New Study Backs Up Finding That MagSafe Can Interfere With Medical Devices (gizmodo.com) 63
Back in January, researchers warned that the iPhone 12 lineup and MagSafe accessories could potentially deactivate implanted medical devices. Now, the American Heart Association has released a study that corroborates these findings on a larger scale, noting that several devices from three major companies were "found to have magnetic susceptibility." Gizmodo reports: The initial study published in HeartRhythm was done on a single patient with a Medtronic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). It was an important finding in terms of awareness, but raised questions as to whether this would impact ICDs from all device makers if the iPhone 12 lineup posed a greater risk than other magnetized devices, and what the impact on pacemakers might be. The AHA's study offers a few preliminary insights into what those answers might be. In the study, researchers observed the impact of an iPhone 12 Pro Max on both ICDs and pacemakers from multiple device makers, as well as conducted both in vivo and ex vivo tests. In vivo refers to tests done on actual patients with an implanted medical device, while the ex vivo tests were done on 11 unboxed devices. The devices tested came from Medtronic, Abbot, and Boston Scientific. (You can see exactly which ICDs and pacemakers were tested in the study itself.)
In 100% of the three in vivo tests, the iPhone 12 Pro Max triggered the devices' magnet reversion mode. That said, the Boston Scientific pacemaker was found to be less susceptible as it only triggered a temporary response. In ex vivo testing, magnetic interference was detected in 8 out of 11 devices, or 72.7%. There are a few things to note here. How seriously a device is impacted may depend on the sensors or components used. The study notes that magnetic interference can occur when medical devices are exposed to magnetic fields as little as 10G. According to the researchers, the iPhone 12 Pro Max has a magnetic field strength of over 50G. However, the ex vivo devices tested didn't respond uniformly. Some were only temporarily disrupted, others had sustained asynchronous pacing, and three weren't impacted at all. The researchers suggest that in the case of a Boston Scientific Accolade MRI pacemaker, the device may not have been affected because it requires a magnet stronger than 70G. After the HeartRhythm study was published, Apple issued additional guidance urging consumers with implanted medical devices to keep iPhone 12 devices more than 6 inches away, or more than 12 inches if wirelessly charging. It also recommended those people consult with both their physician and device manufacturer.
In 100% of the three in vivo tests, the iPhone 12 Pro Max triggered the devices' magnet reversion mode. That said, the Boston Scientific pacemaker was found to be less susceptible as it only triggered a temporary response. In ex vivo testing, magnetic interference was detected in 8 out of 11 devices, or 72.7%. There are a few things to note here. How seriously a device is impacted may depend on the sensors or components used. The study notes that magnetic interference can occur when medical devices are exposed to magnetic fields as little as 10G. According to the researchers, the iPhone 12 Pro Max has a magnetic field strength of over 50G. However, the ex vivo devices tested didn't respond uniformly. Some were only temporarily disrupted, others had sustained asynchronous pacing, and three weren't impacted at all. The researchers suggest that in the case of a Boston Scientific Accolade MRI pacemaker, the device may not have been affected because it requires a magnet stronger than 70G. After the HeartRhythm study was published, Apple issued additional guidance urging consumers with implanted medical devices to keep iPhone 12 devices more than 6 inches away, or more than 12 inches if wirelessly charging. It also recommended those people consult with both their physician and device manufacturer.
Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you own an iPhone 12 ? I bet you don't.
I do. I can barely lift a paper clip with the magsafe magnet on the back. A freaking fridge magnet is more powerfull than that.
Those evil fridge magnet super-rich corporations. Why are they allowed to get aways with it ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't wear fridge magnets.
You don’t wear phones over your heart.
Re: (Score:3)
"You don’t wear phones over your heart."
Inside jacket pocket or shirt pocket? Probably quite common and right over your heart.
Re: Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:2)
Where do you even think the heart is?
Re: (Score:2)
I often wear dress shirts, there's a pocket right over the left side of my heart to be more precise. Other kinds of shirts, suit jackets too and coats often have inside or outside pockets in that area too. Even pockets on the right side are easily within 6" of people's hearts.
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder if it could be mitigated by using electro-magnets. Only when the charger pilot signal is detected do they engage and help align the phone or hold the charger on.
Re: Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I feel like the reverse is true - why are the medical device manufacturers getting away with making implantable devices that are required for life that are susceptible to even fairly small magnetic fields produced by simple bar magnets?
Re: Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:5, Informative)
I have a Medtronic Micra pacemaker implanted in my right ventricle. They insert it via a catheter in the groin. It is the size of a large pill/capsule. No leads, self contained with a 10 year battery, clock, cpu, 6 month event logging memory, accelerometer, and Bluetooth-like io for programming and data collection. It is a little miracle and saved my life a few dozen times in the past four years.
