Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Wearing Apple Watch unhealthy?

Akrapovic said:
But that isn't what Apple says or implies.
Click to expand...

Please take it easy. I didn't say that Apple said that.

1) Apple said that holding Watch closer than 10mm is not recommended
2) Apple provided numbers that their SAR levels are 1.6 (over 1g) and 4.0 (over 10g) for 30 minutes of usage.
https://www.apple.com/legal/rfexposure/watch4,4/en/
3) The official US FCC and European CENELEC limits are 1.6 SAR (over 1g) and 2.0 SAR (over 10g)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
4) In my opinion Apple Watch is close (FCC) if not over (for European CENELEC standard) the allowed limit for 30 minutes of usage
5) And my personal conclusion to this is wearing it at night is quite dangerous because personally I sleep sometimes on my hand and in this case the watch will be definitely closer than 10 mm and the time of exposure will be definitely longer than 30 minutes. That's why I said not recommended
 
DragonX said:
Please take it easy. I didn't say that Apple said that.

1) Apple said that holding Watch closer than 10mm is not recommended
2) Apple provided numbers that their SAR levels are 1.6 (over 1g) and 4.0 (over 10g) for 30 minutes of usage.
https://www.apple.com/legal/rfexposure/watch4,4/en/
3) The official US FCC and European CENELEC limits are 1.6 SAR (over 1g) and 2.0 SAR (over 10g)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
4) In my opinion Apple Watch is close (FCC) if not over (for European CENELEC standard) the allowed limit for 30 minutes of usage
5) And my personal conclusion to this is wearing it at night is quite dangerous because personally I sleep sometimes on my hand and in this case the watch will be definitely closer than 10 mm and the time of exposure will be definitely longer than 30 minutes. That's why I said not recommended
Click to expand...

Define “quite dangerous” what do you think is doing to happen or has been proven to happen?
 
DragonX said:
Please take it easy. I didn't say that Apple said that.

1) Apple said that holding Watch closer than 10mm is not recommended
2) Apple provided numbers that their SAR levels are 1.6 (over 1g) and 4.0 (over 10g) for 30 minutes of usage.
https://www.apple.com/legal/rfexposure/watch4,4/en/
3) The official US FCC and European CENELEC limits are 1.6 SAR (over 1g) and 2.0 SAR (over 10g)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
4) In my opinion Apple Watch is close (FCC) if not over (for European CENELEC standard) the allowed limit for 30 minutes of usage
5) And my personal conclusion to this is wearing it at night is quite dangerous because personally I sleep sometimes on my hand and in this case the watch will be definitely closer than 10 mm and the time of exposure will be definitely longer than 30 minutes. That's why I said not recommended
Click to expand...

Quite dangerous is ... quite a statement. I know people who sleep with their phones under their pillows. That and the watch, at night, should be within range of the phone so it won't be doing LTE on its own much if at all.

Do you take phone calls with the phone to your ear? This is full stream LTE blasting signal. The watch is rarely if ever going to be doing 30 mins of non-stop LTE blasting.

I have a hard time with this because people I talk to on this think that their phones are just blasting out 2.0+ SAR level radiation all the time. It varies a LOT in relation to how close you are to a cellphone tower. These SAR Tests don't list vital information like how far the phone is from the cellphone tower - if what I read has any authority.

That and a lot of them have no clue what non-ionizing radiation is. (Not saying you don't).

You're a lot more cautious than I am. I'm the type that has to burn their finger on the stove 3-4 times before I learn not to touch. :)
 
keeper said:
Define “quite dangerous” what do you think is doing to happen or has been proven to happen?
Click to expand...

Now we are talking!

Per "FCC advise" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate):
"...ALL cell phones must meet the FCC’s RF exposure standard, which is set at a level well below that at which laboratory testing indicates, and medical and biological experts generally agree, adverse health effects could occur. For users who are concerned with the adequacy of this standard or who otherwise wish to further reduce their exposure, the most effective means to reduce exposure are to hold the cell phone away from the head or body and to use a speakerphone or hands-free accessory. These measures will generally have much more impact on RF energy absorption than the small difference in SAR between individual cell phones, which, in any event, is an unreliable comparison of RF exposure to consumers, given the variables of individual use"
 
Let’s be honest...it’s all really boring and nothing to worry about. General life is infinitely far more potentially dangerous.

The end...

 
Last edited:
I have skimmed a few reviews on wifi and it does seem that radio waves can, by an unknown mechanism, cause cancer. Studies being expensive, there are none on bluetooth, but it's the same stuff, only probably less of it, i.e. photons of the same energy as 2.5ghz wifi but fewer. It may have to do with radiation being pulsed.

