pulse and caused an unnecessary power drain on the pacemaker.

  13. uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as iPods do seem to be popular with the pacemaker-wearing population.


    the ipod, no, but the zune is sure being aimed towards the fossil market, at least according to steve ballmer.

  14. This is a bit biased... by msauve · · Score: 4, Interesting

    iPods obviously meet FCC regulations for RF emissions.

    The real concern is why pacemakers are made so they are susceptible to such interference. What happens when a user is exposed to an intentional RF radiator, which would be expected to put out much more power, and consequently cause problems at much greater distance?

    It should be obvious that more study must be done - at what frequencies are pacemakers most affected? Might an 802.11 device, for example, be even more disruptive?

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:This is a bit biased... by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 0

      It's the rare-earth magnet in the harddrive. The easiest solution would be to get a nano.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    2. Re:This is a bit biased... by neapolitan · · Score: 2, Informative

      802.x frequencies generally don't cause any problem if they stay in the frequency range, but at extremely close proximity any RF source would give significant power to frequencies outside this range and could contribute to noise seen by the device...

      In fact, Guidant released a defibrillator/pacer awhile back that programmed wirelessly, I believe in the 802.11 spectrum.

      http://www.guidant.com/news/500/web_release/nr_000 570.shtml

      This opens up a whole realm of bad possibilities, to your ambitious neighbor kid reprogramming your device to accidental interference. Of course, the engineers prepared for this -- one must initiate programming with a wand / frequency outside 802.11, which only has a range of 2 inches. Thus, there can be no drive-by hacking of the device. This wireless device is not used much (in fact, I've never seen one outside the research setting) as the wireless convenience of programming was still regarded as a security / safety risk and did not really add too much utility...

      --
      Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
    3. Re:This is a bit biased... by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2, Informative

      The real concern is why pacemakers are made so they are susceptible to such interference. The heart's electrical signals are very weak, so the pacemaker's sensing leads have to be incredibly sensitive in order to pick them up. Unfortunately, any ungrounded wire is an antenna, so that hyper sensitivity means that they pick up noise, even from sources that meet FCC regulations. Since the exposed lead has to be in physical contact with the heart at some point, there's no 100% effective way to eliminate the noise. It's a known problem with the very concept of a pacemaker.
    4. Re:This is a bit biased... by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about Guidant, but I used to work for one of their competitors and the hardware support has been there for a while. Of course, there were all sorts of concerns about interference and even security as you mentioned, so it was never enabled in production units. It's still used extensively in house because it's much faster than traditional programming.

  15. Easy... by adona1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They did try to do the same study with the Zune, but were unable to find anyone to participate

    --
    Between the falling angel and the rising ape
    1. Re:Easy... by rts008 · · Score: 0

      Is that what they mean by 'Plays For Sure'?

      Imagine the BSOD with you're pacemaker!

      Spectator1: Hey, that dude is turning blue and flopping around on the ground!

      Spectator2: Look at the grip he has on his Zune and his chest!

      Spectator1: Yeah, BSOD Plays For Sure, let's grab a cup of coffee before we have to get back.

      Spectator2: Cool, entertainment AND coffee on our break....it's great to be alive!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    2. Re:Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steve Ballmer's 85-year-old uncle refused to accept the Zune, even as a gift.

    3. Re:Easy... by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      They were doing a heart study. The zune affects a different organ in the body. There is a reason for the brown color...

  16. The answer is obvious by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's because the iPod has DRM.

    (not only that; you should see how long it takes to copy a 17 megabyte file from an ipod to a pacemaker!)

    1. Re:The answer is obvious by Misch · · Score: 4, Funny

      Digital Rhythm Management?

      --

      --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
    2. Re:The answer is obvious by Dirtside · · Score: 4, Funny

      What song was it? "My Heart Will Go On"?

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    3. Re:The answer is obvious by loganrapp · · Score: 1
      Actually, it was "When Your Heart Stops Beating."


      Certainly would've killed me.

