Bike crash left Spokane man unconscious, so his Apple Watch called 911
seattletimes.com
seattletimes.com
- you are in a terrible accident
- there is no one around you to call an ambulance
- you can’t call an ambulance yourself, because you are knocked out or can’t move
I think the odds for such an event are rather low. If you like smart watches, sure, go ahead and buy one. But for everybody who just wants to wear it because they are afraid: I don’t think it’s necessary for most people, unless you ride around alone in remote areas and are inexperienced or whatever.
My point is: don’t buy because of fear if your risk profile is super incredibly low.
And I guess you are writing just to the young users. There are a lot of old people living alone (in the part of the world where such watches are affordable). Falling, even in their own house, then remaining immobile and unable to call for help is a common cause of huge problems (1) (2).
The specialized devices already exist too, but a lot of people don't carry them, until they already suffer such event and also have luck to survive. Such people (who would otherwise not survive) get potentially (if the system do engage and what follows can be influenced) a huge benefit in a watch that has such functionality.
------
1) https://www.medicalalertadvice.com/fall-detection/ also:
"With the monthly costs nearly twice that of a traditional medical alert monitoring system, the cost alone may be the deciding factor. Is the extra costs worth it? Only you can make that decision. Keep in mind, these emergency alert systems cannot detect 100% of all falls."
2) Also see the exponential increase of chances to die with age:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gompertz%E2%80%93Makeham_law_o...
That's been a solved problem for years though. As your link points out, LifeAlert bracelets (and similar technologies) have had fall detection for quite some time now. The new thing that Apple (and Garmin) have brought to the table is pairing that will a cell radio.
Given the other benefits of a LifeAlert bracelet (or pendant), I'm not sure the Apple Watch is a major improvement (especially for someone with failing eyesight).
Loves the Apple Watch I bought him as a gift though.
And this is the best aspect of the systems that aren’t explicitly “for sick and old.”
In which case you will probably not have a cellphone connection anyway.
I have great cell coverage there.
So yes the chance of incident is low, but the cost of the incident is at a maximum (you can die).
- smart watch correctly detects a crash
This doesn’t seem like a very difficult problem to solve for the vast majority of crashes.
At least around here cell reception != humans within earshot at all.
That said, this is a great feature for many people. I could see it being very beneficial to hunters, elderly people, and people who run in the woods.
1: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/sep/24/apple-watch-al...
That hardly ever stopped news outlets from doing so. In fact, in some places everybody (every outlet) does it, even though it's against the law. Of course depends on the country and how exhaustive enforcement is (and if they can just get out of it with a slap on the wrist/small fine, in the eventually they're discovered).
That said, I don't think this is the case here. A device saving someone's life simply makes for a good story (technology, human interest, feel good result, and Apple to boot, clicks all the "people will be interested" boxes), and there are stories written for a lot less ("see this curious grumpy cat" or whatever passes for new). And such a story, if written, couldn't have but a positive spin (a person's life was saved after all).
From the moment the story actually happened, it was inevitable that outlets would report it, and with a positive message for said technology.
I don't understand the complaints about this being an ad at all. Okay, so maybe it's an ad. Is it conveying useful information? I didn't know Apple Watch's were capable of doing this. Ads are just another way of conveying information - often that information is useless. But in this case? No, it's not useless information. It's important and valuable to many people. The alternative is that there's no ads and nobody finds out about this feature, and they lose out on the opportunity to decide whether this feature (and others) warrant a purchase. It also sparks conversation about possible alternatives (and no, the devices for seniors aren't an alternative for many people), or where alternatives fall short.
- there is no one around you to call an ambulance
- you can’t call an ambulance yourself, because you are knocked out or can’t move
Increasingly large odds after a certain age, and not small if you do certain sports (e.g. trekking, climbing, etc) regardless of age.
In fact, older people falling accidents is so common, a proverb in a European country says: "The elderly die either from falling or while shitting" -- the original is funnier than the translation, because the two causes rhyme).
The accident doesn't have to be terrible either. Tons of run of the mill accidents leave people unconscious...
But you don't read about such cases as such.
E.g. an elder person who fell either they eventually get up in time and call for help (so you don't read any story), or they don't, and the story is "person found dead in their apartment" etc, and might or might not mention the fall...
Is it as necessary as a spare tire in your car or a fire extinguisher in your home? No. But (since the device it does other stuff too) not bad to have regardless.
Note: For certain categories, this is so needed, that there are expensive special purpose devices that are popular for certain cases (e.g. elderly with dementia, parkison, bad backs, and so on), e.g.: https://www.medicalalertadvice.com/fall-detection/
But this is a multi-purpose device, and a cool one at that, plus it has a phone attached and can call the 911 itself, and gives this ability as just another feature to everyone!
Yes! Falls by the elderly are a huge issue and there have been major product lines that focus on it. Many will probably remember the 80s/90s commercials about "I've fallen and I can't get up!"
Indeed. My friend's grandma slipped while getting in the bathtub. They found her barely alive 3 days later when she missed her hair appointment and the stylist called her son. Previously, she was the life of the party and went to the gym almost every day. She didn't last a few days after that fall broke her hip. The outcome may have been different if she got help right away and if nothing else, she wouldn't have suffered for a few days. She was in such good physical health that nobody expected something like this to happen.
That said, having an Apple watch is certainly much cooler than wearing those emergency call devices they currently sell for old people.
That's a problem, but I don't think that's the main takeaway from this story.
You could have a loving family and friends and still not be "missed for 3 days". 3 days are not big enough span of time for adults, in the grand scheme of things. E.g. if your wife is on vacation, or you/she work in another city, or have some deal going on, and you talk 1-2 times a week, it's easy for 2-3 days to slip by without anybody noticing you. Friends too might come by once a week or 1-2 times a month, and easily miss you for 3 days (that would already be more often than many people with close friends see them).
Heck, and even 1 day or even 2-3 hours would be enough for serious damage, if you weren't discovered after a fall/accident.
This is the coldest of cold takes.
A person falls, and nobody misses her or looks after her for three days. How is this not a problem of our current society?
You're not wrong, but it's also not unusual. Most people I know do not talk to their mom more than once every 3 days.
If I died today, the only place that could figure it in a day or so out would be my workplace. If I didn't work, then it could be a week before my parents or friends began to suspect something.
Having personally been run over cycling, multiple passersby called 911 for me immediately, and I was in a ambulance in less than 10min.
Don't know about the US, but in several mountains I've been on around the world (not in developing countries though), signal was just fine. It might not work for Everest, or the remotest part of the Rockies, but most hikings/treks are not in such places...
It's an addition safety factor.
If you're serious about hiking/climbing you should never be in a position where you would need an apple watch to save you. You should always let people know where you are going, what you are planning to do, and when you plan to be back or at least back in contact otherwise they should call a rescue team. If you're solo climbing and your apple watch is what you're relying on in case of emergency you probably have far bigger issues to worry about
That being said, it does seem like it could be useful for the elderly in some scenarios
On the other hand, I don't see that there is any appreciable fall risk from hiking. It's the scramblers that get hurt, not those of us who stick to trails.
Anyway, you're thinking of an avalanche beacon. Those are to help others you are with find you quickly if you're buried in the snow, they have no GPS capability.
