Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Gurman: 'No Chance' Apple Watch Series 7 Will Include Blood Pressure Sensor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah and there is no way apple is going to put a needle in the back of your wrist, a movable part of your body. Plus the FDA approval etc.
I can't believe no one has mentioned the fact that Samsung watches already have blood pressure monitoring - and it didn't even require a new sensor. They rolled it out in a software update.
I'd say there's slightly higher than "no chance" of blood pressure estimation coming in the Series 7.
I'd say there's slightly higher than "no chance" of blood pressure estimation coming in the Series 7.
I can't imagine a supercomputer in my pocket than can communicate to anyone in the world and give me all the information I want at my fingertips neither...
Non invasive like an Apple Watch would have to be?? I think it is the sensor attached under skin that is "very accurate" which is what you are referring to. Apples and oranges (no pun intended).
I also have a 4 (upgraded from a 0), and I am leaning toward waiting 1 more year. Un-leaked features could change my mind (like if the new watchfaces are particularly amazing, or it has some new health feature that hasn’t been leaked). But i figure i’ll be buying a new 16” MBP and an iPhone anyway this year, and my watch is mostly underused (i use it for notifications, the occasional phone call if i happen to be too far from my phone to get to it, the time, weather, and exercise tracking, and that’s about it).
i was very surprised when it was suggested yesterday. mainly because i wasn't planning on upgrading this year. let's add this next year, k?
Surely not too surprising. I mean it’s the classic Apple (watch) playbook, all they need this year is a design refresh and people will buy, then gradually drip feed new sensors/ health tech over the next 2-3 years until the next design refresh
Just like with the iPhone this year, the Apple Watch S7 will only see modest improvements...unless you are a fan of the redesign, I would say, if Apple decides to lower the price on the S6 and keep it in the lineup, just pay less and get the S6...
Measuring blood pressure in a health care setting is a matter of a cuff being put on your arm - much less onerous than measuring ones ECG, which involves placing many electrodes on ones body (and, for some, getting hair shaved in those spots). Yet, Apple managed to provide a decent ECG function in its 1oz plastic and aluminum watch. I don't doubt Apple will find a way to do the same with blood pressure.
Measuring blood glucose is a different kettle of fish. Up to now, all clinical and home-based solutions have involved access to a blood sample. Obviously an Apple Watch would have to find a non-invasive means to achieve the same results - very hard problem, from what I understand.
It's a little disappointing that it appears that no new health features are coming in this years watch. I do like the look of the redesign though.
Basic fitness tracker, and being serious on a medical device should be separate. Why does Apple want to cram everything into one device and eat away years getting something out. I won't rely on Apple watch to help with my heart, never. Iterate through your features on the watch year after year. Be transparent with customers as to what it can do and what it can't. Is it really that hard?
I stand to be proven wrong, but there's not a chance either of these functions will exist on an Apple Watch.
Apple designers are clever people so never cease to amaze, but I think the above two features could be a little far-fetched at this time.
But what do I know!? It's just my opinion, plus when the Apple Watch came out, I hated it. (Now I have one wrapped around my wrist.....<groan>)
On my wishlist for it.....ANT+ support please for us sporty types!
- I'll start with what I know best. BP monitoring. Apple wants FDA approval for its sensors. It's part of what makes the ECG and the SpO2 readings so magic on your Apple Watch. According to the FDA and all doctor training, your BP must be measured at the same level as your heart for the most accurate readings. If this isn't done, the results could be wrong and indicate in some cases, higher than normal readings....or lower. I'm not sure Apple would want to risk so many false positives? I have also spoken to a couple of doctors (my family is riddled in them
), and none would accept a light-based sensor BP reading as acceptable. One has appeared on the market but has received little traction as far as I know (Aktiia), but we have to wait and see. Again, new technology against proven and trusted methods are hard to swallow at times. - Regarding Blood Glucose monitoring, this is an area I have little knowledge in but I did message my cousin who has been a diabetic his entire life. It requires him to provide a blood sample to measure glucose / insulin levels, and to date, there isn't a single successful non-invasive wristwatch device that he could point me towards. (Believe me, he would LOVE a non-invasive method), but there is simply nothing on the market. Manufacturers have used "micro-needles" and all sorts of interesting concepts, but I doubt Apple would do anything like this. I am not a diabetic (thankfully), and I would certainly not want an Apple Watch jabbing me from time to time to test glucose levels that simply do not need monitoring. Moreover, the health implications of needles protruding into your skin are one that Apple would have nightmares about!
Apple designers are clever people so never cease to amaze, but I think the above two features could be a little far-fetched at this time.
But what do I know!? It's just my opinion, plus when the Apple Watch came out, I hated it. (Now I have one wrapped around my wrist.....<groan>)
On my wishlist for it.....ANT+ support please for us sporty types!
ECG is a simple electronic measurement which requires very few small ICs with modern electronics. The main challenge with ECG is interference, e.g. 50/60 Hz signal from mains wiring, but filtering those out is relatively simple today. IIRC, the measurement itself dates back to the 19th century. Making high-quality ECG recordings requires multiple electrodes, but the two-electrode measurement has been known from the dawn of the technology. The main problem has been acquiring the required FDA/international approvals.
BP measurement is similar in the sense that the cuff method has been known for over a century. There has been little development since. The problem, however, is that it cannot be applied to a wrist device. Remote sensing BP with low enough uncertainty is a difficult task, and the technology is just not there today.
I would like to remind that Apple has very seldom (if ever) commercialized any technology which has not been commercially available before.
Because the best fitness tracker you have is the one you have on you, and people aren’t going to wear two devices.
And how is apple not being transparent with customers as to what it can and can’t do?
It is smart business but it's not as simple as you make it out to be. They are "forced" to hold back many new features on all products because supply chain logistics, pricing and overall product evolution. Apple could do almost anything they want but why would they want to introduce a new Apple Watch with every bell and whistle in it when no one would buy it because it would cost $2,000? Or maybe they could sell it for $500 but could only manufacture 10,000 of them.
The fact that it makes good business sense to iterate every year on a successful product is not really a choice by Apple, it's just basic tech industry supply and demand economics.