3 ms·

Clearly you don’t have a family member who uses CGM’s. They are extremely sensitive to RF disruptions, and often fail for mind bogglingly dumb reasons. 2s on /

Clearly you don’t have a family member who uses CGM’s. They are extremely sensitive to RF disruptions, and often fail for mind bogglingly dumb reasons. 2s on / 2s off would completely disable all of their functionality until the interference was gone. And possibly much longer - they are finicky.

mannanj 25d ago
So they are sensitive to RF but for some reason all the RF around you, from the power lines in the walls, the WIFI, the towers, they are immune to those?
alightsoul 25d ago
This is such a first world problem. The speakers the post refers to are probably in a third world country where no medical equipment uses Bluetooth so jamming it poses no danger.
- alightsoul 25d ago
  The reason why they don't use Bluetooth is because, they don't exist at all. People either die first before receiving the device, or the condition that requires it is rare in that part of the world
rc5150 25d ago
surely there's a failsafe if they're that sensitive and finicky. Counting my lucky stars I don't need one, but if I did, I don't think I'd rely on it if it's that incapable of staying up.
herczegzsolt 25d ago
Bluetooth operates in an unlicensed band. If any medical device relies on any unlicensed band for any life-critical thing that is horrible design. I would absolutely support consequences to any device manufacturer if a death is caused by a jamming of unlicensed frequencies. (In my opinion, medical devices should be able to keep you alive in any jamming scenario if feasible. But using licensed bands is just bare minimum.)
- ondra 24d ago
  How is additional paperwork supposed to help? Jamming is already illegal and usage of ISM bands is quite strictly regulated.
  - 15155 24d ago
    > How is additional paperwork supposed to help? Additional paperwork reduces the likelihood (in actual, observable practice) that unintentional interferers exist to impact your critical-to-life application. Furthermore, by moving your critical-to-life application away from common frequencies of interest, you avoid being collateral damage to jammers targeting unrelated applications.

mannanj 25d ago

So they are sensitive to RF but for some reason all the RF around you, from the power lines in the walls, the WIFI, the towers, they are immune to those?

alightsoul 25d ago

This is such a first world problem. The speakers the post refers to are probably in a third world country where no medical equipment uses Bluetooth so jamming it poses no danger.

alightsoul 25d ago
The reason why they don't use Bluetooth is because, they don't exist at all. People either die first before receiving the device, or the condition that requires it is rare in that part of the world

rc5150 25d ago

surely there's a failsafe if they're that sensitive and finicky. Counting my lucky stars I don't need one, but if I did, I don't think I'd rely on it if it's that incapable of staying up.

herczegzsolt 25d ago

Bluetooth operates in an unlicensed band. If any medical device relies on any unlicensed band for any life-critical thing that is horrible design. I would absolutely support consequences to any device manufacturer if a death is caused by a jamming of unlicensed frequencies. (In my opinion, medical devices should be able to keep you alive in any jamming scenario if feasible. But using licensed bands is just bare minimum.)

ondra 24d ago
How is additional paperwork supposed to help? Jamming is already illegal and usage of ISM bands is quite strictly regulated.
- 15155 24d ago
  > How is additional paperwork supposed to help? Additional paperwork reduces the likelihood (in actual, observable practice) that unintentional interferers exist to impact your critical-to-life application. Furthermore, by moving your critical-to-life application away from common frequencies of interest, you avoid being collateral damage to jammers targeting unrelated applications.