My mother's father, while still alive, rapidly deteriorated mentally and was in two accidents by himself in somewhat remote areas and also went to drive to the VA 15 minutes away and ended up several hours away lost and confused when state police came upon him.
My half-brother was driving a box truck for work when it went off road (ice) and into a very steep ditch, the truck was not visible from the road and was unconscious for some amount of time, fortunately this was still in flip phone days so his phone was in his pants pocket and within reach. Even on the phone with 911 he said he saw the emergency vehicles pass him (via their lights) while he was on the phone with 911.
2 or 3 years ago, the brother of the girl that was killed in the hit and run, hit a patch of ice on an on or off ramp and rolled his car multiple times down the hill with his pregnant girlfriend in the car, with the car landing on it's roof. Fortunately it happened during day and there were people there that witnessed it and while quite confused/disoriented they both remained conscious, had that happened at night such a device could have summoned help.
I'm one person and these are just the instances I know of where such a technology could have been useful.
A lot of people on HN live in big cities, ride bicycles or public transportation to work, are rarely if ever out of sight of multiple human beings. That's not always the case. Technology like this is great, and the more awareness it gets the more it will be adopted, the more it is adopted the more lives it can potentially save and the more data it can provide on how to refined.
What if someone is home alone and falls down the stairs? Has a heart attack? Is cleaning gutters and falls? My father's father was cleaning his windows, fell and hit his head on the driveway but his wife heard the ladder fall with him and was able to call 911, but what if that was a widower at 2pm on a weekday and he just had to lay there until someone happened to drive by, what if he was in the back yard and had a privacy fence?
The late Grant Thompson crashed his aircraft this summer (I believe they said died on impact) and was able to be located by comparable technology and by knowing where he'd be flying. Had he not died on impact, something like this could have saved his life or had he not told everyone where he was going and when he expected to return this could have given a location to go search (assuming he had signal) and led to a quick recovery of his body.
Edit: and actually, this may have saved my own life if I'd had the technology and it had triggered from a fall from bed. Some years ago I had a hypokalemic event where I was effectively paralyzed, with great effort I managed to get to the edge of the bed and proceeded to fall out of bed like a sack of bricks onto the floor, barely able to move my hands with minimal manual dexterity and poor coordination, fortunately my mother was already living with me due to her health but I still laid there on the floor, with only a bathroom between our rooms, yelling for help for probably 5 minutes. That was a pretty interesting experience, I've written about it here -> https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2013/2/19/flashback...
Now I wonder if you can go "hey Google, call 911" to a Google home.
Unfortunately not. It would be a nice feature to have.
Edit just realized I know of several other instances where an Apple Watch would have saved someone or kept them for have a days torture with broken legs in their back yard while living alone. Surely this is morning common than you make out?
9to5Mac has links to various fall detection stories at the bottom of this post
https://9to5mac.com/2019/09/21/apple-watch-fall-detection-mo...
I used to have an Apple Watch, and now have a Garmin that has similar features. Nice to know they're there, but I wouldn't buy the device just for it.
That said, if I had been the son in the story, yeah, i probably would have run out and bought my own the very next day! The power of a personal connection to a story.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2016/p0922-older-adult-fa... [2] https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls
There should be a law forcing them to wear bicycle helmets for their own good.
Think of it in terms of a risk assessment[1]. If you are engaging in an activity, you should look at the probability of injury and then the consequences if that occurs.
For example, I'm going mountain biking by myself. The area I'm riding in has a loose surface, but no extreme hills or other features. So it's somewhat likely I'll fall, but the consequence of that won't be extreme. Conversely, I'm riding in a hilly area with a rough but grippy surface. Relatively, the probability of a fall may be lower, but the consequence could be much higher.
Using this type of not-exactly-quantitative reasoning, depending on what you are doing (and the consequences of something going wrong), it may be very reasonable to buy a smart watch or something similar just for this purpose.
[1]A not exactly good article on risk matrix use. Also search for "5x5 risk matrix" (NASA probably has a good reference). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix
Even if this situation coincidentally has happened recently, the subtle message is still here: "you can rely on Apple Watch and you should buy one - better safe than sorry"
So yes, it happens.
I’m still mad, 10 years later, about the fact that he has 2 amazing grandkids who won’t get to know him, or that I can’t ask him about the state of the world.
I don’t know if the Apple Watch would have helped him, but I do know that you haven’t done a full risk assessment. He wasn’t in an isolated area, he wasn’t inexperienced. Falls get scarier and scarier the older your loved ones get.
The Apple Watch told him his heart isn't working right - automatically calling emergency services - and he also called his wife to let him know the watch says there is an emergency with his heart?
Or was it that he too passed out, the Apple Watch called emergency services, who resuscitated him enabling him to call his wife?
> Apple Watch cannot detect heart attacks. If you ever experience chest pain, pressure, tightness, or what you think is a heart attack, call emergency services immediately.
Development of a 12-Lead ECG Signal Processing Algorithm Using NI LabVIEW® and NI ELVIS: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8574627
You would most likely need a 12 lead ECG/EKG too, to detect it accurately.
That being said of course they will state that the watch can’t detect accurately hearth attack to avoid any liability.
Outside possibility is he felt bad, saw a heart rhythm notification, and manually triggered emergency sos by holding the power button. But a fall alert seems much more likely.
Aside: as others note, though, you can't really detect heart attacks well from something this simple.
The watch will call emergency services, then it will text your emergency contact(s) and let them know you've experienced a hard fall. I don't know exactly how, in this instance, that was then converted to a voice call.
Edit: I see in another comment that he initiated a call himself because he was conscious enough to do so.
Please vaccinate yourselves and loved ones even for the flu.
I would also highly recommend people go through this app [2] to get some familiarity with CPR. Then take a proper CPR course (I need to take my own advice on doing a proper course, actually).
I have yet to see one that's properly locked up [that didn't have easy to break emergency glass, anyway]. My workplace has a few in special AED boxes, but those have the emergency glass and the hammer.
So don't expect miracles where none are currently possible. Do all you can obviously in case of need, and ideally make yourself familiar with procedures a bit, any delay will worsen the chances.
According to their material, the 30-day survival rate in Denmark has gone from 3.8% (2001) to 10.4% in 2016, with 67.5% bystander assistance: https://hjertestarter.dk/english/you-can-save-lives though it's not clear how much the programme itself can claim.
According to various papers, rapid CPR/AED after a heart attack can triple survival rates.
It's still pretty bleak outcome, but better than e.g. in 2002 Detroit, where 1 out of 471 out of hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) survived to hospital discharge. In USA, all those stats are apparently being tracked by a programmed called CARES.
Fortunately, it costs about the same! but still...
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6806a2.htm
Couldn't find the prayer stats.
I doubt there are any. It seems like a study fraught with problems, to put it mildly.
The longer I was there, the more the discussion became "Our child is facing X surgery. Have you or your child had this surgery? Pros? Cons? Any good tips?"
Prayer very often means "It's hopeless. Humans can't fix this. Our only hope is divine intervention." And it's hugely depressing and disempowering.
Modern feelings of hopelessness and nihilism extremely common in the western world, many people are dealing with these feelings through medication. The effectiveness of regular prayer on mental health is surprising according to studies and demographic data.