    4. Re:The answer is obvious by FlyByWire63 · · Score: 1

      It was really 'Stop Draggin My Heart Around'

    5. Re:The answer is obvious by H8X55 · · Score: 1

      no way! Rhythm Is Gonna Get You - Gloria Estefan & Miami Sound Machine.

  17. Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is noted that such effects have not previously been observed as iPods do not seem to be popular with the pacemaker-wearing population. Also, does this affect HDD and flash based ipods?
  18. touch sensor, maybe by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    how can they possibly be doing this, and it not be a problem for other players?

    Well, for one thing, the touch-sensitive scroll-wheel is somewhat (though certainly not completely) unique. They use capacitive touch sensing. They utilize a low-voltage, low current AC voltage to measure the change in capacitance when you move your finger over the sensor. The googles say 102kHz is common.

    My "second generation" nano produces a high-pitched noise whenever it's on- it's noticeable if you have it within 2 feet or so of your head. I'm pretty sure it is the inverter that generates the AC current, but if it's 120kHz, that shouldn't be possible, unless there's a resonant frequency in the audible range.

    Maybe the sensor just happens to use a frequency that confuses pacemakers. Now that Apple is aware of the problem, they might do some testing and change it on future iPods.

    1. Re:touch sensor, maybe by hazem · · Score: 3, Informative

      My "second generation" nano produces a high-pitched noise whenever it's on- it's noticeable if you have it within 2 feet or so of your head. I'm pretty sure it is the inverter that generates the AC current, but if it's 120kHz, that shouldn't be possible, unless there's a resonant frequency in the audible range.

      That's a known problem and you can get a warranty replacement. I bought one and as soon as I turned it on I notice the sound. Googled and found many people complained about it. I called the mac store and they said bring it back and they gave me a replacement with no hassles.

    2. Re:touch sensor, maybe by Agripa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The capacitance sensor electronics run at such a low power level that I am certain that is not the cause of the noise you are hearing. The main switching power supply is a much more likely candidate.

    3. Re:touch sensor, maybe by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just walked down the hall and asked the guy who designed about 70% of the switchers for the various ipods, and he said they run at "about 600 KHz" fwiw. I bet it's not them.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    4. Re:touch sensor, maybe by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Dunno if it's related, but whenever my mobile phone goes off and it's next to my iPod, the volume goes absolutely haywire (which on in-ear headphones, as you can imagine, isn't fun).

      Makes long train journeys into a long game of eardrum russian roulette, I swear.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    5. Re:touch sensor, maybe by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Ask him about subharmonic oscillation in current mode switching regulators. This occurs when the duty cycle is above 50% and slope compensation is not used. It is usually not detrimental to regulator performance but can be made audible by the magnetics and occasionally the ceramic capacitors through the piezoelectric effect.

      Pulse skipping, constant on time, and constant off time switching regulators can also have a similar problem with noise generation but I have only heard them make a hiss and not a whine or squeal.

    6. Re:touch sensor, maybe by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Zowie, you know your stuff. Slope compensation is used. I don't know the specifics of the circuit, and I'm not sure he does either: he said that was possible but he thought it was unlikely.
      (I've had to design stuff to measure whether our slope compensation works correctly when new silicon comes back, which isn't so easy to do.)

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  19. That is not... by msauve · · Score: 1

    stated in the article, or any reference to this issue that I can find. Can you provide a cite to back that up?

    If it were true, the the title would be even more misleading, since it's not all iPods, but is all harddrives.

    Of even more concern would be the danger posed by something as simple as refrigerator magnets. In a simple experiment, I could easily pick up paperclips with refrigerator magnets, but was completely unable to do so with a hard drive based iPod.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:That is not... by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Informative

      stated in the article, or any reference to this issue that I can find. Can you provide a cite to back that up? If it were true, the the title would be even more misleading, since it's not all iPods, but is all harddrives.

      The article is misleading, yes, but it is not the magnet that's doing the interference. In 1995 cell phones were also found to interfere with pacemakers at the same range. This is not news, there are a number of devices that can interfere with pacemakers -- all patients with pacemakers already know this.