I do disagree with most here that lack of conclusive evidence is a reason not to be concerned. Rather, if it seems plausible that wifi, cellular and bluetooth close to your body can all cause cancer (they have in mice), I think your concern is a good one. We are weighing petty convenience with a chance of early death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: user1234
haleyp said:
I have skimmed a few reviews on wifi and it does seem that radio waves can, by an unknown mechanism, cause cancer. Studies being expensive, there are none on bluetooth, but it's the same stuff, only probably less of it, i.e. photons of the same energy as 2.5ghz wifi but fewer. It may have to do with radiation being pulsed.

I do disagree with most here that lack of conclusive evidence is a reason not to be concerned. Rather, if it seems plausible that wifi, cellular and bluetooth close to your body can all cause cancer (they have in mice), I think your concern is a good one. We are weighing petty convenience with a chance of early death.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the amounts of radiation they use in those mice studies?

In comparison with other things that could kill you early, like driving a car (proven), flying a plane (proven), drinking alcohol (proven), etc - there are many better things to be worried about when it comes to a chance of an early death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G5isAlive and 44267547
BigMcGuire said:
Have you seen the amounts of radiation they use in those mice studies?

In comparison with other things that could kill you early, like driving a car (proven), flying a plane (proven), drinking alcohol (proven), etc - there are many better things to be worried about when it comes to a chance of an early death.
Click to expand...

I am actually more worried about eating microwaved food and even that hasn’t killed me over 30-some years of doing so :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: G5isAlive and BigMcGuire
SDColorado said:
I am actually more worried about eating microwaved food
Click to expand...

That's not a substantiated concern is it? Microwaves, like light, don't stick around after the source turns off. This low energy radiation is probably not strong enough to destroy most nutrients either.

The situation is different in a living animal, with a community of interacting cells. Pulsed electric fields could plausibly disrupt normal cellular communication. Microwaving a person is actually done clinically in local areas for various therapeutic outcomes. But the pulses could make the difference here. It reminds me of deep brain stimulation, where electricity is pulsed into the brain. They had mixed results until they discovered the frequency of the pulses makes all the difference as to whether it harms or helps. Maybe one day we'll find that changing packet sizes in microwave communication can mitigate biological effects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
haleyp said:
That's not a substantiated concern is it? Microwaves, like light, don't stick around after the source turns off. This low energy radiation is probably not strong enough to destroy most nutrients either.

The situation is different in a living animal, with a community of interacting cells. Pulsed electric fields could plausibly disrupt normal cellular communication. Microwaving a person is actually done clinically in local areas for various therapeutic outcomes. But the pulses could make the difference here. It reminds me of deep brain stimulation, where electricity is pulsed into the brain. They had mixed results until they discovered the frequency of the pulses makes all the difference as to whether it harms or helps. Maybe one day we'll find that changing packet sizes in microwave communication can mitigate biological effects.
Click to expand...

I took it as --- Microwaved pre-packed food is not healthy. Like Hot Pockets, those frozen microwave dinners. Most of these undoubtedly (do I dare use this word?) have a detrimental effect on health more than the Apple Watch would heating up the skin surface of your wrist. :p

I've talked to sewage truck owners up in the California High Desert and they tell me how ever since Microwaved pre-packaged food became "the thing" - their business has really gone up - sewage tanks have a hard time breaking down that "crap" as he called it. Obviously, far from scientific, but an interesting observation.

Anyway, that's how I took it. lol. But you're correct in your post.
 
Do I think we are being exposed? Yes. Do I think it matters in the grand scheme? Not likely.

I live a fairly "clean" lifestyle; at least in the areas I can control. I eat clean as much as possible, never buy factory farmed meats/dairy/eggs, or processed foods, don't drink out of plastic water bottles unless I have no other option, don't store food in plastic, rarely use foil, etc.

I'm also extremely sensitive to things, and have been unable to use some of the bigger/heavier apple watches due to a burning feeling going up my arm (most likely the way they press on a particular nerve, but it's something I've posted about here), couldn't use the XS Max due to headaches, and, when I use my iPP sitting down and put it on my legs, I do sometimes have a burning sensation (and it's NOT because the iPad is warm). I also get pain in my ears when I use my Airpods (which, admittedly, I rarely wear because of that). I'm fairly sure I am just hyper-sensitive to certain things.

That being said, I wear my Apple watch most of the day every day, but I don't sleep with it on (I would if I needed to do sleep tracking or heart rate tracking or something, but as a rule, no - mainly because I just don't like sleeping with anything constrictive on me at all).