Let me rephrase that: When the people around you offer nothing but prayers, it's often because they don't believe there is any practical support they are capable of offering. In a group setting, if everyone offers you prayers and zero practical support, the signal it sends is pretty depressing.
To be clear, this was a support group for a deadly genetic disorder that frequently kills children before they reach adulthood. It is classified as a dread disease for a reason. The psychological effect of the diagnosis is huge.
It's practically a sign on the wall a la "All those who enter herein are damned." kind of thing.
If I had to guess I would estimate a prayer to be as effective as a placebo, but to proclaim that as fact seems a bit unscientific.
No affects have been found.
> In 1872, the Victorian scientist Francis Galton made the first statistical analysis of third-party prayer. He hypothesized, partly as satire, that if prayer were effective, members of the British Royal Family would live longer than average, given that thousands prayed for their well-being every Sunday, and he prayed over randomized plots of land to see whether the plants would grow any faster, and found no correlation in either case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studies_on_intercessory_prayer
there's been a number of studies showing lots of effects. Most studies seem to show slight positive effects from prayer, some show none and some show negative effects.
> Meta-studies of the literature in the field have been performed showing evidence only for no effect or a potentially small effect.
I'm an atheist so I take the "no effect" over the "small effect".
I take what I consider to be the simplest explanation in the absence of a credible alternative, that prayer does nothing when the recipient is unaware of it.
I take that view because I've never heard an alternative explaination that didn't appear to break the second law of thermodynamics.
A magical, invisible, omnipresent, omnipotent "all known laws of nature defying"-being that answers prayers, requires significantly more evidence than a small effect in some meta study.
A more properly scientific line of reasoning would be to instead say that you'll assume the small-to-nonexistent effect is nonexistent until somebody produces a model capable of predicting the proposed small effect, or a myriad other arguments along the same general lines.
The Apple Watch is very explicit about not being a panacea, and currently only advertises detection of a specific kind of arythmia or elevated heart rate. Note that the original comment mentioned that fall detection was probably the trigger.
I'm still pretty angry at the universe about my colleague's sudden death. I just want to temper expectations about what the Watch can or cannot do.
What does this mean?
Through this doesn't mean the Apple watch can't be a useful addition, just don't rely on it.
Except, when you wear additional bracelets at your both legs, the other hand, both shoulders and another 6 on your chest. Then yes ;). And consider the continuous cyborgization of our society, that is not that far away.
The 12 lead ECG is about detecting the electrical impulses of heart beats from different angles of your bodies.
If you found a technology to detect these mV values from a meter away ... tell me ;) We will be rich ;)
There's a reason ECG probes are attached to multiple points on the body, and you can infer quite a bit of info from just comparing multiple signals alone, including if you have your heart flipped, for some reason. :D You'll not get that from your watch.
They call this an electrocardiogram (ECG) but the one I had for a medical didn't have 12 leads just 5 or 7 I think.
Unless he had this sense multiple times and was finally right this time...
Thinking of deaths of people I've known; dying at home in bed seems preferable to most.
"Being Mortal" by Atul Gawande is an excellent book on this subject.
https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11-10/he-documented-his-own...
It's easy to criticize a company their size, but they definitely do this very very right.
Here's a post from 2006 for example, talking about accessibility in Mac OS 9: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/724948.
Here's about accessibility in Mac OS X Tiger (2005): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Tiger#Accessibility.
It was evidence to elucidate upon a baseless statement you made earlier.
Thanks to strong leadership in the accessibility team, there was an increasing buy-in from the top, and throughout the company. Today, accessibility is indeed in Apple’s DNA, but initially, there was quite a bit of genetic engineering and (dare I say it?) government regulation involved.
She has a hard time getting up from the floor if she kneels or sits down as is, one good fall from a cat tripping her or something is likely to be devastating.
(I would be very surprised if the series 3 and 4 have significantly different accelerometer hardware)
[0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/13364/apple-announces-the-app...
Maybe because they added new hardware to enable it...?
For battery life concerns, I can see them implementing some of the fall detection logic in hardware as well. For example, a high shock or shaking could trigger the fall-detection software to wake. Although, with the 60-second period, they probably wake the main processor often enough anyway that hardware detection might not save much power.
One of my friends was recently killed in a motorcycle crash. A passerby found them in the morning in some bushes near the side of the road. We don't know what time the crash occurred, or even if they died right away. This feature may have saved them.
The new Fenix 6 series is awesome, but they're a little bulky for my wrist.
Just checked them out and my jaw dropped when I saw the +600 Euro price-tag.
Since I'm not made of money, I hope some core tech from those quickly trickles down to some cheaper sports trackers from Xiaomi for example.
If you just want a smart watch for training then a Forerunner 235 would work fine.
[0]: https://www.rei.com/product/140950/salomon-slab-shift-mnc-sk...
Though even as someone who spends 40+ days/year in the backcountry skiing around the PNW, the 645m is plenty for me. That, combined with an inReach Mini incase shit hits the fan and I feel pretty well covered.
As a side note, those bindings are incredible. Easily one of the biggest innovation in skiing since shaped skis. I put 30 days on mine last season and didn't have a single issue; really impressive for a lightweight, finicky, and brand-new piece of gear.
It's £105 delivered from amazon in the UK. I expect a similar price in your country https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07CRPSJJX/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_...
I believe most people, if given a discrete choice, would sacrifice 2% of battery life and "forgot your password?" features for the privacy of such information.
This is not the case with the Apple Watch - your Health data lives and dies on your phone unless you back it up or choose to share it with other apps.
The FR945 that was released this year has far more features than the apple watch (including the emergency features). Even comparing the Apple Watch 4 to my FR935 (released in 2017), the Apple watch would be a huge step down for my purposes. That's all without mentioning the fact that I'd probably break the apple watch on my first outing.
The Apple watch might be a better smart watch for day-to-day use, but next to a Garmin it's pretty obvious which is the toy.
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/product-comparison-calculator?ty...
I get a yearly physical just to be safe, but honestly running is my favorite way to decompress and I'd need some kind of diagnosis before giving it up.
I'd venture to say they live far longer.
From the introduction of Vina & al 2016:
In longitudinal studies, physically active men and women have an approximately 30% lower risk of death compared with inactive people (Schnohr et al. 2015). No upper threshold for physical activity has ever been recommended (Pate et al. 1995). In fact, in studies performed on top‐level athletes, participation in endurance competitive sports increases life expectancy (Hartley & Llewellyn, 1939; Prout, 1972). Moreover, Karvonen and co‐workers found that Finnish champion skiers lived 2.8–4.3 years longer than the general male population in Finland (Karvonen et al. 1974). We tested the effect of strenuous exercise, performed by well‐trained humans, on their longevity. We measured average and maximal lifespan in cyclists who had taken part in the Tour de France between the years 1932 and 1964 and compared them with those of the average population in those years. Only cyclists born in Belgium, France and Italy were included in our study. The results were striking: we found an 11% increase in average longevity in Tour de France participants when compared with the general population (Sanchis‐Gomar et al. 2011). These results have been confirmed recently with the observation of a significant 41% lower mortality rate among French elite cyclists from the Tour de France, compared with the general male population (Marijon et al. 2013). Evidence from human studies supports the notion that regular, vigorous aerobic exercise might be a useful tool, with a dose–response effect, to improve the overall health status and longevity of the general population (Ruiz et al. 2010; Teramoto & Bungum, 2010). However, the controversy regarding the potential adverse effects of regular strenuous physical exercise continues (Benito et al. 2011; Schnohr et al. 2013). Schnohr and co‐workers have found that moderate‐intensity joggers have lower mortality rates that sedentary people or high intensity joggers. In other words the relationship between intensity of jogging and mortality follows a U‐shaped curve (Schnohr et al. 2015). Thus, the ideal ‘dose’ of exercise needed to improve longevity is not a simple linear relationship. Genetic aspects as well as lifestyle factors (smoking, diet and alcohol consumption) may be important in interpreting studies aimed at determining the effect of exercise training on longevity.