  20. Pure Sensationlism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm an engineer who works for a pacemaker company, and from what I've understood on this hype, the iPod is just disrupting communication with the cardiologist's programming station. "The equipment to misread the heart's pacing" is misunderstood as the pacemaker missing the heart's pace, but I believe it much more likely to be the programming station missing the real time EKG stream to the programming station. With the exception of that lone device, I bet the rest of the pacemakers paced and performed as properly as they could with a noisy communication channel. The communication protocols for the devices I've worked on are often wrapped with many parity checks and CRCs. And yes, modern pacemakers are even run through lengthy tests of randomly hitting them with a multitude of communication errors to make sure these situations are covered.

    So in short, this is just a poorly written and misleading article that is going to feed off the public's misunderstanding of technology.

    1. Re:Pure Sensationlism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my initial thought as well...it was disrupting the programming station or whatever device was used to monitor/record the cardiac information. I have a pacemaker and an iPod and have not experienced any problems.

    2. Re:Pure Sensationlism by Misch · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a pacemaker recipient, I realized that the last time I was in for a pacemaker checkup, the docter made an adjustment to one of the settings.

      Then it dawned on me that he was programming my heart (More correctly, sripting, or pointy-clicking.)

      But that's one device I'll never be able to program.

      And I'm freaking jealous. /Cyborg since 2006 //Waves the flag that the Robots made

      --

      --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
    3. Re:Pure Sensationlism by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I think The Register has been accused of hosting a significant anti-Apple bias several times in the past. I really don't read the site so I don't really know. If they were out for page hits, then they can easily pull a Dvorak and publish sensationalist stories when they find a low-hit day.

    4. Re:Pure Sensationlism by backwardMechanic · · Score: 1

      El Reg. aren't anti-Apple. It's far broader than a bias. They're anti-everything-new-and-trendy-and-cool. That's what makes it such an entertaining read, restoring balance to an 'OMG that's neato' universe.

    5. Re:Pure Sensationlism by hypnagogue · · Score: 1

      Last time I was at the device lab, the cardiologist kept frobbing some button that caused bouts of tachycardia. It is pretty uncomfortable to have your heart rate jump between 50 and 200, back and forth.

      Then it dawned on me the she was trying to get me to crash.

      At that point I asked her what security measures the device used to prevent this sort of denial-of-service attack by "unauthorized" people. Silence...

      --
      Liberty you never use is liberty you lose.
    6. Re:Pure Sensationlism by hypnagogue · · Score: 1

      BTW: daily pacemaker and iPod user... no problems. If my EVDO equipped PocketPC doesn't affect it, why would my MP3 player? Stupid premise, stupid conclusion.

      --
      Liberty you never use is liberty you lose.
  21. Nothing like... by davidsyes · · Score: 4, Funny

    heart-felt music....

    (Captcha: "leaking")

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    1. Re:Nothing like... by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      That would be Gerry and the Pacemakers

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  22. No problems with my pacemaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm 31 and I've got a pacemaker (implanted when I was 17) and I have not experienced any problems when using my 5th generation iPod. I don't keep the iPod on top of my pacemaker, either, but I can't recall ever having a problem when using the iPod. I use lots of wireless devices as well (blackberry pearl, MS wireless keyboard, bluetooth headset, etc) and don't experience any problems. Again, as the manufacturers of the devices and the pacemakers recommend, I usually keep the devices a few inches from the pacer (and most often use the phone on the ear opposite the pacer implant location).
    The study should include information about the pacer models and manufacture dates...perhaps these were very old units.

  23. iWorld! by alisson · · Score: 1

    iPace! It keeps your heart a'goin, and pumps music directy to your brain, and is updated via 802.11n/Bluetooth/EDGE, and is compatible to synch with your iPhone!

