“iPods can cause cardiac implantable pacemakers to malfunction by interfering with the electromagnetic equipment monitoring the heart, according to a study presented by a 17-year-old high school student to a meeting of heart specialists on Thursday,” Debra Sherman reports for Reuters.
“The study tested the effect of the portable music devices on 100 patients, whose mean age was 77, outfitted with pacemakers. Electrical interference was detected half of the time when the iPod was held just 2 inches from the patient’s chest for 5 to 10 seconds,” Sherman reports.
“The study did not examine any portable music devices other than iPods, which are made by Apple Inc.,” Sherman reports.
MacDailyNews Take: Well, isn’t that conveeeenient? For safety’s sake, you’ll probably want to keep iPod also-rans away from pacemakers, too.
Sherman continues, “Jay Thaker, lead author of the study and a student at Okemos High School in Okemos, Michigan, concluded that iPod interference can lead physicians to misdiagnose actual heart function. Thaker, whose father is an electrophysiologist and whose mother is a rheumatologist, said he asked his dad about a potential interaction between pacemakers and iPods.”
“‘We looked online but didn’t see anything. Then, one of his patients asked him if there would be a problem, so (my father) put me in touch with Dr. Krit (Jongnarangsin),’ Thaker said in a telephone interview,” Sherman reports.
Sherman, “Jongnarangsin, a long-time friend of Thaker’s father, is the senior author of the study and an assistant professor in the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine at the University of Michigan. ‘Most pacemaker patients are not iPod users,’ Jongnarangsin said. For that reason, he said, it is unclear how often iPods cause misdiagnosis. ‘This needs to be studied more,’ Jongnarangsin added.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: This is actually a valuable study. Imagine an iPod shuffle clipped to the shirt or an iPod or iPod nano in a shirt pocket right over a pacemaker!
The American Heart Association recommends:
If you have an artificial pacemaker, be aware of your surroundings and the devices that may interfere with pulse generators:
Home appliances
• CB radios, electric drills, electric blankets, electric shavers, ham radios, heating pads, metal detectors, microwave ovens, TV transmitters and remote control TV changers, in general, have not been shown to damage pacemaker pulse generators, change pacing rates or totally inhibit pacemaker output.
• Several of these devices have a remote potential to cause interference by occasionally inhibiting a single beat. However, most people can continue to use these devices without significant worry about damage or interference with their pacemakers.
• Power-generating equipment, arc welding equipment and powerful magnets (as in medical devices, heavy equipment or motors) can inhibit pulse generators. Patients who work with or near such equipment should know that their pacemakers may not work properly in those conditions.
Cellphones
• Cellphones available in the United States (less than 3 watts) don’t seem to damage pulse generators or affect how the pacemaker works.
• Technology is rapidly changing as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is making new frequencies available. Newer cellphones using these new frequencies might make pacemakers less reliable. A group of cellphone companies is studying that possibility.
Medical equipment
• Carry a wallet I.D. card with you. Equipment used by doctors and dentists can affect your pacemaker, so tell them you have one.
• Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) uses a powerful magnet to produce images of internal organs and functions. Metal objects are attracted to the magnet and are normally not allowed near MRI machines. The magnet can interrupt the pacing and inhibit the output of pacemakers. If MRI must be done, the pacemaker output in some models can be reprogrammed. Discuss with your doctor the possible risks and benefits before you undergo MRI scanning.
• Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a noninvasive treatment that uses hydraulic shocks to dissolve kidney stones. This procedure is safe for most pacemaker patients, with some reprogramming of the pacing. You’ll need careful follow-up after the procedure and for several months to be sure your unit is working properly. Patients with certain kinds of pacemakers implanted in the abdomen should avoid ESWL. Discuss your specific case with your doctor before and after the treatment.
• Radiofrequency (RF) ablation uses radio waves to manage a wide variety of arrhythmias. Recent studies of patients with implanted pacing systems measured the units before, during and after RF catheter ablation. They showed that most permanent pacemakers aren’t adversely affected by radio frequencies during catheter ablation. A variety of changes in your pacemaker can occur during and after the treatment. Your doctor should carefully evaluate your pacing system after the procedure.
• Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is used to relieve acute or chronic pain. Several electrodes are placed on the skin and connected to a pulse generator. Most studies have shown that TENS rarely inhibits bipolar pacing. It may sometimes briefly inhibit unipolar pacing. This can be treated by reprogramming the pulse generator.
• Diagnostic radiation (such as screening X-ray) appears to have no effect on pacemaker pulse generators. However, therapeutic radiation (such as for treating cancerous tumors) may damage the pacemaker’s circuits. The degree of damage is unpredictable and may vary with different systems. But the risk is significant and builds up as the radiation dose increases. The American Heart Association recommends that the pacemaker be shielded as much as possible, and moved if it lies directly in the radiation field. If you depend on your pacemaker for normal heart pacing, the electrocardiogram (ECG) should be monitored during the treatment, and your pulse generator should be tested often after and between radiation sessions.
• Dental equipment doesn’t appear to affect pacemakers adversely. Some patients may feel an increase in pacing rates during dental drilling.