I also suspect lifting weights (and a bunch of other things) is important for long term health, how does that relate?
Not a fan of apple, but this is some cool tech.
Edit: Saw that some garmin's have crash detection too. Neither are "just" toys.
I had the Apple Watch track me during my hour long bike tours, GPS and heart rate sensor on and all, without any problems and with battery left to spare at the end of the day.
Seven to eight hours is probably the critical mark, but anything below that is no problem at all.
The AW might be a huge step down for your purposes, but I was fine recording 5+ hour bike rides and my 4+ hour (yeah, yeah) first marathon. I really disliked using a touch screen on the AW for recording runs, particularly intervals. I love the feature set of the 945 and haven't looked back.
THAT SAID, I would trust the Apple Watch over the Garmin any day of the week for 'lifesaving' type tech. Garmin's software is spotty, to say the least. First off, I can trigger the Garmin crash detection at will by jolting to a sudden stop on my bike and hopping off. Not all that aggressively -- it happens in my normal dismount process with some regularity. I have to tell it to cancel the emergency call.
Right now it's setup to text my wife. Looking at the config, it says "Select up to 3 people to be notified via text message and email if an incident occurs or assistance is needed". I don't know how I could set it up to call 911 if I wanted to.
And that would all assume it even works. Multiple times a week, my watch says it doesn't have connection with my iPhone X, and I have to reboot the watch for it to find my phone again. My wife's FR235+iPhone 7 setup seems more reliable, but at least once a month for the past 3-4 years, it's decided to stop syncing and we need to reboot the watch again.
IME, the Apple Watch <-> iPhone BT connection just works. All the time.
I have a Garmin Fenix 5X and it does not make the Apple Watch look like a toy. The Apple Watch integration is seamless, the Garmin Connect integration is a joke.
Moreover the Fenix has a clunky user interface, and is bulky and ugly.
The Apple Watch absolutely trounces the Garmin in every aspect, functional and aesthetic, except for two:
1) Water resistance: it's hard to argue with the Garmin's 100M water resistance.
2) Battery life, but it only does better here by being massive (ref. previous comment about bulkiness).
Seriously, unless you're spending a lot of time in the water, and if you're able to put the watch on charge every night, buy the Apple.
I have 8.5 inch wrists, and even though that's relatively chunky, the Garmin looks absolutely ridiculous.
The thing about fitness and sleep tracking is it's only useful if you're wearing the device pretty much all the time, particularly for things like daily calorie burn.
Whereas I found that there are so many contexts where it either wasn't appropriate, or I didn't want to, wear a gigantic activity watch. I slugged it out for a few months, but in the end gave up on it because it wasn't really practical or stylish.
The maps are something of a wash as well, because the screen is so tiny.
My other arguments stand, to the point where I wouldn't even recommend buying one of the smaller ones unless you really need the water resistance. I imagine even the smaller models still have better battery life than the Apple Watch, so that's another consideration.
If you're not a cyclist then it doesn't matter but there's definitely lots of stuff the Garmin can do that the Apple Watch can't.
We are still waiting for ECG here in Australia. Sigh.
> "If Apple claims the ECG function in its Apple Watch has therapeutic benefit for wearers, the watch would need to be included in the [Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods] in order to be legally supplied in Australia," a TGA spokesperson said to Gizmodo Australia in a statement.
This could be fixed if Australia allowed unapproved devices to be sold with a warning instead of outright banning them.
1. https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2019/09/why-apple-watch-series-5-...
During that time I never had any kind of crash or even a particularly close call. Two years ago I decided I didn't want to push my luck any further and sold my bike. Drivers are so distracted now that I feel my luck was going to run out soon.
I would be more than happy to buy the cell enabled versions for my parents considering what the watches can do but neither is keen on using a smart phone let alone the associated costs of buying and maintaining one
Also good for you man, ditchin some of the distractions for focus. I think some people get weirded out by me when i watch sports because i'm basically 100% in the zone and yelling constantly. Trying to soak up every detail of every play. not casually browsing and watching 2 / 3 screens at once. I can go hours without my phone without really noticing much honestly.
I do criticise the fact that only the Apple Watch contributes to their "Activity" app.
I bought a Fitbit Charge on impulse at an airport for a couple of hundred bucks, and have worn it every day since. I think I prefer it because the battery seems to last forever, it's light-weight, and it's not doing any additional features (although I think it can) than taking my heart rate, counting my steps, and a silent alarm. Would love the EKG feature tho.
I have a first generation Apple Watch. This is one of the things that annoyed me after buying it: you aint sleeping with it on if you want it to running the next morning.
I'm hopeful that batteries will get better and better, and eventually we'll be able to sleep with the watch on and have it track sleeping patterns, etc.
I just keep reading the comments and sadly the ECG feature is not available in Australia and may never be as Apple have never applied for the licenses.
Not a huge deal breaker but an annoying one.
Try shutting some of the extras off, and you’ll be surprised at how long it lasts. Also, your morning alarm won’t wake anybody else up!
Bummer really. Would love an Apple watch in a form-factor where it can complement a watch.
https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/in-the-future-everyo...
I’m disappointed that Android Wear didn’t take off.
More competition would greatly increase innovation.
Android wearables have a chicken and egg problem. Manufacturers aren't innovating because nobody is buying and nobody is buying because there are no innovations.
Apple is fully vertically integrated so it can recoup the high R&D costs for new silicon and other components through the price of the unit but on Android platforms you have separate manufacturers for the vital components who are under pressure to be cost competitive as they don't get a slice of the profits of the final product so they won't invest in R&D until they see enough consumer demand which isn't there.
If Apple Watch hadn’t been an immediate success, I’d like to think they’d still be pushing hard to make it so.
Most of its competitors have far more offerings with much less commitment behind any one of them.
Apple Watch wasn't an immediate success - at least not in the form we see it today. WatchOS 1.0 was dramatically different from what we have today, with much less focus on health and more focus on 'connecting you with people' and stuff.
Apple kept working at it, paring out the stuff that wasn't useful (the side button was originally dedicated to a list of contacts to send messages to for example), and doubled down on the stuff that was (health). Clearly it has worked...
[1]: https://1reddrop.com/2019/01/07/apple-watch-sales-history-fr...
edit: Apparently the Samsung Galaxy Watch series are Tizen, not Android
Regular quartz watches can go 3-10 years between battery replacements. Solar charging can increase that to 20 years or more. Self-winding mechanical watches will last a lifetime as long as you wear them regularly and have them serviced every now and then. How long does a modern smartwatch last in comparison?