  24. Non sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple knows well about RF interferences, All theirs machine since the MacPlus freaks me about how many metal shield they put in it. The metal case of almost all iPod shield them self from outside. Every conductive casing will act as a faraday cages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage). Soo since a iPod Nano is 100% made of aluminum and every pacemaker are made of titanium (can't corrode and bio compatible) I really don't worry about and iPod. If pacemaker was so sensitive, we shall see a lot more incident from cell phone, Wi-Fi or electric razor.

  25. Re:Just iPods? What's going on, Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA you stupid dickhead. it WAS written by some 17 yo and all he tried was an ipod

  26. Re:I knew it! Apple makes such shitty products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  27. I'm going to make an exception... by msauve · · Score: 0

    and respond to an AC.

    Assuming you actually are who you claim, how is this communications done? I would assume that it's done with inductive coupling. If so, what is the interference mechanism?

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  28. Regarding sensationalism... by neapolitan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I am a cardiologist (a lot of electrophysiologists are interested in devices, electronics, and are quite computer-savvy!)

    msuave: Yes, a pacemaker or defibrillator is essentially inside a faraday cage already. They are generally titanium or steel encased, and designed to resist most radiation fields that are encountered in everyday life. However, faraday cages are not perfect, and the pacemaker has to have leads come out to thread into the heart. Just as you can use your cellphone inside a metal plane (also a faraday cage), some degree of radiation will be seen by the pacemaker electronics. In general, these devices are programmed by placing a wand over the device which essentially communicates by RF to the internal device -- if it was a perfect cage, it couldn't even be reprogrammed except by physically accessing the device (e.g. minor surgery.)

    AC: Agreed regarding the sensationalism. Our practice tells EVERY pacemaker and defib recipient a list of things they should and shouldn't do. We counsel patients to hold their cellphone in their RIGHT hand and only crunch it between their right shoulder and ear, as almost all pacemakers are implanted on the left side. In general microwaves are ok, and patients are given a letter and card for the airport, where they can be wanded. Quite clearly, if somebody puts another RF emitting device RIGHT ON TOP of the implant, it could cause some interference. No, this is not unique to ipods. Again, if you actually talk to grandpa, I'm sure he knows this, especially if he was implanted by us. :) This "research" is quite ridiculous.

    Finally, agreed regarding the description of the findings -- if it is just interrupting transmission of data to the programmer, this is a lot less dangerous than scrambling the internal signal seen by the pacemaker. The pacemakers are designed to recognize noise, again for the expected interference as noted above, and can handle this using many filters (e.g. something at 60 Hz is probably NOT coming from your body.)

    ----------
    Vetran slashdotter, ID #101.

    Wait, UIDs are not in binary?

    --
    Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
    1. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for sharing your expertise. As someone with a pacemaker, I can confirm that pacemaker recipients are advised not to keep devices like cellphones on top of the pacemaker and to use the opposite ear when operating the devices.

      I contacted the Univ. of Michigan Doctor who was involved with this study and asked for a copy of the report. I certainly hope cardiologists like yourself look at the report, too, and give a thorough review of the methods used to conduct the study and record the results, etc. And if this is in fact a flawed study, you can hopefully reach your patients (and maybe even the media) and get this type of story retracted or corrected.

    2. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I saw you were already modded +5. so I will comment instead of modding you up.

      I am an engineer, and share your suspicion this is groundless news sensationalism.

      The IPod is NOT a transmitting device. Yes, it does have a processor. And WILL emit *some* EMI. But not that much. If it did, we would have already heard scores of complaints from radio and television owners.

      My own observations ( from spectral analysis of existing problems ) is that an ordinary switcher flourescent tube ballast or CRT-based TV set radiates orders of magnitude more EMI than an IPod could ever muster.

      Those things are handling powers in the order of tens of watts. The IPod is only working with milliwatts. It has to. Or the batteries would not last very long.

      And if the IPod was radiating much EMI, good luck to the analog engineers who had to make its audio innards work.

      My own take is this claim is as overblown as the claim that power lines cause cancer.

      If the EMF fields of power lines could cause cancer, I suggest all radio amateurs should have died a long time ago, same with CB operators. I have been around fields generating 1KW of power - which is way, way, way more than most people ever get exposed to - quite a bit. If ANYONE gets leukemia from exposure to high energy electronic fields, *I* SHOULD have been FIRST IN LINE!.

