Apple Sued Alleging Racial Bias Against Minorities on Watch's Blood Oximeter
dockets.justia.com
dockets.justia.com
[1]: https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/08/06/san-jose-falafels-dri... [2]: https://abc7news.com/san-jose-time-deli-close-to-sued/221143... [3]: https://www.siliconvalley.com/2021/08/17/attorney-sues-dozen... [4]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/sacramento-attorney-and...
I'm definitely against frivolous lawsuits, but that doesn't seem like a good example of one to me. "Product isn't what it claims" seems like a totally valid lawsuit.
Does any brand make a decent toaster ready alternative that isn't just flavored sugar but actually contains a decent amount of actual strawberry filling?
I'll give Kellogg's some credit for having the other fruits listed in the ingredients and making it clear there is very little fruit at all. It looks like strawberry pop-tarts may contain more salt than strawberry.
ingredients on the box says:
wheat flour, sugar, sugar, sugar, oil, sugar, and wheat flour.
Contains 2% or less of wheat starch, salt, dried strawberries, dried pears, dried apples, baking soda/baking powder, citric acid, gelatin, more wheat starch, yellow corn flour, caramel color, xanthan gum, corn starch, turmeric extract color, soy lecithin, red 40, yellow 6, blue 1
FDA is aware of this issue. Increasing diversity in clinical trials is a hard problem. https://www.linkedin.com/events/increasingdiversityinclinica...
The least they could do is be upfront about this.
Did you actually read the ToS or EULA?
What claim did they make? AFAIK, their page on the oximeter always had a disclaimer (the current one says “Blood Oxygen app measurements are not intended for medical use, including self-diagnosis or consultation with a doctor, and are only designed for general fitness and wellness purposes”)
To be clear, I don't think it'd be acceptable for this to be hidden in the Terms either way.
And no, that's not really equivalent either. And the drawback becomes immediately evident to almost anyone taking photos, since they have their own eyes to compare to.
Yeah, I kinda do.
My friend is heavily tattooed and their apple watch doesn't even know its on their wrist and they lost alot of functionality because of that. They would love for it to work but understand the limitations of the technology currently.
We pay Apple to understand the internals they put in their watch, so they should be the ones to describe the limitations of their technology.
I am unaware of Apple listing limitations of any of their technologies. Could you provide a few examples?
Brightness, battery, cell support, limited water and dust resistance, etc. are the most obvious ones. The footnotes list other details, including demographics on which certain features are less effective.
For example,
> Irregular rhythm notification requires the latest version of watchOS and iOS. It is not intended for use by people under 22 years old or those who have been previously diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AFib).
As someone else linked in the thread, it turns out Apple actually does claim their oximeter method is special and improves on conventional oximetry, accounting for the range of human skin tones: https://www.apple.com/healthcare/docs/site/Blood_Oxygen_app_...
If their O2 meter functions poorly depending on skin tone, that's very obviously worth noting in a footer.
From a quick search it appears that subcutaneous fat can adversely affect the accuracy of an optical pulse oximeter. It sounds like everyone with a large BMI should get a class action going too.
For that matter, I can't believe that the GPS in the Apple Watch, which is marketed as accurate by a trillion dollar company, works worse for people living in dense urban areas. Another clear case of bias against the urban poor while billionaires living on their ranches in Montana with an open view of the sky enjoy perfect GPS.
/armchair internet lawyer.
It was at least two years ago that I first heard that the darker you are, the more likely you will get a false high reading on one.
This is largely about how Apple Watch pulse oximetry feature was marketed vs. how pulse oximetry actually works, so, without taking a position on the merits of the suit, it is quite possible for Apple to legitimately be in the wrong here and other sellers of pilse oximeters not to be, even if Apple Watch pulse oximetry works exactly like pulse oximetry generally.
Here's a link to something in the same vein https://www.wired.com/story/can-apples-iphone-x-beat-facial-...
I'm a mechanical engineer. There is no way that Apple's mechanical team did not evaluate the oximeter performance against people of many skin colors. If this thing goes to trial, Apple will pull out their test data and that will be the end of the case.
Also, did they sue Garmin and Fitbit similarly? If not, it's kind of a self confessed money grab attempt in full daylight.