Doubt it. Apple watch is already a bigger business than netflix - the battery life is perfectly sufficient and making it longer would involve making it less capable.
edit: found https://www.apple.com/watchos/feature-availability/
Your second link is specific to international roaming with the cellular-enabled watch, which gets complicated for various reasons (do you need an active SIM, does the modem on the watch support bands used in that country).
> The improvements to the SIP and cellular bands allows the Series 5 to make use of its SOS feature in more than 150 countries now. If you find yourself in a bad situation, or the Watch's fall detection kicks in when you fall off your bike during a cycling workout, users with cellular Series 5 models can now call emergency services in various countries.
[0] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/09/apple-watch-series-5...
Ultimately what I got back was "yep you do have an irregular heartbeat sometimes. It's nothing threatening and you'll be fine." They additionally did a stress test and found that under exertion my heartbeat returns to normal so it was nice to have the peace of mind.
Talk about response time, wow!
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21020162
https://github.com/corollari/fixedHackerNews/blob/master/ext...
Formatting may improve such quotes that already begin with ">", but the problem is that people come up with their own inferior solutions instead of simply using ">". For example, some people try to use italics which are hard to see, hard to distinguish as quotes, and don't even render as italic on some of the HN native apps I've used.
If ">" was good enough for decades of email and usergroups, it's good enough for HN. No, your quotes in this one post doesn't need anything different or special.
What HN needs is a simple formatting-help blurb when writing a post to set people straight once and for all like reddit (or res?) had/has. The first line of it, if I wrote it, would be "Prepend > for quotes, prepend four spaces to format code."
dang, was that something you were testing?
There is nothing to fix: code blocks do (almost) exactly the right thing for code. (the indentation on the right is unnecessary and counterproductive, though, but that's not the main source of the complaint here.)
They are horrible for quotes, especially on mobile, but that's not what they are for. Admittedly, quotes are vastly more common than code on HN and HN could use a good quote formatting mechanism, but that's a missing feature, not a bug in code formatting.
Yes, but that one line is very long and nobody knows how it ends.
white-space: pre-wrap;Prepending a line with two spaces is not intended for quoting people. It is intended for posting code in a comment.
If you're quoting someone, stick to the well-established standard of prepending with a > symbol.
(Tangent: anyhow, this reminds me of a great aphorism:
> If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
This can apply to many situations involving technical debt in software... is it really more effective to do many unseemly hacks rather just fix it properly?)
I figured it was the jerking-around. Maybe it looked to the watch like she had fallen down.
Each time, was watching a tight rugby match and getting a little over excited. Nice to know it works as advertised, though.
> As opposed to social media or GPS tracking apps, Schaeffer said the Apple Watch fall-detection feature offers extra reassurance by not relying on a person to alert first responders.
We're early enough in the adoption cycle that this is an undeniable benefit. Obviously, if nobody else is around, then it's life-saving. But I do worry about the long-term ethics. What if, when such watches become common, it becomes socially acceptable to just ignore people in life-threatening distress - "I don't need to call 911, their watch will have taken care of that." Just another nail in the societal coffin of distorting individualism as insularity.
Not a reason to ban this technology (or any similar action). Just something to keep in the back of our heads as the adoption curve progresses.
Also, the bystander effect deals with the probability of any individual helping out. It's still possible that there are two forces at play here: the declining probability of any individual helping vs the increasing probability that someone in an ever-larger group will still help despite the individual effect. It might be the case that there is a critical value N of bystanders where the second effect overpowers the first one.
I doubt that as N increases the "network" effects are strong enough to overcome the chance that someone that will help, regardless of what the effect of "N-1" bystanders is, shows up.
The effect is informative regarding what to do when you need someone's help, though. Since the basis of the effect is the diffusion of responsibility, it helps to address a person directly when asking for help. Instead of asking whether anyone in the group can help with something, point to a particular person and ask them whether they can help. In this way, the refusal to help becomes explicit and people will be less likely do that. This is something I've observed from personal experience too.
I have done this, and it has helped in mitigating the bystander effect. It means that there is a relatively large amount of people in the population that know what to do when accidents occur. IMO this makes bystanders who have done such programs to help, since they know how valuable time is in a lot of these situations.
Since I have done this training, whenever there is an accident on the streets and I am nearby, I will go help because I know what to do. And am therefor more likely to take initiative.
So I wouldn't immediately say this discount would be correct. It could also mean that some mitigation against the bystander effect is working.
"circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party who could face potential injury or death without being rescued"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,_2007,_Baghdad_airstri...
In the mentioned Kitty Genovese incident the numbers were inflated and while it isn't mentioned here, there actually were police reports while it was happening.
They were just ignored until it was too late.
This is the reason why Good Samaritan law is being brought into effect across the world.
Until someone gets fined for an ambulance being called on their behalf, because they dropped their watch on the floor...
No it would not.
It's not open source, I'm not about to defend a product I know nothing about.
This problem doesn't exist in countries where there is public healthcare like in Australia, Canada and I believe most countries in Europe.
And the fun fact is that US citizens call socialism "evil" while you sacrifice your health and/or your livelihood over a broken leg. I got a completely different definition what "evil" is, and oh btw I'm serving capitalism in EU (so don't start crying out "socialiiiiiist!!").
the issue is not with the technology, but with people, as always. with the adoption of ipv6, iot and gps_in_everything etc. it's not a question about if the technology can be used for bad things, it's a question about if it will.
people who only believe int he darker side of this technology can easily avoid it by not participating. they should let people who willingly participate do so at their own 'peril' if that's their opinion.
privacy advocates are the new religion trying to push their views on everyone even though it's just a matter of opinion. some people love to be tracked everywhere for the benefits it can give them, other people hate it for the downsides it might have. its all a matter of opinion for users, and a question of integrity for its masters.
Garmin, Whahoo and other bike computers have had off crash alerts via a linked phone for, maybe, 10 years I think. Certainly since the Garmin Edge 1000 at least. That's a better fit for me as I'd never ride without my phone in a jersey pocket.
I'd always want a screen in front of me and not on my wrist.
I do know I use stuff like VO2Max estimation, FTP estimation, recovery estimation, power zones analysis and hill descriptions for climbing while on the bike and those features are not available on an Apple Watch to my knowledge. I know for sure that Apple doesn't support ANT+ and that's important for me.
An Apple Watch might be a good companion if you're a runner or a cycle commuter but it appears to be pretty limited if you want to use it for cycle sport.
Also, as a developer, I don't care as much about losing functionality in my lower body. My wrists, hands and brains however are how I make my money. Even though I have full disability insurance, I still would much rather keep working than sit at home.
Here in Canada my dad who has COPD and IPF was using it to get a ballpark idea of his current blood oxygen percentage. It's not a medical device but it's (was) convenient for someone in his situation.
It seems fraudulent for a company to remove a feature without notice (yes probably buried on line 1,256 of an update). Not just an app but one that used a physical device/sensor on the phone removing it seems very wrong if not illegal.
Edit: canada and cyprus only is why.
Just a matter of time before these companies get too greedy and get hit with violence.
As for them being ugly, at least Apple has a wide selection of bands, and the watch itself is as unoffensive as a rounded rect can be, but I feel you there. It's not a work of art, but at least it's not the house arrest bracelets that fitbit sells.
