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.
Wearing Apple Watch unhealthy?
- Thread starter Chiromac81
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Everything in life can be unhealthy. Moderation is the key. Try not to tighten it to the point that it will restrict blood flow. Clean your watch. Get active. Healthy lifestyle.
I also heard somewhere that the Apple Watch is NOT gluten-free.
In the early 90's I had to do a college engineering internship and a company in the Bay Area hired me for the six month stint. This company worked on the patterns for large TV antennas and would tweak the power output and direction to better serve communities. This required many studies, one of which was to measure the EMF in various locations to make certain it was within acceptable limits. This was 30 years ago so forgive me if I have forgotten details.
We used a handheld meter and walked the neighborhoods taking readings. People would stop us and ask us about what we were doing. We showed them our results, the acceptable limits, and explained what we were doing. Every once in a while somebody would tell us that what we were doing was very dangerous, asked about cancer clusters and told us they were going to complain.
I was working with a 40-year veteran of the industry. The first time it happened he told this husband and wife that he'd like to show them something. He showed them the reading outside and then we went into their house. He then showed them the reading in their house and it was noticeably higher. Then he said "Put some water into your microwave and turn it on". The husband did this and we looked at the meter. Pegged. Off the chart. They just looked at each other with their mouths open.
We then walked back outside and again looked at the meter. They said "thank you" and that was that. Nobody ever complained after they saw that test.
Maybe it's apples and oranges, but my point is that there is so much out there that could be dangerous, or may be dangerous, or might kill you in 50 years - but there's so much we don't even think about that it's really not worth the worry.
And back in those days there were no cell phones, cell towers, home WiFi, electric vehicles, etc. I can't imagine what that test would look like today when walking into a home.
We used a handheld meter and walked the neighborhoods taking readings. People would stop us and ask us about what we were doing. We showed them our results, the acceptable limits, and explained what we were doing. Every once in a while somebody would tell us that what we were doing was very dangerous, asked about cancer clusters and told us they were going to complain.
I was working with a 40-year veteran of the industry. The first time it happened he told this husband and wife that he'd like to show them something. He showed them the reading outside and then we went into their house. He then showed them the reading in their house and it was noticeably higher. Then he said "Put some water into your microwave and turn it on". The husband did this and we looked at the meter. Pegged. Off the chart. They just looked at each other with their mouths open.
We then walked back outside and again looked at the meter. They said "thank you" and that was that. Nobody ever complained after they saw that test.
Maybe it's apples and oranges, but my point is that there is so much out there that could be dangerous, or may be dangerous, or might kill you in 50 years - but there's so much we don't even think about that it's really not worth the worry.
And back in those days there were no cell phones, cell towers, home WiFi, electric vehicles, etc. I can't imagine what that test would look like today when walking into a home.
I've been smoking a few cigarettes for 4 years now and I'm fit as a fiddle. You'd think if there was any issues with smoking I'd know by now.
If you live in a city, you are probably sleeping in the radio frequencies of at least 12 different WiFi networks. I don't know how far away you keep your phone during the day, but it's usually closer than on your nightstand.
I see the point you’re trying to make.
Smoking has been proven to have detrimental effects. It has led to the early death of many. We have had 30? Years of observations of cellular and how many more for radio?
The only way we saw anything was by bathing rats in tons of cellular radiation on a high rate per kg of body weight and even then rats survived with a few having observable effects. If I remember the article correctly.
To add to that, we have had microwaves in use for how many years? I think microwave radiation probably poses more of a problem than cellular radiation, yet I don't know many who don't use their microwaves at least a couple times a day.
Microwave radiation is contained and reflected back by microwave oven cases. If you were really exposed to microwave radiation the results would’ve been severe and deadly, you would’ve been blind and injured. You are not, in reality, exposed to any sort of microwave radiation in your daily life. Please read what FDA says:
https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitt...ave-oven-radiation#Microwave_Ovens_and_Health
On the other hand you’re really exposed to cellular radiation which is not reflected back. Otherwise it wouldn’t have worked. Remember, you’re preparing food INSIDE microwave oven. While with watches and cellular phones you’re constantly connecting to OUTSIDE cellular towers.
And the food you're eating that has been exposed to the radiation inside the microwave?
The waves are reflected back in the microwave oven. It’s much safer than holding a constant microwave radiation emitter like cellular watch or a smartphone the whole night close to your head.
I give up, you're comparing something with much less power to a 1500 watt microwave generator. That and you think that a microwave doesn't leak any radiation outside of the front window. :/ Whatever floats your boat.
[doublepost=1557161362][/doublepost]I had to switch to the 5ghz band because when I ran my cheap microwave in my house it prevented any 2.4ghz wifi signal from being received by any device in my house.
I've never met anyone who thinks that it is safe to put your face in front of a microwave. Tons of web articles and youtube videos to show this assumption false.
I didn’t say it’s safe. The further your head is from any sources of microwave radiation the better. No matter if it’s faulty microwave or a constantly radiating cellular/watch. Remember, you don’t wear your microwave on your wrist and don’t hold it in the pocket lol.
Right, and a microwave is much more destructive/powerful - 1000-1500 watts of non-stop generation while running. A watch has a 250 mAh battery and does short tiny bursts of much lower power. Kind of like comparing a fly to a car in terms of output power and hitting force.
This is getting off topic from Apple Watch, but I'll share a similar experience.
When brand new, my microwave caused no interference with my wireless headset. Over time, it would cause increasing interference. At first it only interfered if I was right next to it. Later on it interfered if I was anywhere in the kitchen.
Then one day I noticed that it interfered even if I was in an adjacent room. That's when I replaced the microwave.