I was instructed to avoid any magnets within six inches of my heart and I cannot get a standard MRI scan.
Keeping a phone away from my heart is a small price to pay for not dying.
This âoenewsâ story is just clickbait.
That magnets affect implants is common sense and Micra patients have been educated on this clearly by Medtronic.
I also cannot be cremated without it first being removed due to the lithium battery and if the battery runs out after ten years, they have to leave it in and put in a second one because of tissue growth around the first device.
Making it impervious to magnets is not high on my wish list.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Keeping a phone away from my heart is a small price to pay for not dying.
That can be true, and it can also be true that allowing such a weak magnetic field disable your implanted device is stupid and unnecessary. It's easy enough to get more powerful magnets.
Re: (Score:2)
why are the medical device manufacturers getting away with making implantable devices that are required for life that are susceptible to even fairly small magnetic fields produced by simple bar magnets?
Implantable medical devices use an electromagnetic wand to program. ergo, any magnetic signal strong enough can interfere or even wipe the programming. BT and WiFi are not feasible as they require complex circuitry and battery power to operate. The EM wand actually supplies the power to the device allowing it to communicate without drawing battery power. Any other technology would shorten battery life and increase visits to the OR to replace.
Re: Why is Apple allowed to get away with it? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Better question (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: Better question (Score:3)
Magnetic shielding?
Re: (Score:1)
Magnetic shielding?
As of right now, it is already the size of a big pill, that somehow needs to be shoved up THE GROIN of all places. I don't think the extra 1 or 2 mm per side may be a feasible thing to do
Other than that, for what I read here, the implant comunicates with the exterior world with some embedded capacitive antena, so (i'm not an electrical engineer or anything close), I don't think this could be possible if fully shielded. Besides, if you can give the implant some extra size, then why won't it simply give some
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Better question (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Better question (Score:1)
Medical device security (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
My thoughts exactly.... Asking why "big daddy government" isn't cracking the whip here is the wrong question. Magnets are all around us. They're everywhere from inside every single speaker to on the back of all the junk attached to the typical refrigerator. Even magnetic media like computer hard drives aren't affected a bit by the amount of magnetism found in a mag-safe AC adapter's connector or a fridge magnet. (People can stick them right on the side of a PC mini-tower case and it'll be just fine.)
It
Re: (Score:2)
People know what magnets are and what things typically contain them. They are much less likely to know that Apple recommends keeping an iPhone 11 at least 6 inches away from your chest if you have an implanted medical device.
What's more holding your phone that close to your chest is not uncommon. Apple should really have thought about the way people hold their phones, but of course we have all heard their "holding it wrong" excuse before*.
Having said that you are right, the medical device manufacturers shou
Re:Medical device security (Score:4, Insightful)
Given the general, ongoing problems with security in embedded medical devices, I wonder whether this says at least as much about medical device design as it does about MagSafe design.
This isn't about security. These devices specifically used magnetic fields to enable certain functions such as communication. Anyone with a pacemaker is told in no uncertain terms, stay the **** away from magnets.
In general we have few options for communications as the wireless signals these devices use to communicate interfere with their sensitive electronics, hence why most ICDs will disable certain detection algorithms in this so called magnet reversion mode. It's to facilitate communication.
The solution? Well Ghost in the Shell style cable connections on the backs of our necks, though presumably having the socket on our chest makes for easier wiring.
Re: Medical device security (Score:3)
That sounds like itâ(TM)s exactly about security. A trivial over the air EM attack that allows you to change the state of the device without user interaction? Yeh⦠thatâ(TM)s a security problem.
These devices should be designed so that theyâ(TM)re fine with pretty much any magnetic field you see in the real world unless youâ(TM)re in an MRI machine or CERN.
As the parent poster said, it should require a very specific magnetic field to trigger the device, and even then it shoul
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like itâ(TM)s exactly about security. A trivial over the air EM attack that allows you to change the state of the device without user interaction?
Over the air is really more about over a few cm worth of air-gap. If your magnetic field is strong enough to trigger this at any distance then you're also erasing credit cards of everyone in the vicinity. This is not a risk.
You're right the topic is security. I'm calling out the parent's use of your word "problem".
As the parent poster said, it should require a very specific magnetic field to trigger the device
What do you propose such a magnetic field do? Firstly the magnetic field needs to be quite strong, secondly the only specificity that can work here is an alternating field, which as physics dictat
Re: (Score:2)
If you are going to hit someone with an EM attack you would probably just fry the pacemaker entirely, or cause it to glitch. The amount of energy needed would likely be a lot less than the amount needed to trigger a magnetic switch.
Re:Medical device security (Score:4, Informative)
The magnet is the safe option since it requires physical proximity to trigger. Until the iPhone 12, people didn't tend to keep magnets in their shirt pocket.