If my watch tries to get my attention, I know it’s reasonably important. If my phone does, I don’t have to pull it out of my pocket if I don’t want to.
It does not need to be tied to a phone or an app ecosystem (android or iOS) to work. It does need a cellular connection, and some logic on the device, but that's about it. This device would be cheaper and affordable to a larger set of people than spending upwards of $500(estimated) on an apple watch.
Not many folks under 60 walk around wearing heart monitors, fall detectors, and other health monitors. This is about those things becoming commonplace for everyone.
So if you don’t want to buy a watch, then get a standalone product. But if you already have an Apple Watch, then this is a cool feature to have.
Here is an article discussing them: https://www.medicalalertadvice.com/fall-detection/
- Heart rate monitoring and warning when something is not right with the heart?
- Fall detection and call 911?
I preordered, but maybe it's because I've been off samsung so long I've forgotten
PS If this is a PR placement, this is masterful.
As a long time Apple hater, they are doing a great job of convincing me to spend the money on their products.
( MacBook Pro is still overpriced and kinda sad tho )
It peaked in 2015, and it was a truly beautiful machine.
And OnStar has it easier, with existing collision detection.
$15/month for a fall detection device vs $399 + $10/month buys a lot of months. Yes, I know the Apple Watch does more, but I wasn't the one who tried to make the comparison.
Does the Apple Watch stay on the phone with you until EMS arrives? Is it capable of giving medical information to dispatch?
Another "Apple was the first to do this!"... "No it wasn't"... "Well, the cost is different!"... circumlocution.
I could care less, either way. Whichever device gives me less false positives (but not false negatives) works best for me as a first responder.
If any of those services have reached the point that the end device can detect an emergency and contact local emergency services by itself, then they've done a terrible job of advertising that functionality.
> If any of those services have reached the point that the end device can detect an emergency and contact local emergency services by itself, then they've done a terrible job of advertising that functionality.
They all have (see my sibling comment about Automatic Fall Detection), and I agree.
There are many good ideas that exist out there that are "unknown" because the product they are in misses some aspect of how consumers would wish to consume them. My favorite was that the Tesla Roadster wasn't the first electric car, but it was the first that I could see myself buying at some point.
The nice thing about this being a feature of the watch is that the watch brings a bunch of great stuff all on its own. That it can also call emergency services or diagnose Afib is like bonus time.
Careful with that as an assumption:
> In people younger than 55, Apple Watch’s positive predictive value is just 19.6 percent. That means in this group — which constitutes more than 90 percent of users of wearable devices like the Apple Watch — the app incorrectly diagnoses atrial fibrillation 79.4 percent of the time. (You can try the calculation yourself using this Bayesian calculator: enter 0.001 for prevalence, 0.98 for sensitivity, and 0.996 for specificity).
> The electrocardiogram app becomes more reliable in older individuals: The positive predictive value is 76 percent among users between the ages of 60 and 64, 91 percent among those aged 70 to 74, and 96 percent for those older than 85.
(Source: https://www.statnews.com/2019/01/08/apple-watch-iffy-atrial-...)
That being said, I will not at all dispute the ECG tools as very valuable.
https://www.ajmc.com/conferences/acc-2019/giant-study-sugges... - discusses the findings in the context of the Apple Health "Study" announced at one of their events.
edit: its a reference to the ads, you bozos.
OnStar is part of an entire car.
This is a watch with greater capability than both put together. Let it be awesome.
I'm not claiming Apple has done something revolutionary. It's an evolution that builds on and combines various capabilities in a novel way. It's the sort of thing I could imagine seeing growing up watching "future" tv shows (Beyond 2000 ftw) and I love when technology produces something like that.
I can see in time people will say they didn't stop to help because they thought his car, watch, phone could've saved him.
I am asking this because these type of features should be pervasive and be widely adopted by those at risk.
The more watch makers that has these features the better.
I have elderly father in Eastern Europe and he would really benefit from this.
Physical presence, not completely: https://www.apple.com/watch/cellular/
> The Apple Watch also alerted Gabe Burdett that his dad had fallen.
Yes.
> After the call ends, your watch sends a message to your emergency contacts with your location letting them know that your watch detected a hard fall and dialed emergency services. [0]
Now - I just want that hydration sensor that was teased a while back. So many health conditions that accurate information about hydration could assist.
That said, the cupholder in my riding lawn mower squeezes my iPhone 8 buttons into SoS mode. The first time it called 911 and I picked it up 30 minutes to a missed call and a text. No ambulance. Next time I mowed it, it called 911 again. No call and no text. I guess I made the 911 pranker list? Yay? Hopefully I don’t need it.
Wonder what makes this guy get an ambulance and me in South Bend Indiana get one text?
When fall detection activates a 60 second timer starts and the watch vibrates like mad trying to get your attention, if you do not dismiss the alert not only does it dial emergency services and text your location to registered emergency contacts, it actually starts speaking to the operator stating that you have fallen as well as providing your GPS coordinates.
The assumption is that you manually activating emergency SOS implies you are alert enough to speak with the operator, but somebody unresponsive after a fall needs the device to ensure they get assistance even though they are incapacitated.
I wonder if the fall has to happen in combination with some other health metrics that it senses? Does there even need to be a falling down? What if you have a heart attack while you’re strapped into your parked car and you don’t fall? Does it call then?
Seems very hard to trigger inadvertently, so it makes sense to me that they use an algorithm that factors in the heart rate and the fall trajectory and velocity.
Also from their initial demo, the fall detection uses more input than just a fast falling motion. Apparently humans fall in a specific way that the watch detects
How about instead of brushing your hair and playing with your watch you concentrated on driving?
I inferred you were on a public road. If you weren’t then I apologise.
Phone destroyed or dead battery and no call correct?
There have been multiple cases now where (American, obviously) Law Enforcement have brutalized and injured people experiencing diabetic shock.
And what if the fall and unconsciousness is the result of illicit drug use? Surely the wearer doesn't want a call to 911 to be the default behavior in that case.
Does Apple act with greater discretion in jurisdictions where law enforcement are known to be criminally brutal or corrupt? I suspect that the answer is "no."
Since people of color experience a greater proportion of negative outcomes from law enforcement contact, I surmise this feature is far more useful for white people.
Don't get me wrong - it's a cool feature for sure. But until we untangle law enforcement (and state brutality) from medical and fire response, it's potentially a dangerous one for some users.
Those incidents are reprehensible and should never be forgotten, and I don't intend to excuse them or the culture that enables them, but statistically they are extremely rare. Even in the worst parts of America, in a medical emergency you are better off with emergency treatment than not.
And if you don't want the watch to call 911, for whatever reason, you can turn that feature off.
>There have been multiple cases now where (American, obviously) Law Enforcement have brutalized and injured people experiencing diabetic shock.
Given the odds, there are likely far more cases of people being seriously injured or even killed from diabetic shock that do not pop up on the public perception radar because they are not attached to a social spectacle.
>And what if the fall and unconsciousness is the result of illicit drug use? Surely the wearer doesn't want a call to 911 to be the default behavior in that case.