The new microwave causes no interference at any distance. This would indicate to me that (1) a microwave's radiation barrier is not necessarily working even if everything looks and appears to be in good, working condition, and (2) a microwave's radiation barrier/door seal can degrade slowly over time, so there's not necessarily a single event where you'd know that it is now broken.
That's a really weird thing to know about everyone you've met. Like, did you ask everyone that?
That's a rhetorical question of course. But in all seriousness, I've seen several people peer into the microwave oven to watch food cook or to see its current state. I used to do this myself. I don't think this behavior is unique to my circle of friends and family, so I strongly suspect that if you actually did ask everyone you've met, that you would find at least one person that thinks it is fine.
How do you know about the bursts? What is your source of information? And how frequent are the bursts?
On their website Apple states that their SAR levels are 1.6 over 1g and up to 4.0 over 10g.
https://www.apple.com/legal/rfexposure/watch1,2/en/
While FCC limit is 1.6 SAR over 1g and CENELEC limit 2.0 (!) over 10g
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
This is all for 30 minutes of usage.
What are the numbers below the bolded? Like where it says head 0.109, and head 0.037, and wrist 0.061? Are they not showing the legal limits, and then their limits below?
Just want to be sure I'm reading the information correctly.
You don't even know how cellphones transmit data and you're making assumptions about things being bad?
https://pongcase.com/blog/cell-phones-work/ -- a very simple site saying something very obvious to most people.
"In order to conserve battery life, a cell phone will vary the strength of its transmitted signal and use only the minimum necessary to communicate with the nearest cell tower. When your cell phone has poor connectivity, it transmits a stronger signal in order to connect to the tower, and as a result your battery drains faster. That’s why good connectivity not only reduces dropped calls, but also saves battery life."
How do I know about the bursts? It's called common knowledge.
This SAR rating is only during transmission. This is not non-stop. This would be while on a call or streaming data like a movie. Even music is only small quick transmissions of 3-6MB songs - then waiting to play the song before streaming the next song.
Do you really think that your phone/watch are blasting non-stop at 1.6-2.0 SAR levels? That's only when data is transmitting. The whole point of preserving battery life is to reduce the number of times you communicate over LTE.
The watch drains like a brick when you're streaming data on LTE because its tiny battery is not designed for long term non-stop communication. Your phone, streaming video on LTE will drain it VERY fast.
Ever use cellphones back in the GSM days with computer speakers? You could hear every time the phone communicated with the tower for a small tidbit of information. Only during a call was the phone broadcasting non-stop. When the phone was not on call or streaming data, it very rarely communicated with a cellphone tower, and when it did, it was short tiny bursts to get tower updates, location updates, etc... - usually tiny 1-2 second bursts every few minutes.
See:
Finding sources that talk about how often your phone communicates with the tower is not turning up any easy results.
[doublepost=1557166436][/doublepost]
A good read: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html
Last edited:
In the link I gave above to a paper, it's not so much plain EMF as the pulses that have biological effect, and not so much field strength as the polarization of manmade EMFs. The mechanism is probably the activation of voltage-gated calcium channels, the communication medium of the nervous system. Only recently has the integration of the nervous system and the immune system been widely recognized, and similarly the link between the immune system and cancer.
Given that cancer happens all the time for your whole life but gets cleaned up by the immune system, it's not hard to imagine that disrupting neuronal communication disrupts normal immune function, allowing immune evasion by cancerous cells, and proliferation.
I wouldn't be surprised. But you're getting way above me in terms of technicality. I'm a firm believer that in 100-200 years from now we'll wonder how we ever could have done the things that we've done as science and understanding progress. But there is that fine line between paranoia and using things that are harmful/not harmful for us.
One thing for sure, me eating healthier will have a much larger impact on me not getting cancer/being healthier (me personally). lol
But that's the point isn't it?
Those that want to be experimenters and refuse any concerns due to any hard evidence or long term studies can do it as they see fit.
Others do want to know of concerns and ongoing studies to be better informed. I eat as healthy as I can because I want to avoid cancer, dementia, etc. even though some of the links are still disputed. But I do want to know, and I can make my own decisions.
What concerns me more are those that don't want to hear it (for themselves or others) until all of the evidence is clear and unequivocal.
I definitely see where it is coming from. I just find most people I talk to that tell me my cellphone is killing me really don't understand frequencies, how their cellphone works, and link me sites that would make some cry. We've had some long term studies on cellphones and they haven't found definite links, yet. I think we all know now that if we can reduce what "may" be bad is only a benefit to us so use headphones, speakerphone when possible.
I do wish there were a lot more studies on this as we're starting to become a lot more inundated with radio signals (wifi - not just wifi but high end 5G / AC gbps wifi, cellular, etc...). I just think doing studies on this is difficult. What we do know is that if there are effects, they are minuscule in comparison to a lot of other things.
I'm overweight, not in shape, I eat terribly, I don't exercise as much as I should, and I spend all day in front of a computer. It would probably be much better for me to fix those first - same for a lot of people, as they have a much larger impact on my overall health.
Doesn't negate that more studies should be done. The studies that have been done don't find anything obvious. As a taxpayer, I'd be all for more studies.
People are free to do what they want, yep.
I agree with you.
We don't want to be the anti-vaxxers, but come at this with some backup and qualified studies. And then let people decide on their own.
We don't want to be the anti-vaxxers, but come at this with some backup and qualified studies. And then let people decide on their own.
Thank you for the explanation. My question about the burst is about your phrase: "A watch has a 250 mAh battery and does short tiny bursts of much lower power.". To understand the influence on human body we need to know 1) How powerful/harmful one burst energy is? 2) How long are the bursts? 3) How frequent are the bursts?
We already know the answer to the question one. But what about the second two? Do you have any sources about that? You cannot deduce it solely from the battery power.
Exactly!