      The WWII radar operators got exposed to radar beams so strong they melted chocolate bars in their pocket ( which is how we discovered Microwaves made a good cooking appliance... the original Litton RadarRange ). Now, they DID get a glaucoma like problem if the microwaves cooked their eyes, much like the cooking of an egg, as the eyes do not have a mechanism for dissipating heat, and the transparent vitreous humor within the eye will congeal like the white of an egg if heated, but other than that, I have seen nothing.

      News senastionalism sells papers, and panics the public. But its just selling FEAR.

      Before I get too worked up over it, I want to see the data, and make my decision based on that.

      If anyone has been affected by an IPod, I would love to see the pacemaker itself and the spectral analysis of anything the IPod could have emitted which could have possibly affected it.

      Until I find supporting evidence ( which I can not imagine there could possibly be any ), I would hold this as a scare story sans merit.

      My own EMI analyses show simple lamp dimmers and motor speed controls emit way, way, way more EMI than I could ever see from an IPod. My simple power drill emits EMI so nasty it completely screws up TV all over the house.

      I can show you old-style cars whose ignition circuit can screw up the entire neighborhood!

      And a lightning bolt? For me, off the scale. But I do design my stuff to take it. I know the biomed engineers are far more into this than I, and my stuff keeps going through thunderstorms.

      If one feels insecure, by all means, consult your cardioligist. For me, personally, its not something I would lose sleep, or ditch my IPod, over. My own feeling is that its like blaming a car crash on the inertia of a fly which landed on your car.

    3. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by olman · · Score: 1

      I am an engineer, and share your suspicion this is groundless news sensationalism.

      The IPod is NOT a transmitting device. Yes, it does have a processor. And WILL emit *some* EMI. But not that much. If it did, we would have already heard scores of complaints from radio and television owners.


      I am an electronics engineer and make sure our devices are EMI-compliant by the circuit design and by casing.

      To interfere with radio you need to hit specific frequency bands around ~100MHz. For TV, yes, I can easily imagine placing ipod on top of a set producing visible interference when you arrange the leads just right. That's right, the headphone is a great antenna. In fact there are many mp3 players that use the headphone set as an FM antenna! Antennas works both ways, too..

      Again, thought, TV would be suspectible for specific frequency bands that would essentially be picked up and amplified by the internal circuitry.

      It's the kind of thinking that makes people proclaim their product is EMI-safe because they're immune to cell phones, which emit RF in very narrow frequency bands. However, when you subject the product to a different frequency (tested band is from 80MHz to 1GHz or 2.5GHz for medical devices) it can keel over and die. Medical devices, incidentally, have this higher frequency band because of the electric surgeon's knife.

      In this instance, if I understood things correctly, the device kept on functioning correctly, but the communication between the monitoring/programming device and the pacemaker malfunctioned. This is allowed behavior as long as it does not endanger the patient, the behavior is easily noticed by the user (junk output) and the device restores normal operation after the interference is removed.

    4. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am an EMC engineer who has tested pacemakers in the past. I don't commonly do swept frequency radiated immunity testing, but have seen it done. Pacemakers are required to undergo thourough testing to an RTTE directive as well as AAMI testing. Commonly they are tested to 10 V/m swept from 80 MHz to 2500 MHz with a 1kHz AM modulated signal. We have never seen a failure for this testing. On the other hand, 10 V/m is not a very stringent requirement.

      Also, certain pacemakers are able to use different telemetry options, including the standard wand usage that requires it be placed directly over the heart/device, or another type that can communicate at distances up to three meters.