They wouldn't have standing to sue Garmin and Fitbit unless they had purchased products from those companies as well.
But even if they had, it's not required to sue all possible defendants simultaneously. Sometimes plaintiffs start with the small defendants, who are more likely to settle because of lack of funds, and sometimes they start with the big ones, who are worth more and may care about the court of public opinion.
For an imaging sensor, the sensors are designed to be sensitive at different wavelengths and in different dynamic ranges, with some historical set points determined by major manufacturers being located in Japan. While darker tones do imply less collected light, this seems like a very solvable problem with in-camera image processing.
Another interesting question is around non-invasive neural sensors. Many EEG electrodes work relatively poorly in thick or curly hair, and there's been several efforts to develop EEG electrodes appropriate for natural hair [0]
The initial part of the complaint:
1. Apple, Inc. (“Defendant”) manufactures, markets, and sells the Apple Watch, purporting to measure the oxygen level of a wearer’s blood directly from their wrist (“Product”).
2. The interest in blood oxygen levels extends began at least two hundred years ago hot air balloon flyers and mountain climbers needed to ensure survival.
3. Later, these groups included astronauts, pilots and divers.
4. The early devices, were used in a person’s ear, used light-based technology or spectrophotometry to measure oxygen levels.
5. In the 1970s, a fingertip oximeter was invented that was easier to use than its predecessors.
6. For decades, there have been reports that such devices were significantly less accurate in measuring blood oxygen levels based on skin color.
7. The “real world significance” of this bias lay unaddressed until the middle of the Coronavirus pandemic, which converged with a greater awareness of structural racism which exists in many aspects of society.
8. Researchers confirmed the clinical significance of racial bias of pulse oximetry using records of patients taken during and before the pandemic.
9. The conclusion was that “reliance on pulse oximetry to triage patients and adjust supplemental oxygen levels may place Black patients at increased risk for hypoxemia.”
10. Since health care recommendations are based on readings of their blood oxygen levels, white patients are more able to obtain care than those with darker skin when faced with equally low blood oxygenation.
11. While traditional fingertip pulse oximeters are capable of measuring blood oxygen levels and heart rate, wrist-worn devices like the Product determine heart rate, as blood oxygen measurements from the wrist are believed inaccurate.
12. Algorithms designed for fingertip sensing are inappropriate when based on wrist measurements, and can lead to over 90% of readings being unusable.
13. Though one recent study concluded the Product was able to detect reduced blood oxygen saturation in comparison to medical-grade pulse oximeters this fails to recognize the failings of pulse oximetry in general with respect to persons of color.
14. As a result of the false and misleading representations, the Product is sold at a premium price, approximately no less than $400, excluding tax and sales.
2-6. Thank you for the history of vaguely functionally competitive devices from sellers other than the defendant, but what the hell does that have to do with Apple's watch?
7-8. Also seems unrelated to Apple or Apple Watches, but rather to non-Apple fingertip devices.
9. Perhaps an alternative conclusion is "Healthcare workers probably shouldn't be [and almost certainly aren't] triaging patients of any skin color with a consumer watch."? Since they're not using Apple devices for this purpose, to any extent that they're drawing inaccurate conclusions for care based on devices which use the same underlying theory but aren't actually made by Apple, that is not Apple's responsibility.
10. It's a good thing then that healthcare workers aren't using these Apple devices to triage, direct, or prioritize care. To the extent that non-Apple healthcare workers are using non-Apple devices to improperly direct this care, that is certainly a concern, but is not Apple's concern.
11-14. Thank you for getting back to something relevant to your suit; not sure why you wasted the court's time with items 2-10.
They aren't charged with “racism”, which, incidentally, also isn't, per se, illegal. So even if that was true of racism, it isn't relevant.
They are charged with fraud under various laws, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment, some of which require intent, but not the intent you describe (racial animus).
Going further, the vast majority of retail consumers have no knowledge of technical limitations regardless of skin color.
On another note, the FDA handing out "certification" in addition to "approval" seems like a deliberate way to confuse consumers when one is basically a stamp for money.
Let's call this out for what it is - some lawyer is looking for a bag.