The magnetic sensitivity is a feature. It's how the patient or an ER physician can get a malfunctioning device under control or alter it's mode of operation when necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
+3 at least
Re: (Score:2)
In my experience, the ER usually calls in a cardiac specialist to control the pacemaker. Perhaps in a *real* emergency they'd act differently, but I don't believe so. I don't believe they generally have the knowledge OR the equipment to intervene helpfully. And no, just waving a magnet at it isn't helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
Waving a strong enough magnet at it can be very helpful if "it" is an implantable defibrillator that is shocking the conscious patient unnecessarily every 90 seconds.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they call in a cardiologist for that, but it will be an on-call cardiologist in the ER.
Re: (Score:2)
The FDA has to up their requirements on implantable electronics.
New book plot (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You'd have infinitely more chances of success with a fridge magnet.
But Apple haters are gonna hate, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have infinitely more chances of success with a fridge magnet.
There's nothing about Apple haters here. The risk of having a device that is quite often carried in a chest pocket interfering with a pacemaker is quite real. I don't tend to do that with fridge magnets, though the fact that you shouldn't put magnets near pacemakers is universally known by anyone who has one. The fact that the iPhone12 has a magnet which also presents a risk is not.
Re: (Score:1)
smoking hot arm candy wife
Was the need for Millennials to come up with new, entirely-redundant sayings based on their [substantial] ignorance or their tireless quest for relevancy?
Re: New book plot (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing much going on upstairs.
"Body by Fisher. Mind by Mattel."
Re: (Score:1)
Arm candy was used by us sailors in 1989.
I'll take your word for that; I've see the term only once, on the web. First use in print was apparently 1992; a female journalist for the Tribune - a 'trendsetter,' no doubt. I rest my case - if only in principle. ;)
Tinfoil is so last-year (Score:1)
Tinfoil hats are so last year -- let me show you my new Mu-metal suit!!
50 Gauss? (Score:2)
You don't say.
You can buy 2000 to 10,000 Gauss bar magnets for as little as a quarter each, in bulk, and people use them all over the place.
Modern home speakers can have outrageously powerful magnets... a big one can run 1.5 Teslas (about 15,000 Gauss).
Re: (Score:1)
There is no home speaker or any speaker running 1.5T magnets. That's like a fucking MRI machine. It would be huge. Ever seen a speaker the size of a whole room with helium cooling? Yeah, right
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but there are. Magnet tech has come a long way since the 1990s. There are some neat ways to focus magnetic fields to make small, immensely powerful local fields.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but mag fields fall off as the 4th power of the distance. Keep your distance and there's no problem. (Of course, that assumes you're at the same distance from both poles. Special geometries can change the rule if you're close enough.)
ICD Magnet Reversion Mode (Score:4, Informative)
For anyone else who didn't know what this was it appears that ICDs used magnets to engage certain functions like communications with the outside world. ICDs in particular when they do this will also disable tachyarrhythmia detection rendering one of its primary functions useless.
There have been quite a few documented cases of various devices triggering this unintentionally such as e-cigarettes (turns out they are bad for your health). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Re: ICD Magnet Reversion Mode (Score:2)
So basically an ancient necessary mechanism for testing and defibrillator use, which is now sticking around long past the point where better solutions are possible (better ignoring the transition problems).
Re: ICD Magnet Reversion Mode (Score:2)
How would you suggest they enable a communication mode in a device inside a person? Keep in mind you don't have the power budget to have a radio receiver listening all the time.
You also need to enable a way for an EMT to disable the device, without proprietary tools or knowing exactly what model device is inside the person, when the device is malfunctioning.
Re: (Score:2)
Modern wake up "radio" (more likely inductive than RF) circuits will go way lower in power consumption than required.
Standardize on a circuit, put it in a cheap puck which works with all the devices to put it into asynchronous mode.
Re: (Score:2)
So basically an ancient necessary mechanism for testing and defibrillator use, which is now sticking around long past the point where better solutions are possible (better ignoring the transition problems).
I'm curious what you think the "better" solution is? Before you answer consider the following:
- The body is great at absorbing wireless signals, so wireless signals need to be quite strong.
- Wireless signals interfere with the incredibly sensitive electronics that detect tachyarrhythmia which is why this function is disabled before communications can be started.
- Not everyone feels comfortable having an ethernet or USB socket dangling out of their chest or a button advertising "here be cyborgs".
With those e
Re: (Score:2)
The body is terrible at absorbing magnetic fields, just use a tiny ferrite rod and inductive NFC.
Those "incredibly sensitive" electronics already have to deal with a sea of interference, with 50/60 Hz hammering the front end stronger than modern NFC communication would, closer to the frequencies of interest too.
Oblig (Score:2)
Steve Jobs: "You're just cardiovasculating wrong."
Telemedicine (Score:1)