      I am more familiar with pacemaker testing for radiated immunity(with a pulse modulated signal). AAMI PC 69 calls out the requirements we test to. It does not lay out a specific level in Volts/meter, but instead goes by watts. For frequencies below 1 GHz a level of 8 watts is suggested, while above 1 GHz a 2 watt level is suggested. The minimum requirement is (if I recall correctly) 120 mW, while we have customers who have tested to 50 watts. I have seen failures up to and including complete failure of pacing and unintended shocking. That is not common. We always are testing multiple devices, and when we see failures we troubleshoot, and the customer usually ends up respinning a board or doing some other engineering analysis to fix the problem. They then come back to retest.

      I would not be that worried about cell phones around pacemakers. Other EMI sources can be a concern. I personally would advise against storing electronics in your front shirt pocket or hanging out near high power transmitters.

      Also, although the ipod is not a tranmitting device that does not mean it cannot generate significant interference. All you need is a fast clock, a little cabling(or even a slot in the case) to act as an antenna and you could cause interference with many things.

      One last thing - this article does not give very much information. I would like to read the full study and examine their methodology.

    5. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, microwave radiation leads to cataracts -- opacity of the lens, not the vitreous humor. Glaucoma is a different disease, where movement of liquid from inside the eye through the pupil to the outside of the eye is blocked, often from debris clogging the fine network of holes, so pressure accumulates within the eye, leading to nerve damage and blindness.

      Also: I've found most lamp dimmers to be reasonably quiet, EMI-wise, especially the newer electronic ones that switch on partway through the phase and switch off at zero-crossing. Really cheap triacs with no snubbers are pretty loud, though, and anything driving reactive loads by chopping is appallingly noisy.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    6. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'll take your word on that one, as my specialty is the electronics, not problems of the eye. I just know of this problem and steer clear of high energy fields based on this observation, learned by experience, of fellow engineers.

      Thanks for more clearly specifying what it was my colleagues had experienced.

      And, on the lamps, although SCR phase shifter ones made some EMI mess, these new CFL lamps with the inverters built in the base - well some of them emit quite a mess of EMI. Saw one of these plastic CCFL inverters open and note it has a fullbore inverter in the base, running at about 30-50 KHz to drive the tube. Beautiful design. But sometimes they do make quite a bit of EMI racket in the process of trying to control the tube.

      Fluorescent tubes have always been a kinda nasty beast to control, as you are basically trying to stabilize a ligntning bolt inside a glass tube.

      Yeh, same with any arc lamp.

    7. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Thanks for posting.

      Its always neat to find someone here whose actually DOING what is being discussed.

      In your experience, do you find the Sensormatics ( the antitheft sensor used by many merchants to screen for those little plastic tags ) interfere with pacemakers? They emit strong 57/114KHz pulses, but may have harmonics.

      Those generate quite a field in order to excite Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS) tags.

      Sensormatic EAS tags are those little (usually white strips with fake barcode imprinting on the top) tags about 1/32 inch thick, almost 1/2 inch wide, and about 1 3/4 inch long. Usually stuck inside books or onto packaging, however there is industry pressure to have the tags included IN the product packaging. I think they are quite clever.

    8. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      I've only dealt with scr/triacs -- I'm sure the CFL's are a mess. Thankfully, we don't have to deal with that stuff. I've built a couple arc-energized gas lasers in my time, and when they fire up, I suspect the entire neighborhood loses its TV reception.

      Turns out it's not just microwaves that'll curdle your lens and/or cornea: heavy IR (young-onset cataracts used to be known as glassblower blindness) and even radiation can do it. Of course, you have worse problems than cataracts if you're exposed to that much radiation...

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    9. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by anubi · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the heads-up on the IR.

      I'll be more cautious about wearing my sunglasses.

      I am getting older and would like to skip cataracts from my life if I can.

      My dad had cataracts, and he blamed it on sun reflection from the sea. He loved deep-sea fishing and went every chance he could. ( Me, I hated it. Being held captive on a fishing boat all day reminded me of being locked up in a bathroom all day. And it rocked. And I got, well, you know, all woozy. )

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    10. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem, glad to provide some perspective on this issue.

      At work computer so have to AC. I've never seen any credible report of the antitheft device interfering with the pacer/defib. I would guess those things have a strong pulse but pretty short duty cycle emitting short bursts of energy, and would be simply filtered out by the essentially low-pass filter of the device.

