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.
Report Claims iWatch Awaiting FDA Approval, Will Feature Blood Glucose and Sweat Sensors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Toys" rarely are 5 years in making by teams of professionals, some of which are medical device professionals. Do you really think Apple would release anything sub-par or anything that is going to feel like a gimmick or toy?
That's what they said about the iPhone and iPad. If anyone can pull it off, it's Apple. Of course, if it doesn't work then I think we'll all be disappointed...
I don't think it'll arrive with iWatch but it may arrive first in a "toy" nevertheless. Maybe iWatch 5. But don't be so sure that this'll be a gadget only suitable for hospitals. It's in everyone's interest if blood glucose measurement can be done with a mass production "toy".
rival the ipad? So what affliction does every ipad owner have then?
I see you failed at reading comprehension.
You mean like MP3 players before the iPod, "smart" phones before the iPhone and tablets before the iPad? I've learned to wait and see what Apple has to offer before declaring an entire category a non-hit.
Is this extreme sarcasm? They caught on immensely.
----------
In other words, you think Apple would flat out lie about the capabilities. This is all just rumor right now, but I think you'd get a bit more than an FDA rejection if Apple made a claim like that...and it really kind of puzzles me that a. you can't believe that it could have been done without YOUR knowing and b. someone would lie about it so far as the FDA having to stop them.
Months. And Apple cannot miniaturize something that doesn't exist. Even ignoring size, this technology doesn't exist yet in any reliable fashion.
This is a great read for the "OMG buy shares now!" crowd under the belief that glucose measuring will actually happen. I love how it describes the pointless investiments as "dumb money".
Do you really think Apple would release anything sub-par or anything that is going to feel like a gimmick or toy?
You have just described Siri and the Maps app.
Even the iPhone and the iPad are basically toys - they are not health devices, they don't require FDA approval, they have never had to be subject to a rigorous battery of scientific studies to prove that they can do what they claim they do.
Non invasive glucose measuring not only would be and require all of the above, it would be a revolution from a company that has currently zero health products.
Revolutions don't usually happen without people taking notice of them. I would expect the stereotypical basement-based forum dweller to be too alienated to hear something about it, but it's something that would change the world.
Besides, Apple doesn't need to lie. It simply has to add enough caveats to say the truth - that their device could measure glucose levels, only without enough accuracy to make it useful as a health device - and then rely on consumer's lack of information and general Apple fanboyism to see people using the iWatch as if it were an accurate source of information.
Last edited:
The average slob is not the average person, even though it may seem that way to you.
----------
That's one of my fears of an always watching health tracker...those nights when it may say, "Your wife is right, that should be your last drink then you should go home".
Siri and Maps are cloud based services that are immensely more complicated than you seem to grasp and do not even fit the description you have proposed.
There's a reason why this is a rumor, but you're making even more assumptions when it comes to a "rigorous battery of scientific studies".
They are gimmicks that currently work poorly and are stuck in beta. Since they're basically toys, that doesn't really hurt people (unless you live in Australia, of course). A glucose measuring device couldn't afford to be so, well, sloppy.
That's how health care works. I don't expect everyone to grasp the concept, especially in a nest of Apple fanboyism, but creating a completely new and revolutionary health product isn't as simple as making a toy.
The FDA approval, as an approved medical device, can be narrow. I product can have a broad range of marketing features, but FDA can approve it for use for only one of those. If that is the case Drs. can only prescribe the device for that particular use and the manufacturer has to make it clear to the consumer what exact use and protocol the device is approved for. The package can't just have an "FDA Approved Device" on the box to give the impression all features were tested by the FDA for efficacy.
If the "iWatch" does get FDA approval for some uses then boom! it's the next iPhone. That is much bigger than just an iPhone companion or fitness band. But I doubt the first watch will have any FDA approval. Too much testing and red tape; much more than getting just FCC certification.
Imagine paying for an Apple device with insurance or HSA. I would hope for just a minor malady, enough to get a prescription.
Any foul language will be billed to your iTunes account at the rate of $.50 per foul word.
You are right, The more I read about the "iWatch", the more I believe that Apple might actually be trying to enter the sports watch market. In that sense google, samsung, motorola and most apple fanboys got it completely wrong. They thought that these devices would interest the general public, but why would the average joe want to measure their health data all the time?
let me tell you this: there is a group of people that have been collecting and analyzing their heart rates and other health data for years: athletes. Not even professional athletes but people that DO work out. Think runners, triathletes.
There is a well established market of sports watches. Companies such as Sunnto, Garmin and Polar have offered "smart watches" with dozens of sensors for years. These will be the real contenders for Apple. Not samsung with it's stupid wrist-camera!
Hell, if someone is really interested in measuring his/her health data they do not have to wait for the iWatch. Just have a look at stuff like the garming 620 which has a heart rate monitor, gps, accelerometers, bluetooth, wifi, colour touch screen... it syncs with your phone/pc. It lets you share your workouts on the web. Does that sound like an 'iWatch' to you?
My prediction is that the "iWatch" main focus will be the sports-watch functions with integration with iPhones as a (secondary) plus.
I suspect that most apple fanboys will be disappointed. Training devices such as these are ugly and bulky, you wear them during your workouts, not as a fashion gadget. Still runners and other athletes buy them, not because it's cool but because the data is actually useful for them.
If you have never had the need for a gps-watch or a heart rate monitor before, I suspect the new watch from apple won't appeal to you.
There were a lot of technologies that didn't exist... until Apple invented them or bought a company who invented it.
You feel smarter than Apple?
-You feel smarter than Apple?
-Me and my friend take health more seriously. We are also "real straight guys"
-You feel smarter than Apple?
-Me and my friend take health more seriously. We are also "real straight guys"
Imagine paying for an Apple device with insurance or HSA. I would hope for just a minor malady, enough to get a prescription.
Absolutely, or at the very least with a corporate FSA account. (Pre-Tax at least!)
I better start eating worse so I can raise my Blood Pressure before the fall. haha