• Electroconvulsive therapy (such as for certain mental disorders) appears to be safely used in patients with pacemakers.
• Short-wave or microwave diathermy uses high-frequency, high-intensity signals. These may bypass your pacemaker’s noise protection and interfere with or permanently damage the pulse generator.
More information: American Heart Association – Pacemakers
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Escaport” for the heads up.]
Don’t try to defend the largest demographic in the history of the world to some punk gang bangers with a collective IQ of a kumquat and tracks between their toes. Darwinism will get rid of them soon enough.
“Dumbest FUD I have ever read. iPod doesn’t transmit or receive RF, microwave, or any other kind of radiation”
Every electronic device does this as a side effect of it’s operation.
There are standards for the levels of emissions and immunity. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_compatibility for a better description than I can give in a short space.
“iPod is the de facto music player, so naturally its the named product.”
Each device has it’s own profile of emissions, it’s possible that iPods could cause this and other players may not.
“I’d guess that a layer of thin foil inside a pod would shield it nicely.”
Dealing with EMC issues is usually a bit more complicated than that. Many consumer electronics devices already include a sprayed conductive layer inside the case, or shielded internal components to meet EMC requirements, but that’s just one technique. Usually you will have to tweak the unit’s design to reduce emissions.
This is complete bullshit, and I can’t believe it was published.
A 50% chance of there being interference is no better than CHANCE. In science we call that statistically insignificant. This paper doesn’t prove jack, and it is extremely irresponsible for it to be getting this much attention.
Walter Chillum,
You say that “Anything that come from The Heart Foundation (American, British, Australian etc) is gospel as far as I’m concerned” yet it appears that you pay little attention to their advice when it doesn’t suit your agenda.
All heart foundations recommend reasonable diets and regular exercise, and most of the people you’ve seen in heart wards are obese. They got fat and their heart conditions because of their own gluttony and laziness, and now they’re straining our medical system.
We live on an overpopulated planet as it is. We shouldn’t be wasting resources trying to save people whose injuries and diseases are self inflicted with full knowledge of the consequences. Every penny spent on these people would be much better spent helping the homeless or the poor in third world countries.
Quick! Send a CASE to Dick Cheney…
oh, but he IS a case…
Or, better yet… get a few dozen iPod users to surround him and twiddle their click-wheels to find the sweet spot.!
Damn. That won’t work, someone would have to find his bunker first.
Psychopaths don’t have hearts.
As a former Apple fanboy, I watch the reaction of the community with interest when bad news comes out about Apple. The response to this article was predictable. Had this study singled out the Creative Zen players, the Apple fans would be bragging that people should have bought an iPod because it couldn’t possibly have this problem, since Apple would have engineered it out. But since it mentions the iPod, they make sure we all realize that the problem isn’t JUST the iPod but all the other players on the market, too. Wouldn’t do to have someone think there’s a problem with the iPod that other players don’t share.
Similarly, I laugh at the latest Apple TV commercial for the Mac. Macs don’t have “bloat”, huh? Ever looked in the factory build for a Mac Pro? Disk space wasted with a trial copy of Microsoft Office, a Chess game, Comic Life software, Grapher, umpteen million printer drivers, tons of extensions for hardware not even installed in the box, and localizations for every language on Earth. The typical PC or Mac comes loaded down with a lot of crap the average user will never run. As an example, I think I’m the only Mac user at our company who’s ever used the built-in Perl language, rsync, or any of a number of other command line items loaded into OS X. Just as we reformat and reload every Windows PC that comes in the door to eliminate any bloat, we do the exact same thing with the Mac, for the same reason. The Mac simply isn’t “superior” when it comes to bloat. Just like Windows and Linux, there are plenty of reasons why the Mac sucks!
@EMC…although you are right in EM emmisions in electrical devices, in case you haven’t noticed, the iPod has a metal case which can act as a Faraday cage thus reducing or eliminating the emmision. Therefore, in all due respect to Walter Chillum as I realize heart problems are a serious subject, this article is bogus and should be ridiculed for its irresposibility. As a scientist and editor of science publications, this would never pass muster.
Cheesy “Monk” episode plot detected. Quick, somebody call the MythBusters!
Just my $0.02
“A 50% chance of there being interference is no better than CHANCE. In science we call that statistically insignificant. This paper doesn’t prove jack, and it is extremely irresponsible for it to be getting this much attention.”
Great! How about I give you a revolver, half the chambers loaded, you spin the cylinder, point it at your heart and pull the trigger. Does 50% sound like good odds now?
“@EMC…although you are right in EM emmisions in electrical devices, in case you haven’t noticed, the iPod has a metal case which can act as a Faraday cage thus reducing or eliminating the emmision.”
Yes I had noticed, and there is an explanation. Firstly Faraday cages block out static electrical fields and effectiveness against electromagnetic radiation depends on the design.
On a device like the iPod, the cage is not complete as you have holes in it like the LCD window, click wheel and so on, and a nice antenna in the form of ear buds.
That’s enough to be a problem with radiated emissions and noise immunity.