      We're all pretty much saved by your classical 2nd year physics 1/r^2 drop in field intensity -- somebody said that the gain of the device has to be turned up to get at the heart's faint electrical signals -- that's not entirely accurate. The readings from the pacemaker are surprisingly strong because it actually burrows into the heart muscle, making direct contact with the measured muscle activity, and your whole exterior body somewhat acts as an insulator. When taking a normal EKG the heart is buried in the inside of the said insulator, so standard electrocardiogram has much more difficulty in getting accurate readings than this internal device.

    11. Re:Regarding sensationalism... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Sunlight is less of a problem. There's an *enormous* amount of IR coming off ovens and stuff. Regardless of that, my girlfriend the opthamologist says everyone should wear something with UV and IR protection when they're outside during daytime, because glassblower cataracts might show up when you're 30 but exposure to sunlight -- esp if on water or skiing -- could cause cataracts to show up when you're 60. Cataract surgery is pretty trivial these days, but if you don't have to, you shouldn't. Or at least put it off as long as possible because they're beginning to produce replacement lenses that are flexible, so at some point you'll be able to get your lens replaced with one that's better than it was when you were 20 -- no more reading glasses.

      Yeah, long days on boats when you don't want to be there kind of suck.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  29. a zune for balmer's uncle by mrcdeckard · · Score: 1
    This may be the selling point that Steve Balmer was looking for to finally get his uncle to own a zune.

    mr c

    --
    "Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - R. Feynman
  30. lol by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    While there do not appear to be any long term effects, iPods disrupt the operation of the pacemaker.

    I don't understand this sentence. Oh wait, this is slashdot.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  31. Re:Just iPods? What's going on, Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Wow. Anonymity really brings out the worse of people, doesn't it? You should learn some manners, buddy.

    I read the article. I realize they only tested the iPods. But that wasn't the point of my post, and a cleverer person would have realized that. There is nothing intrinsically different about an iPod that other players or similar devices wouldn't also exhibit, particularly when you're talking about electromagnetic emissions. It's like saying, "Coke is bad for you, but I won't mention any other similar cola because I didn't have time to test them."

    The article almost implies that you're better off with an alternative music player, when in reality, they would all have the same effect on the pacemakers. Are you starting to get the point now? Glad to hear it! :D

  32. According to the list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pacemaker users should be wary of slot machines. How come there aren't epidemics of old folks keeling over in front of the slots in Vegas?

  33. New tagline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zune: Hey, at least it won't kill your grand/parents!

  34. "iPods and Pacemakers Don't Mix" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think iPods are supposed to go inside your chest cavity. I sometimes wear mine on an armband, but I've never tried incorporating it into my circulatory system. I can see how that would go wrong.

  35. First, Microwave ovens, now this by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Time to drag out the old tinfoil vest.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  36. Re:Just iPods? What's going on, Apple? by Speedracer1870 · · Score: 1

    So iPods are going to kill all the honeybees...sweet!

  37. Yes... but by revolu7ion · · Score: 1

    iPods and Pacemakers Don't Mix
    Yes, but does it blend?
    --
    Jesus Saves
  38. EMI by Detritus · · Score: 1

    Many devices are susceptible to EMI. I recently saw this while testing a hand-held UHF two-way radio. When I pressed the push-to-talk button in high-power mode (7 W output), it killed a computer that was about 6 feet away from the radio. The computer just made a funny noise and turned itself off.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  39. Meaningless. by Ihlosi · · Score: 0
    They have to meet FCC Part 15 and other international standards, just like any other device.



    Sorry, but you seem to be unaware that the FCC has exactly zero to do with pacemakers.


    Heck. Even ECGs (that are fully compliant to FDA/AAMI specs) can affect pacemakers (which are also completely compliant to any regulations), simply because there is no rule about things like what frequency a certain device may use to measure respiration (it's done by measuring the impedance across the chest at a certain frequency in the 10's of kHz range, using a few hundred nA of current). Pacemaker and ECG are using the same frequency ? You're in trouble.

