I was thinking… with future Apple Watches rumored to get various health tracking features such as glucose monitoring, blood pressure sensing, sleep apnea monitoring, and the other possibilities, my only thought is Apple will turn all of these features into a monthly based subscription service in order to use them. What are your thoughts?

  • Bethesda-Darryl@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I lost the blood oxygen app that comes with the watch. Any ideas how to reinstall it? I can’t find it in the App Store. I think I am missing another health app as well.

  • Ansuz07@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    All of those features aren’t something you can put in any watch sized device right now - at least not in a way that the FDA would allow.

    Apple is no doubt working on them, but they are many years away.

    • InterestinglyLucky@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Looking it up, it traces back to a 2010 acquisition of a company called RareLight, and currently it is estimated (per Bloomberg and quoted here) that ‘hundreds of engineers’ are working on it.

      While earlier in 2023 a ‘breakthrough’ had been talked about, it is still behind a secret development project, consuming many millions of $. And the device being worked on would be a "prototype device about the size of an iPhone that can be strapped to a person’s bicep.” So a very different thing altogether compared to the phone.

      In the medical device business, plenty of existing companies for about a $10B business. Are they asleep regarding a non-invasive monitor? No way.

      Still many years away…

    • drmike0099@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The current tech wouldn’t fit into a watch, but they’re working on new tech to do these, mostly based on using lights/lasers that are already in the watch.

      And the FDA doesn’t care how you build it, just that it works. It’s easier if you copy an existing technology because the FDA clearance is easier, but the hurdle isn’t very high for new tech in this relatively simple area, i.e., did our devices readings match the gold standard reading?

      • Ansuz07@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s easier if you copy an existing technology because the FDA clearance is easier

        The problem is that for many of the innovations people want, you can’t just copy existing tech. Current BP measurements require a cuff, and BGM requires actual blood samples. To put either tech in a watch form-factor requires new tech to be developed, and then that new tech has to be proven to the FDA at a certain level of efficacy.

        That is much easier said than done.

      • Ansuz07@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Wrist temp does have some value, particularly for women looking to track their cycle.