So your comment on reducing rather then eliminating emissions is correct.
Having read the article, and being the child of a cardiologist, two questions come to mind: 1. if an iPod/cellphone can affect the pacemaker, doesn’t that speak to issues with the inherent shielding (or lack there of) of both devices being inadequate and 2. as has been recently commented on by the Aviation industry (as an example) cell phones on flights do not (apparently) interfere with the functioning of aeroplanes. Therefore, in either case, are we either overhyping the issue and also, why would a person having an iPod so close to their pacemaker in the first place (I carry mine in my pant pocket or in my hand, not in a shirt pocket or on the band/strap of my backpack/satchel.
Having a pacemaker implanted only 1 year ago, and also being a religious user of an iPod, I can identify with both concerns, even though I am only 55 (they didn’t test my age group). However, keeping in mind all the warnings I received at the time of implant regarding electronic devices, I am not dumb enough to even test this theory to understand its validity. There are so many other places to attach or wear an iPod, why even tempt potential problems? Nowadays, an electronic device is an electronic device. Just put the thing some place else, and enjoy the best of both worlds!
As a “doctor” or a liar? What a pathetic lack of understanding of the fundamentals of scientific investigation you have. I pray for your patients, moron.
You have made a clinical decision regarding the safety of the iPod without knowing how the experments were conducted, the types of devices were used, the make and manufacture of the pacemakers, or the model of iPod(s) used.
A news blurb certainly does not qualify this report as having the same credibility as a peer-reviewed article from a respected journal. Additionally, there are no other independent reports that either support or refute these data or conclusions. Without additional studies, it would be unprofessional to make broad-based recommendations. What a complete ass you are.
“BUT, it does say in the article that one pacemaker stopped working all together – that IS a big deal.”
A trend of one? There is no clinical or statistical relevance to a trend of one. Tell me, how many lines can be drawn from a single data point, dumbass?
Cubert, you are a pathetic ass.
@WC
Please note @webmaster apprentice’s response to your post, and add this perspective to it – Those who post here are often extra cynical when a perfectly good product is “conviently” picked out of a crowd of products, in this case just because its an Apple product, and held up as the new public enemy no. 1.
Reading between the lines of the article (just barely between) it sounds a lot like Windows lovin’, Mac hating daddy put sweet little daughter up to this innocent little task, and daddy’s wildest dreams came true – He did his part to make Apple look like the devil incarnate.
So I think that’s where the attitude really comes from – the realization that this kind of naked propaganda can’t be taken seriously – so we don’t.
Have a lovely and peaceful day.
What a moron, you are!
A 230-grain bullet traveling a 960 fps would likely have greater “interference” than a radio wave of unspecified signal strength or wave length, dumbass. I can’t believe that you can eat and breathe at the same time.
…And as you can see, some of us can’t spell either.
IPod’s may not be carried by people with Pace Makers, YET, because people tend to prefer the technology they are familiar with by the typical heart attack age. However, today’s IPod users do need to realize they too will get older and still be surrounded by their generation’s technology, so even if all your grandparents have died and you don’t visit any elderly people, you may someday be at personal risk. Keep this study in mind..
The people who should be most concerned are nursing home workers and families who care for elderly members in their home. No one wants to be responsible for a loved one’s death or hospitalization on suspicion of a heart attack. I urge all users of electronics to be aware of the issue this study just barely touches–the risk to pacemakers. Microwaves today are better shielded not because of foresight but because some people had pacemaker troubles around the old ones.
@EMC
I had thought of the ‘incomplete’ shell with regards to the Faraday cage but considering that it was only one face exposed and that even there I believe there is a foil shield, the emmisions would be severrely reduced (but you are right, not eliminated). At what point is this low level significant? God knows that in comparison, other mp3 devices like the Zune (low % of that causing any problems though) and phones etc which do not carry metal casings would be ticking time bombs…..
Yeah, some folks misspell, others simply can’t think at all. No comparison, eh, Peebody?
Holy Crap! I’m with TT… Cubert’s a Dr.?
What’s this world coming to. First TT and C1 kiss and make nice, and now Cubert is a Dr.??? What’s next? Dogs and Cats living together? Windows on a mac?… oh wait…
fergit it.
All the medical practitioners that I know describe themselves as “physicians”. None call themselves “doctors”. Only a moron or a liar would use the word “doctor” when “physician” is the ubiquitous and customary expression.
Hey, Cubert, are you reading this?
How do iPods affect penile implants? That could make or break my weekend.
Sheesh! A 17-year-old, watched no doubt by a beaming dad seeing visions of his child winning a Nobel prize, declaring the iPod a danger to 77-year-olds with heart pacemakers! I think putting iPods into the hands of those geezers (Sorry, grandpa, just kidding!) is a danger to the iPod rather than the other way around. Could it be that the problems the Nano supposedly had some time back were due to the devices being adversely affected by pacemakers installed in their owners’ hearts?!!
For the record, I am a proctologist and my head is always in my work. As you can see, I am performing an autoinspection of my colon. I have perfected the technique!