    1. Re:Meaningless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but you seem to be unaware that the FCC has exactly zero to do with pacemakers.

      Sorry, but you seem to be unaware of just how much ambient RF radiation already exists in your environment.

      I don't know the frequenc(ies) that the iPod is emitting that supposedly interfere with pacemakers (which is no problem; neither do the authors of the study or the article) but I assure you, there are so many other sources around you with similar emission characteristics that EMI from an iPod is literally going to be lost in the noise floor.

      There is unlikely to be any actual problem here to begin with. The article is, as the grandparent states, garbage. But if there is a problem, the only safe solution is to quit designing life-critical products, from airplanes to medical equipment, that's vulnerable to low-level RF interference. This issue simply cannot be addressed on the transmitter side.

  40. Breaking News From Redmond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft(r) (MSFT) announces that Zune(r) does not affect pacemakers. However the evidence up to this point is a bit sketchy because Microsoft(r) are still looking for the one pacemaker users who is actually licensed to use a Zune. Researchers feel confident that Zune(r) will not affect a pacemaker because it so far has not affected any PC running Windows(r) Vista(r)

    Some guys love it when you "Squirt" your Zune.

  41. Does this mean... by Mythrix · · Score: 1

    ...that pacemaker users will need tin-foil platemail?

  42. iPod and my Heart by Heembo · · Score: 1

    I have been wearing my iPod flash for a necklace for some time - and and old tech buddie said that can't be good for your heart. I scoffed. After reading this article, I'm giving this a second thought. Anyone know just how much EMF or whatnot radiates off of a iPod?

    --
    Horns are really just a broken halo.
  43. Excellent news for me! by trash+eighty · · Score: 1

    Now if my Dad asks for an iPod for Xmas i got the perfect excuse not to get him one! :D

  44. money bacK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hell, they should get a cut of the inheritance;-}

  45. Lies. by CrowbarKing · · Score: 1

    iPods and Pacemakers don't mix? Yeah right, I'm sure it will blend.

    --
    If girls liked guys that were interested in them for their brains, they'd date zombies.
  46. Shielding by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Are pacemakers part 15 devices? If so they have to accept the interference.

    RF shielding is a big deal. Just look at the nice Faraday cages used to enclosed MRI scanners. It has to be RF quiet because that is the actual imaging part of the system. The magnets just make things jump to higher energy levels. When they fall down they emit a signal detected with an RF scanner.

    I would imagine there should be some form of RF/EM shielding on something so critical as a pacemaker.

  47. Important notes by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    The study only covered 100 patients. Many other devices may also interfere with pacemakers. More study is needed to determine overall effect.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  48. iPods also cause Pancreatic Cancer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both Steve Jobs and Apple Pioneer Jef Raskin came down with pancreatic cancer. Jobs had enough $$$ to beat it, but Raskin wasn't so lucky

  49. Show me a man with a song in his heart... by thewiz · · Score: 1

    and I'll show you a man with an AM/FM pacemaker.

    Or, in this case, a MP3-playing pacemaker.

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
  50. Ballmer by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    I hear Steve Ballmer's uncle participates ;)

  51. My grandpa will not want one by ghostbar38 · · Score: 1

    I will be calling me and asking me anything, but wait, the cellphone could do interference too as well as another mp3 player... Well, he will live in the pre-historic age again :)

    --
    ghostbar page.
  52. Ipods conflict with pacemakers?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be still my heart!

    sfsp

  53. No other brand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I heard the iPod was the music player to die for.

  54. George Bush's iPod by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    No wonder so much attention has been paid to George Bush's iPod - whenever Dick Cheney starts giving him lip in the oval office, he can just walk over nonchalantly, stand next to Dick, wait for him to pass out, and then continue the meeting.

    I wonder if Bush has Sting's "Nothing Like the Sun" album on his iPod?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  55. Too bad about the pacemaker by Ant2 · · Score: 1

    But the iPod is okay, right?