3 ms·

Yeah, it's definitely worth the drama, but personally I'm more scandalized that biomedical engineers still use unmodulated magnetic fields to switch implanted d

Yeah, it's definitely worth the drama, but personally I'm more scandalized that biomedical engineers still use unmodulated magnetic fields to switch implanted defibrillators than I am scandalized by the fact that the iPhone emits a magnetic field. iPhones aren't the only thing that emits a magnetic field. Not by a long shot. Not by accident, not by intent. I'm sure being able to use a magnet to switch these implants is handy, but putting inductive transceivers on every EMT's toolbelt and in every operating room isn't a physics challenge or an engineering challenge, not with the amount of money in the medical world. It's an implementation challenge, yes, but it's one that should have happened 20 years ago. Due to the severity of their work the medical community is used to always getting its way, but in this case they're the ones who need to shape up.

DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
Why not a subdermal physical switch that could be actuated through the skin? Like a push-button toggle or slider-switch?
- da_chicken 5y ago
  Probably because people roll over in their sleep and like to carry laundry or groceries by holding the bag to their chest.
matthewdgreen 5y ago
The minute you require the presence of a non-standard tool for emergency medical attention that could impact an ICD, you've guaranteed that it will not be present in some cases. It's very likely that such a decision will have a body count.
- xxpor 5y ago
  But the current situation likely has a body count as well.
  - mikeyouse 5y ago
    For the last xx years of ICDs, ~nobody with ICDs carried magnets in their pockets. So the body count of the 'current situation' is likely 0. Now that phones are ubiquitous and some are including magnets powerful enough to interfere, there's a new issue.
animatedb 5y ago
The magnet is usually used as a mitigator to turn off the device in case the device is doing something wrong like producing pulses too fast. There is typically RF communication that can communicate to the device and can often be used to turn the magnet detection off, which means that the device will not quit working when a magnet is detected.
- long11l 5y ago
  When I first got my ICD it was wired up wrong. I was shocked 26 times in a row and then a magnet was used to disable it for the time being

DaiPlusPlus 5y ago

Why not a subdermal physical switch that could be actuated through the skin? Like a push-button toggle or slider-switch?

da_chicken 5y ago
Probably because people roll over in their sleep and like to carry laundry or groceries by holding the bag to their chest.

matthewdgreen 5y ago

The minute you require the presence of a non-standard tool for emergency medical attention that could impact an ICD, you've guaranteed that it will not be present in some cases. It's very likely that such a decision will have a body count.

xxpor 5y ago
But the current situation likely has a body count as well.
- mikeyouse 5y ago
  For the last xx years of ICDs, ~nobody with ICDs carried magnets in their pockets. So the body count of the 'current situation' is likely 0. Now that phones are ubiquitous and some are including magnets powerful enough to interfere, there's a new issue.

animatedb 5y ago

The magnet is usually used as a mitigator to turn off the device in case the device is doing something wrong like producing pulses too fast. There is typically RF communication that can communicate to the device and can often be used to turn the magnet detection off, which means that the device will not quit working when a magnet is detected.

long11l 5y ago
When I first got my ICD it was wired up wrong. I was shocked 26 times in a row and then a magnet was used to disable it for the time being