The Health Concerns in Wearable Tech
MARCH 18, 2015
By NICK BILTON
EDITORS’ NOTE APPENDED
In 1946, a new advertising
campaign appeared in magazines with a picture of a doctor in a
lab coat holding a cigarette and the slogan, “More doctors smoke Camels than
any other cigarette.” No, this wasn’t a spoof. Back then, doctors were not
aware that smoking could cause cancer, heart disease and lung disease.
In a similar vein, some
researchers and consumers are now asking whether wearable computers will be
considered harmful in several decades’ time.
We have long suspected that
cellphones, which give off low levels of radiation, could lead to brain tumors,
cancer, disturbed blood rhythms and other health problems if held too close to
the body for extended periods.
Yet here we are in 2015,
with companies like Apple and Samsung encouraging us to buy gadgets that we
should attach to our bodies all day long.
While there is no definitive research on the health effects
of wearable computers (the Apple Watch isn’t even on store shelves yet), we can
hypothesize a bit from existing research on cellphone radiation.
The most definitive and arguably unbiased
results in this area come from the International Agency for Research on Cancer,
a panel within the World Health Organization that consisted of 31 scientists
from 14 countries.
After dissecting dozens of
peer-reviewed studies on cellphone safety, the panel concluded in 2011 that
cellphones were “possibly carcinogenic” and that the devices could be as
harmful as certain dry-cleaning chemicals and pesticides. (Note that the group
hedged its findings with the word “possibly.”)
The W.H.O. panel concluded
that the farther away a device is from one’s head, the less harmful — so
texting or surfing the Web will not be as dangerous as making calls, with a
cellphone inches from the brain. (This is why there were serious concerns about Google Glass when
it was first announced and why we’ve been told to use hands-free devices when
talking on cellphones.)
Analysis conducted by a
group of European researchers and led by Dr. Lennart Hardell, a professor of
oncology and cancer epidemiology at Orebro University Hospital in Sweden,
concluded that talking on a mobile or cordless phone for extended periods could
triple the risk of a certain kind of brain cancer.
There is, of course,
antithetical research. But some of this was partly funded by cellphone
companies or trade groups.
One example is the
international Interphone study, which was published in 2010 and did not find
strong links between mobile phones and an increased risk of brain tumors. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded in 2014 that “more research is
needed before we know if using cell phones causes health effects.”
Another study, in
The BMJ, which measured cellphone subscription data rather than actual use,
said there was no proof of increased cancer. Yet even here, the Danish team
behind the report acknowledged that a “small to moderate increase” in cancer
risk among heavy cellphone users could not be ruled out.
But what does all this
research tell the Apple faithful who want to rush out and buy an Apple Watch,
or the Google and Windows fanatics who are eager to own an alternative
smartwatch?
Dr. Joseph Mercola, a
physician who focuses on alternative medicine and has written
extensively about the potential harmful effects of cellphones on the human
body, said that as long as a wearable does not have a 3G connection built into
it, the harmful effects are minimal, if any.
“The radiation really comes
from the 3G connection on a cellphone, so devices like the Jawbone Up and Apple
Watch should be O.K.,” Dr. Mercola said in a phone interview. “But if you’re
buying a watch with a cellular chip built in, then you’ve got a cellphone
attached to your wrist.” And that, he said, is a bad idea.
(The Apple Watch uses
Bluetooth and Wi-Fi to receive data, and researchers say there is no proven
harm from those frequencies on the human body. Wearables with 3G or 4G connections
built in, including the Samsung Gear S, could be more harmful, though that has
not been proved. Apple declined to comment for this article, and Samsung could
not be reached for comment.)
Researchers have also raised
concerns about having powerful batteries so close to the body for extended
periods of time. Some reports over the last several
decades have questioned whether being too close to power lines could cause
leukemia (though other research has also negated this).
So what should consumers do?
Perhaps we can look at how researchers themselves handle their smartphones.
While Dr. Mercola is a vocal
proponent of cellphone safety, he told me to call him on
his cell when I emailed about an interview. When I asked him whether he was
being hypocritical, he replied that technology is a fact of life, and that he
uses it with caution. As an example, he said he was using a Bluetooth headset
during our call.
In the same respect, people
who are concerned about the possible side effects of a smartwatch should avoid
placing it close to their brain (besides, it looks a little strange). But there
are some people who may be more vulnerable to the dangers of these devices:
children.
While researchers debate
about how harmful cellphones and wearable computers actually are, most
agree that children should exercise caution.
In an email, Dr. Hardell
sent me research illustrating that a child’s skull is thinner and smaller than
an adult’s, which means that children’s brain tissues are more exposed to certain types of radiation, specifically the
kind that emanates from a cellphone.
Children should limit how
much time they spend talking on a cellphone, doctors say. And if they have a
wearable device, they should take it off at night so it does not end up under
their pillow, near their brain. Doctors also warn that women who are pregnant
should be extra careful with all of these technologies.
But what about adults? After
researching this column, talking to experts and poring over dozens of
scientific papers, I have realized the dangers of cellphones when used for
extended periods, and as a result I have stopped holding my phone next to my
head and instead use a headset.
That being said, when it
comes to wearable computers, I’ll still buy the Apple Watch, but I won’t let it
go anywhere near my head. And I definitely won’t let any children I know play
with it for extended periods of time.
Editors’ Note: March 21,
2015
Editors’ Note The
Disruptions column in the Styles section on Thursday, discussing possible
health concerns related to wearable technology, gave an inadequate account of
the status of research about cellphone radiation and cancer risk. Neither
epidemiological nor laboratory studies have found reliable evidence of such
risks, and there is no widely accepted theory as to how they might arise.
According to the World Health Organization, “To date, no adverse health effects
have been established as being caused by mobile phone use.” The American Cancer
Society, the National Cancer Institute, the Food and Drug Administration and
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have all said there is no
convincing evidence for a causal relationship. While researchers are continuing
to study possible risks, the column should have included more of this
background for balance. In addition, one source quoted in the article, Dr.
Joseph Mercola, has been widely criticized by experts for his claims about
disease risks and treatments. More of that background should have been
included, or he should not have been cited as a source. An early version of the
headline for the article online — “Could Wearable Computers Be as Harmful as
Cigarettes?” — also went too far in suggesting any such comparison.
Correction: April 2,
2015
The Disruptions column on
March 18, about health concerns stemming from wearable technology, referred
incorrectly to research conducted by Dr. Lennart Hardell, a professor of oncology
and cancer epidemiology at Orebro University Hospital in Sweden, that concluded
that talking on a mobile or cordless phone for extended periods could triple
the risk of a certain kind of brain cancer. The study was an analysis of two
earlier studies that asked people with and without brain tumors to answer
questions about cellphone and cordless phone use; it was not a longitudinal
study in which patients were followed over time.
No comments:
Post a Comment