I don't know if that's your (our?) call to make. Whether a drug abuser wants to die from their drug abuse is, I think, a deeply personal choice. Unless they have a DNR (which they can get if they are so inclined), I think the right choice is to try to intervene and get them to survive before throwing the book at them.
FWIW, there are many laws centered around "forgiving" people involved in incidents like this to increase the response/survival rate. For example, I live in a college town and if you report someone (underage even) overdosing on alcohol or any other illicit drug, the police are instructed to not pursue a criminal case against the overdoser or anyone who reports the incident (even if they themselves are breaking the law). The point being that anyone who finds themselves in situations like this will hesitate to call for help, and laws like these increase the odds that people in trouble get the help they need in time.
>Does Apple act with greater discretion in jurisdictions where law enforcement are known to be criminally brutal or corrupt? I suspect that the answer is "no."
Two things here. First, I don't know what "greater discretion" would imply here - they wait longer before calling, or adjust the threshold of what constitutes a fall? Second, "jurisdictions where law enforcement are known to be criminally brutal or corrupt" is a deeply subjective topic, probably one which Apple rightfully should have zero cards in. I also fear that you will find that districts that engage in brutality also happen to have a large minority population (since you state white people are not affected by police brutality at the same rate that minorities are), and this will further reduce the usefulness of this feature for those people.
>Since people of color experience a greater proportion of negative outcomes from law enforcement contact, I surmise this feature is far more useful for white people.
While you make a good point with conditions like diabetic shock and presumably seizures, I think this feature was generally meant for people who have lost consciousness (as the subject in the article did). I think even the most egregiously corrupt police force in the country would still call in an ambulance for a guy who has passed out rather than proceed to taze him or something.
I have the Series Zero, which is now state of the ark, so I'm not really up on what's widespread anymore.
Anyone know of any force alarms from devices that call the emergency services automatically, be that a watch or app?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
The article says: "His watch messaged emergency medical services at 12:02 p.m., and an ambulance was there within a minute."
Though this seems to be contradicted by the previous paragraph: "His Apple Watch had called 911 through the fall-detection feature, which sends out an alert if the wearer is immobile for 60 seconds after a fall."
Edit: It makes a call, according to Apple's docs [0].
Point of clarification - US Emergency services can accept text messages. Currently it's only available in certain areas, and it's up to each local ESD/911 call center to implement it if they choose.
And yes - the apple watch does call 911.
> “A hit that hard could have killed me if I weren’t wearing it,” Burdett said. He had to replace the helmet.
Letter to the editor: the last sentence is a non-sequitur. You have to replace a bike helmet any time it takes an impact, even if it isn't "so hard," because even if it doesn't look damaged the foam may be compressed and useless for a future crash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um5gMZcZWm0
The gist of it is that car seats do not help nearly as much as we hope. I got the impression that there ought to be a car with a built-in, non-removable car seat would work better. I'd imagine this would be an instant hit in the SUV market. However, no automaker seems to take up on the challenge. Is there a legislative obstacle that prevents automakers from doing this?
People want safety, but they also don’t expect to actually be in a serious accident.
Apple’s detractors fit this bill far more than its fans do. The online hate Apple gets is nothing short of ridiculous compared to how responsible a corporate citizen they’ve been for as long as I can remember. Most of the time when I see Apple fans in a conversation, it’s countering badly informed anti-Apple circlejerking. One example that comes to mind is the whole Foxconn thing. Apple got massive amounts of backlash for the working conditions there, when virtually every other manufacturer uses them too and received only a handful of the same criticism. Apple dramatically tightened their standards and expanded their vetting process for third-party suppliers (which were already in place). Everyone else? Next to nothing or actually nothing.
It’s completely backward in the same way as the stereotype of vegans. As someone who spent some time as a vegetarian, I quickly realized that most vegans/vegetarians try not to make a big deal out of their dietary choices. On the off chance someone does ask about it, they quickly explain their motivations and hope to move on. Then the next hour of conversation involves something like the omnivores trying to list off every animal type they’ve ever eaten, alphabetically. Alligator, beef (wait, does beef count? Probably not, okay let’s say bison), cuttlefish (wait do individual fish count or no?), etc.
Apple fans (and vegans) get a bad rap because they’re in the minority and those in the majority are simply used to the status quo.
Not by any vaguely reasonable metric when compared to other companies its size
Why don’t we judge Apple for Apple’s words and actions and compare them to other’s words and actions, then see how each stacks up.
Size seems less relevant than the image Apple’s projected and its profits.
Ahem ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
They have better PR, arguably better products, and a more likeable CEO than other tech hyper-corporations. But they are fundamentally no different than any other self-aware pile of cash.
Note: that's not to say that the speaker is being in any way deceptive. People naturally evolve and reinvent more effective speech patterns, often unconsciously.
The post further down (well, up now) that's calling attention to the fact that the guy should replace his helmet because he used it (something that is common knowledge for most people young enough to only have worn single use helmets and is literally printed on the helmet and packaging) is a better example of virtue signaling since it states something basically everyone already accepts as fact and is only tangentially related to the article in the first place.
Unfortunately, the term virtue signaling has taken on a political meaning so you can't say it and expect the internet even if you mean it in the technical sense.
This second characteristic really grates on me when it comes in the form "I don't even know anything about X and even I know this is bad!" -- wherein people somehow leverage their lack of credibility on a subject as a source of authority.
But I think it works because it makes the claim bigger by changing what it's being compared to.
Despite thing-X’s flaws it does a good job of outcome-Y?
So I completely understand why someone would qualify their opinion that this is a nifty good feature by stating as much. Automatic emergency dialing is one feature that my Galaxy Watch doesn't have, that I'd like to have.
Going back to my first paragraph: Appled "claimed" AoD in their launch, however the Galaxy Watch has a great always on display with battery that lasts for days - even longer than the S3 Frontier I had before it. Pebble was the original gangster of course, pretty much inventing the whole market - screen always on for 10 days in the PTS! - but now that they're gone (RIP - all of my Pebbles broke several times so I know why) Garmin has the #1 best battery life by far. I really, really like Tizen however so went with that being a Samsung S-series owner and appreciating the fantastic integration.
I don’t reckon that’s how a non sequitur works:
A non sequitur is a conclusion or reply that doesn't follow logically from the previous statement.
Bob was plantings some flowers. He had to replace his helmet.
Not a non sequitur:
Bob crashed his motorbike. He had to replace his helmet.
It might have been better if they’d written something about how a helmet needs replacing after any impact, sure.
EDIT: Here's an interesting list of non sequiturs, many of which fit the same pattern as the article. I think loeg is probably right after all.
https://examples.yourdictionary.com/non-sequitur-examples.ht...
The watch detects falls and calls 911 based on that, not based on "unconscious".
Here's how: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208944
Those older than 65 should have it enabled, but should check. (I wasn't sure about the exact age so made a conservative/ lazy guess)
The article says that it was a consideration when he bought it.
Apple Watch detects falls, not unconsciousness. It doesn't detect heart attacks either.
> Apple Watch cannot detect all falls. The more physically active you are, the more likely you are to trigger fall detection due to high impact activity that can appear to be a fall. [0]
The more time passes the more i realize how much the saying « the road to hell is paved with good intentions » is true.
And those of us that do not wear a permanent tracking device will have some sort of financial (insurance rates) and emotional punishments (peer pressure/blackmail) inflicted on us.