I've never carried my phone on me, and the watch actually makes it even easier to leave the phone farther away. I DO sleep with the phone fairly close by because I use the alarm on it.

I guess with all the things I try to be careful with, I just figure these are things I can't really avoid. Tech is here to stay, and in order to keep up with things, it's a bandwagon I'm gonna have to be on. No I probably don't need an AW to stay on top of things, but it's convenient for me in so many ways, and I'm so used to it that IDK if I'd want to NOT have it. I just try to keep a balance.
 
haleyp said:
That's not a substantiated concern is it? Microwaves, like light, don't stick around after the source turns off. This low energy radiation is probably not strong enough to destroy most nutrients either.

The situation is different in a living animal, with a community of interacting cells. Pulsed electric fields could plausibly disrupt normal cellular communication. Microwaving a person is actually done clinically in local areas for various therapeutic outcomes. But the pulses could make the difference here. It reminds me of deep brain stimulation, where electricity is pulsed into the brain. They had mixed results until they discovered the frequency of the pulses makes all the difference as to whether it harms or helps. Maybe one day we'll find that changing packet sizes in microwave communication can mitigate biological effects.
Click to expand...

Well, stuff does continue to cook for a little while after the microwave is done. But to answer the question. No, it is not a substantial concern. Which was really my point. I am not really worried in the least about the microwave or microwaved food and I am even less concerned about my watch. I swap between a couple of them, wearing one during the day and another at night for sleep tracking.

I am more worried about things like x-rays, heated mattress pads, heated car seats, my large computer monitors and environmental factors than I am about my watch. I am really not so concerned about them either :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
I’m not a scientist, but then again there’s no real science so far in this thread, so I’m assuming that there’s more electromagnetic radiation reaching you every time there’s a solar flare than there would be in a lifetime of wearing a watch.

If you develop wings or gills after wearing your watch for a while, feel free to sue me. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
hologram said:
I’m not a scientist, but then again there’s no real science so far in this thread, so I’m assuming that there’s more electromagnetic radiation reaching you every time there’s a solar flare than there would be in a lifetime of wearing a watch.

If you develop wings or gills after wearing your watch for a while, feel free to sue me. :p
Click to expand...

You do not trust scientists at FCC, or do you?
 
phrehdd said:
Research is out there that prove without any doubt that keeping a cell phone (transceiver) immediate to the body can cause micro cellular damage. Front shirt pocket and pant pockets by the groin are considered the worst place to carry phones. As for watches, they are indeed close to the body and too may cause damage at a cellular level.
Click to expand...

Got any links?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newtons Apple
hologram said:
Of course I do. Whatever gave you that idea?
Click to expand...

Because you think there's zero science in this thread. Let me explain:

BigMcGuire said:
You mean the one where the FCC says this?

https://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/sar.pdf. (now located here I guess :
www.fcc.gov/file/15268/download )

"Many people mistakenly assume that using a cell phone with a lower reported SAR value necessarily
decreases a user’s exposure to RF emissions, or is somehow “safer” than using a cell phone with a
high SAR value."
Click to expand...

Yes! This one and the one from the updated document
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you

"For users who are concerned with the adequacy of this standard or who otherwise wish to further reduce their exposure, the most effective means to reduce exposure are to hold the cell phone away from the head or body and to use a speakerphone or hands-free accessory."

In addition they measure SAR levels considering 30 minutes of exposure.
So Apple's levels are at the border of SAR limits and you wear your watch all the time on your wrist! And you expose your wrist and your whole body all the time to the signal that is on the border of SAR level. And you cannot even hold it away!
 
DragonX said:
Because you think there's zero science in this thread. Let me explain:



Yes! This one and the one from the updated document
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you

"For users who are concerned with the adequacy of this standard or who otherwise wish to further reduce their exposure, the most effective means to reduce exposure are to hold the cell phone away from the head or body and to use a speakerphone or hands-free accessory."

In addition they measure SAR levels considering 30 minutes of exposure.
So Apple's levels are at the border of SAR limits and you wear your watch all the time on your wrist! And you expose your wrist and your whole body all the time to the signal that is on the border of SAR level. And you cannot even hold it away!
Click to expand...
Very rarely will the Lte watch blast full lte signals for 30 minutes non stop. Most communication will be short bursts. I don’t have an lte watch. Just gps. Mostly because I don’t want to pay 13 a month for it. I jog with my phone so I probably won’t ever get an lte watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newtons Apple
HDFan said:
Do you get symptoms around other electrical items, power lines? You could be EMF sensitive.
Click to expand...

I haven’t really noticed it around basic electrical stuff (appliances and things like that), and I’ve never really been near power lines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back