Advanced Apple Watch health monitoring features are hitting some roadblocks

Jump to First Reply
AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Apple Watch

The long-rumored blood pressure monitoring and sleep apnea features of the Apple Watch probably aren't going to arrive in Apple Watch Series 10, or Apple Watch Ultra 3.

Gold smartwatch with a white band and a sensor on the back, set against a colorful blurred background.
A render of the rear sensor of the Apple Watch Series 10



Rumors over the years have claimed that Apple is bringing blood pressure monitoring to the Apple Watch, possibly doing so by the Apple Watch Series 10. There has also been speculation that sleep apnea functions would also be added.

Unfortunately, Apple may have encountered too many issues to actually introduce the features in its 2024 generations.

Apple's work on measuring instances of high blood pressure, known as hypertension, hasn't been reliable enough for the company, Bloomberg said on Sunday. Sources add that there were concerns about the function working correctly under the new design of Apple Watch Series 10.

Furthermore, while there are expectations of full blood pressure readings, Apple's system won't offer that. Instead, it is apparently only going to monitor if the user's blood pressure is high compared to an established baseline, and even then only alert the user.

Sleep Apnea



The sleep apnea function is being affected by an entirely non-technical problem. Apple's lawsuit with Masimo Corp over blood oxygen saturation detection technology means Apple can't measure that vital statistic.

For sleep apnea to exist on the Apple Watch, either Apple has to find a way to successfully end the lawsuit, or work around it entirely.

It is plausible that Apple could include the technology in the Apple Watch Series 10 but keep it disabled at launch. That would give Apple the opportunity to activate it at a later time, following the lawsuit and if its allowed to continue using the technology.

A bigger goal ahead

While also not likely to arrive with the Apple Watch Series 10, one feature is arguably a bigger target for Apple to reach.

Glucose monitoring has been rumored and in development for close to a decade, with no sign of it actually reaching wrists anytime soon. This is largely because it's difficult to perform glucose monitoring without being invasive, such as requiring direct blood access.

However, Sunday's report was told that Apple has managed to hit some major milestones in its development. This is a good sign for the function's future arrival, if not speculating on when that could be.

Rumor Score: Likely

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 9
    gregoriusmgregoriusm Posts: 518member
    Or pay Masimo licensing fees. 
    gatorguyjrfunkwilliamlondon
     2Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 2 of 9
    Xedxed Posts: 3,115member
    Or pay Masimo licensing fees. 
    1) Masimo's patents have been shown to be invalid and except for one juror holding out this would've been settled long ago.

    2) How exactly does Apple paying a company for invalid patents for O2 monitoring somehow invent noninvasive glucose monitoring or engineer sleep apnea monitoring via a wristworn device? 

    3) With that kind of logic you could be a lawyer for Masimo.
    edited July 2024
    macxpresschasmmeterestnzwilliamlondonbyronlwatto_cobra
     6Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 9
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,979member
    Once they do get this right and out the door it'll be quite a major thing for Apple to do. I think this will benefit so many people and it will give Apple a shitton of Apple Watch sales. Glucose monitoring will be huge for Apple. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 9
    DAalsethdaalseth Posts: 3,271member
    Rodblocks? Yes but not unexpected ones. Not ones they haven’t been dealing with from day one. Blood pressure and glucose monitoring are damndably hard to do, This is especially true from a sensor located out at the end of the arm. It has the same problem that temperature measurements do. It’s why they will be just a deviation-from-average readout rather than an absolute value. This is not an easy problem and I am not at all surprised that these sensors are not out yet.

    If this was easy Samsung would have thrown together some half-assed version by now. 
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 9
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,145member
    Xed said:
    Or pay Masimo licensing fees. 
    1) Masimo's patents have been shown to be invalid and except for one juror holding out this would've been settled long ago.

    2) How exactly does Apple paying a company for invalid patents for O2 monitoring somehow invent noninvasive glucose monitoring or engineer sleep apnea monitoring via a wristwork device? 

    3) With that kind of logic you could be a lawyer for Masimo.
    Complete bullshit. The Massimo patent that prevents Apple from measuring blood oxygen saturation was not invalidated. 
    williamlondon
     0Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 6 of 9
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,823member
    We don't know if Masimo has any blood pressure patents.  They might.  And so may others.

    But I'm not looking.  But I understand where @Gregoriusm is coming from.
    williamlondon
     0Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 7 of 9
    Xedxed Posts: 3,115member
    flydog said:
    Xed said:
    Or pay Masimo licensing fees. 
    1) Masimo's patents have been shown to be invalid and except for one juror holding out this would've been settled long ago.

    2) How exactly does Apple paying a company for invalid patents for O2 monitoring somehow invent noninvasive glucose monitoring or engineer sleep apnea monitoring via a wristwork device? 

    3) With that kind of logic you could be a lawyer for Masimo.
    Complete bullshit. The Massimo patent that prevents Apple from measuring blood oxygen saturation was not invalidated. 
    I didn't say they were. In fact I very clearly noted that they would've been except for a single juror. What I said is that they've been shown to be invalid. While I'm not a patent lawyer I have looked at the evidence — if that was the same evidence shown to the jury I'd have sided with Apple in that case. There are plenty of times when I feel that Apple should just pay the royalty or simply buy the company... this is not one of those times and I think eventually Masimo will lose.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 9
    Fidonet127fidonet127 Posts: 613member
    The Massimo patent we are to believe so similar to Apple that Apple should pay, and yet by the Massimo CEO, Apple's software is so inferior it shouldn't be used. Which is it?
    edited July 2024
    williamlondonbeowulfschmidtwatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 9
    greginpraguegreginprague Posts: 492member
    Fidonet127 said:
    The Massimo patent we are to believe so similar to Apple that Apple should pay, and yet by the Massimo CEO, Apple's software is so inferior it shouldn't be used. Which is it?
    Good luck getting these trolls to answer the hard questions…
    Fidonet127watto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.