Speaking for myself, I'm ready to die when its time. If my body is so weak and knackered that I cannot even go for a bike ride without medical assistance then I reckon it's time to shuffle off this mortal coil and make way for someone else.
> Speaking for myself, I'm ready to die when its time. If my body is so weak and knackered that I cannot even go for a bike ride without medical assistance then I reckon it's time to shuffle off this mortal coil and make way for someone else.
This could happen because of a hit-and-run driver or because of some other temporary medical condition; either might be completely resolved with the right treatment. I think a better way to look at it is about your quality of life afterward. If you're terminally ill or of very advanced age with a poor prognosis for recovery, then I can see why you'd want a "do not resuscitate" order, would disable this feature, etc. Otherwise why not get help?
I can only see the watch being useful for #2: the exact situation where I think it would be better that I die.
“A hit that hard could have killed me if I weren’t wearing it,” Burdett said. He had to replace the helmet.
Sigh. Bicycle helmets prevent neither concussions nor death: by design, according to all epidemiological studies and according to the manufacturers of bicycle helmets.
https://www.badscience.net/2013/12/bicycle-helmets-and-the-l...
Bike helmets are probably useful in reducing a tiny subset of head injuries.
And this is yet another anecdote proving the opposite of what the true believers think.
Sometimes I despair, then I think of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCL4dXUtblg
> With regard to the use of bicycle helmets, science broadly tries to answer two main questions... “what is the effect of a public health policy that requires or promotes helmets?” and... “what is the effect of wearing a helmet?”
> The linked paper by Dennis and colleagues investigates the policy question and concludes that the effect of Canadian helmet legislation on hospital admission for cycling head injuries “seems to have been minimal
More cyclists wear helmets in those jurisdictions (parts of Canada, all of Australia and N.Z.) and yet ecological studies fail to clearly demonstrate any benefit from helmets. If you sprayed a field with RoundUp and saw no difference in the number of weeds compared to an unsprayed field you would start to wonder about the effects of the treatment.
And in doing so, it goes to some effort to explain why you cannot, from that, conclude that helmets have no effect on individual accident outcomes, all other things being equal. (Mainly because all other things aren't equal, and it's very difficult to devise a methodology that makes them so.)
Right. A friend who's an ER doctor once put it this way:
"I'm going to hit you in the head with a hammer; you can wear a bike helmet or not, your choice."
Statistics are all well and good, but it would take a rare allegiance to epidemiology to skip the helmet.
I've also heard it said that statistics look different when you are the statistic...
> an emphasis on helmets reflects a seductively individualistic approach to risk management (or even “victim blaming”) while the real gains lie elsewhere. It is certainly true that in many countries, such as Denmark and the Netherlands, cyclists have low injury rates, even though rates of cycling are high and almost no cyclists wear helmets. This seems to be achieved through interventions such as good infrastructure; stronger legislation to protect cyclists; and a culture of cycling as a popular, routine, non-sporty, non-risky behaviour.
The linked editorial does not limit itself to discussing the impact of public health policy. It does start with a link to an article that attempts to quantify the effects of a Canadian helmet law. However, it then discusses a number of other papers and the general methodological issues with trying to estimate effects of wearing a helmet.
However, the article certainly does not endorse the claim you are responding to: "Bicycle helmets prevent neither concussions nor death"
The conclusion reached by the editorial is that the safety effects of helmet use are complicated and contingent which makes the results of any study of the effects highly dependent on the methodology. (There could be a positive effect in NYC but a negative effect in the Netherlands or a positive effect for riders of street bikes, but a negative effect for cruisers)
> In any case, the current uncertainty about any benefit from helmet wearing or promotion is unlikely to be substantially reduced by further research.
Incorrect. The article makes the strong and accurate claim that there has been no clear, measurable proof that helmets prevent concussion or death.
This should come as no surprise. When cyclists are hit by cars or trucks the force of the collision is generally so huge that the aorta are ruptured, internal organs (including the brain) are torn from their moorings, bones are cracked.
Helmets are incapable of preventing any of the above.
What _is_ capable of preventing such deaths is the removal of the private automobile from the public roads.
I am curious what part of the editorial leads you to draw that conclusion. The editorial specifically acknowledges that there is evidence that individual helmet use does reduce head injury rates. The entire point of the editorial is to discuss how to reconcile the individual use studies with the canadian helmet law study.
The point is not that "helmets don't pervent head injuries", but that helmets, and specifically, helmet focused public policy, have a marginal impact on safety and distract us from other more effective policy interventions.
> an emphasis on helmets reflects a seductively individualistic approach to risk management (or even “victim blaming”) while the real gains lie elsewhere. It is certainly true that in many countries, such as Denmark and the Netherlands, cyclists have low injury rates, even though rates of cycling are high and almost no cyclists wear helmets. This seems to be achieved through interventions such as good infrastructure; stronger legislation to protect cyclists; and a culture of cycling as a popular, routine, non-sporty, non-risky behavior.
Removing private automobiles from public roads is completely unnecessary to achieve much better bicyclist safety.
EDIT: to the downvoters: question everything.
If you're talking about a Seattle Times journalist or editor literally being bribed into running the story, you've gone off the deep end. Any such attempt by Apple would give some journalist a once-in-a-lifetime chance to expose a major scandal. It would expose Apple, and any journalist and their publications to risks far larger than whatever the value of a positive, but rather minor, story in a second-tier US newspaper is worth, etc.
"question everything" is stupid advise. Do you question if water isn't a deadly poison every time you drink it? Do you verify your spouse's DNA every time you see them, to prevent them being replaced by imposters?
Of course not, because it's impossible (also insane). Try establishing the usefulness of, say, vaccines from first principle: it would require running hundreds of clinical trials, all by yourself (don't trust anyone!), at costs in the billions of dollars, and taking far longer than your life.
And remember that you will also somehow need to convince yourself of the power of whatever statistics you use in those trials. You need to redo everything, all the way back to, at best, "parallel lines don't intersect". Because that Pythagoras wasn't even considered trustworthy by his compatriots, so why should you?
Realistically, you, like everyone, make thousands of decisions every day and need heuristics to get anything done. Most often, those heuristics involve some system of establishing trust by, for example, remembering previous interactions with people or newspapers or other institutions. It just so happens that you think you come across more interesting on the internet by pretending (or actually) trusting a different set of sources than society at large, i. e. conspiracy theorists pseudonymously ranting about the "mainstream media", instead of that media.
Man, when I was an edgy teenager I questioned everything. But then I grew up, had a family and you know what.... I ain't got time to question everything. Even if I spent all my time questioning everything, what would I gain? I couldn't possibly get answers to 99% of the things I question. I can't be an expert in everything.
So whats the point in questioning everything? Who gives a shit if this was a "stealth article" by Apple, the CIA or the Coca Cola Bottling Company. What difference does it make to me? None whatsoever.
These days I try to be very careful what things I spend my time & energy on.
Samsung is going to implement it "Sometime early next year" in their currently shipping version.
> Like the latest Apple Watch, which has a built-in fall detection system, the new Garmin watch also has a safety monitoring feature, which the company calls incident detection.
https://www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/featured-2/safety-and-trac...
Apple don't deserve any credit for the idea but deserve something for doing it well.