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.
Some Apple Watch Bands Contain Toxic 'Forever Chemicals' Per Lawsuit [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Obviously to Apple fans you are allergy-ing it wrong. 😉
We are to bend/evolve to what Apple wants to serve. Recall how all of our “one handed use” hands were able to dynamically grow once Apple moved beyond the “perfect” 4” screen size. 😉
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Don’t state facts & reality when there’s accessories to sell. Shareholders need to feed their families! 😉
life is risky. unfortunately many metals are toxic, and many people have skin allergic reactions to metals. I reckon most fabrics are safe, but then again many fabrics involve pesticides and fertilizers in their production, not to mention post-production processing chemicals....Life is risk.
Unfortunately, you don't get any kind of reaction from PFAS, allergic or otherwise.
It "just" gets absorbed into your body through any part of your body and stays there for a very long time.
It's not that any singular source of PFAS can really do much damage, unless it's very concentrated which is very rare.
It's the "cocktail effect" in play that's worrying as most of us are exposed to PFAS through many sources which then accumulates in the body because of how long it takes to excrete them again.
They can cause a number of hormonal issues and cancers so they really should be banned from everything.
I don't know why everyone in here is making fun of this lawsuit?
If the Watch Sports Band, or any bands contains PFAS then many millions of people around the world are getting exposed every day, around the clock.
Despite their name, there are ways to remove them from water. Reverse osmosis should do it well enough, as will some other options: https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/reducing-pfas-drinking-water-treatment-technologies
They are not preferable to not having the PFAS in water, but they can be treated.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I’m not happy they are alleging these chemicals are in the watch bands. A lawsuit is not proof of the allegations.
California is the American version of the EU, always moaning about something and looking for a payday. Maybe Apple should just release the Apple PocketWatch, hangs by a chain and then there's nothing to moan about.
I’ve been wearing in-ear headphones since I carried a Walkman. My favorites were Sony and Panasonic. What I didn’t realize until AirPods Pro, I have an allergy to silicone ear tips. I also called Apple after a year of ownership. I explained that I was calling to share the issue as I read others sharing the same issue on Apple discussion forums. I didn’t expect anything but to share the issue. Apple support offered a full refund to my bank account; I just had to send them back. I accepted but went without AirPods for a while (fwp).
I liked them, just the tips were the issue. Wound up buying them again months later but found foam replacement tips for them.
My reaction to the silicone ear tips was itchy ears they were “wetter” than normal, definitely a reaction.
Sharing my experience, because even though I’m an ancient martial artist that pounds sand, I was not told to continue my practice. 🤷🏻♂️
Agree re the lawsuit, but, this study was first "reported" here on MR a week ago (https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...omer-bands-what-should-i-use-instead.2447534/) and I am not convinced that without this lawsuit we would ever find out any more detail, at least not in a timely manner.
So if the "only" outcome of the lawsuit were more data and education - that'll be a win.
Will be interesting to watch.
Meanwhile, I will continue wearing my ocean bands ...
“the study tested smartwatch models from Apple, Nike, Fitbit, and Google.”
Was the study funded by Samsung? <\jk>
Was the study funded by Samsung? <\jk>
There is no evidence presented that PFAs can absorb through the skin from a watch band. They mention in the background information of the watch band study that skin adsorption of PFAs contained in sunscreen has been shown in previous studies. But, I think its a big leap to say that sunscreen contents which are meant to dissolve on the skin and the watch band, which is meant to be hydrophobic would lead to the same exposure.
And, there is no ban on PFAs, they are only regulated in drinking water. So I don't see how this lawsuit can do anything.
And, there is no ban on PFAs, they are only regulated in drinking water. So I don't see how this lawsuit can do anything.
PFAS is most commonly used to make products waterproof, stain-resistant, grease-proof, nonstick, and resistant to heat or corrosion.
So, really, any of Apple's bands that have those properties could have been treated with PFAS.
Of course, we shouldn't speculate as it's impossible to know exactly which ones. But something tells me it's probably the bands that buyers have praised for being the most durable and the bands that wear and stain the least.
This 'recent study' is from December last year.
Unlike Red Dye No. 3, which has been known to cause cancer for the past 40 years and just recently got banned.
Interestingly this wasn’t reported on the MR main news feed (that I could tell)
People will complain that people are sucking on the chain and getting poisoned by the minerals in it....
Or that someone got it wrapped on its neck and almost died...
Whiners will always whine.
Any proof of this accusation or is this just a theory? (Guilt of main issue aside)
For plaintiffs to prevail in this suit, they would have to provide exactly this type of evidence, and not a small amount of it. Cases like this require extensive scientific data and expert opinions. As to your concern that the lawsuit "seems impulsive," it's very possible these plaintiffs have the data already. It's also possible they don't.
According to The Guardian, the study did not indicate which smartwatch brands were found to be using PFAS, but it said the study tested smartwatch models from Apple, Nike, Fitbit, and Google.
from the summary of the linked study (at ACS):
15 of the 22 watch bands contained total F concentrations >1% fluorine, suggesting the widespread use of fluoroelastomers in this product category
so, we do NOT know if Apple bands were found to be containing PFAS, they might, might not.
So of course we are doing what we do best here at MR: speculating
Apple could end this lawsuit rather quickly by publishing the contents of alleged bands, but there might be proprietary information that prevents that. And I am quite sure that Apple has know about this study for longer than we have.
As I said before, if the only outcome of the lawsuit is we get more data - just fine with me.