FDA Report: IPods Are Not Hazardous to Your Health

[zekrahminator]

When a new hit technology comes out, a lot of people tend to buy it. When a lot of different people buy the same thing, there's bound to be a few quirks and problems. There are allegations that iPods can interfere with such critical life-support systems as pacemakers. Neither Apple or the Food and Drug Administration of America took this sitting down, and promptly ran independent studies. Using a fancy scientific procedure that can be found in the source link, the FDA determined that iPods really do not have much, if any, effect on pacemaker operation. However, as big as the scientists from the FDA may be, it's awfully hard to refute the evidence against these findings. Cardiologists were listening to an iPod while performing a routine examination, and noticed a definite effect on the pacemaker. A seventeen year old requiring a pacemaker noticed that he could not hold an iPod within two inches of his chest without causing problems. It should be noted that the FDA only studied four types of iPod, and only used one type of Pacemaker.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Dangle]

I'm tired of all of these idiots who come up with these idiotic studies with the intention of making everyone equally miserable. Like this article which says you might DIE watching the super bowl. http://www.thatsfit.com/2008/01/31/avoid-a-super-bowl-heart-attack/

 

[bubba_000]

reminds me of the wi-fi scandal and the fact that a computers electromagnetic field will kill cells, when a washing machine has a much more powerful field

 

[ChillyMyst]

ipods suck, but harmfull to ur health....rofl........damn if only they where, maby we could get them off the market and get more sales of samsung and iriver units that play more formats!!!!

 

[imperialreign]

but . . . but . . .


if you have the ear buds in tight, and play the volume really loud, you can partially lose your hearing = an ipod has the capability to be somehow damaging to one's health!

The FDA report is short-sighted and inconclusive!!!

 

[btarunr]

When a government agency breaks away from its basics and gets into multiple-standards based moral-policing, we ge get to see stuff as pointless as:

1. This

2. Banning codeine based analgesics in the US (more effective, inexpensive to produce, relatively harmless compared to it's FDA certified alternative, Benedryl derived analgesics).

 

[ChillyMyst]

lol, hey u really dont get the us do you

its all about $, if a lobbist pays a polotition or group of them enought $ they can get anything made leigal/illegal, hell if they tryed hard enought they could probly bet crack leiglized !!!!!!

 

[btarunr]

I do understand how US functions fairly well. It's just that Codeine and Benedryl aren't exactly trademark owned drugs (patented drugs with exclusive ownership) and Bayer can produce both and sell patents to small time pharma companies. Both the drugs are addictive and harmful in their own way and so it defeats the purpose of banning one and letting the other sell. I mean come on it's just something to help you with sore throat and chances of people abusing it are equal with both.

I wonder what your policy makers thought. That said, I will subscribe to your view that there could be an 'upper hand' in FDA playing the fascist moderator and making the iPod wear the angel's gown while the same FDA made blunders when classifying common off-the-counter drugs (like cough-syrups for kids).

 

[ChillyMyst]

ah but you are looking at NOW, back when benedryl came out here it was patanted(and its still trademarked) that means for years the ONLY company that could make and sell it was the patant holder, and im sure at the time it was a good move to make it so the could charge more for codeine based drugs by selling them only thru doctors and also force socity at large to buy Benedryl based drugs over the counter, again, you gotta go back to the roots of how this shit all started.

its like why pot/weed is illegal, it has ZERO to do with it being harmfull, it has everything to do with a small group of people who had power and $ wanting it made illegal because they couldnt make any $ off of it, its to easy to grow it yourself for starers, it also would cost alot of sales of other drugs that those companys sold, in this world, not just america/usa nothing speeks louder then $ NOTHING, if you have enought $ to throw at something you can get away with anything..........

 

[Tekmuch]

ah but you are looking at NOW, back when benedryl came out here it was patanted(and its still trademarked) that means for years the ONLY company that could make and sell it was the patant holder, and im sure at the time it was a good move to make it so the could charge more for codeine based drugs by selling them only thru doctors and also force socity at large to buy Benedryl based drugs over the counter, again, you gotta go back to the roots of how this shit all started.

its like why pot/weed is illegal, it has ZERO to do with it being harmfull, it has everything to do with a small group of people who had power and $ wanting it made illegal because they couldnt make any $ off of it, its to easy to grow it yourself for starers, it also would cost alot of sales of other drugs that those companys sold, in this world, not just america/usa nothing speeks louder then $ NOTHING, if you have enought $ to throw at something you can get away with anything..........

I would have to disagree that it has nothing to do with being harmful. Weed makes one irritable and lazy. Denial of these effects are always measured by Marijuana advocates. How do I know of the affects of weed? I smoked it for 8 years and still do on very rare occasion. Although I am all for legalizing it as the war on drugs is completely useless. And smoking marijuana is a lot less detrimental to a person than alcohol.

The second part of this I would like to retract my statement about the harmful effects of weed. A lot flipping drugs do that even over the counter.

 

[asb2106]

lol, hey u really dont get the us do you

its all about $, if a lobbist pays a polotition or group of them enought $ they can get anything made leigal/illegal, hell if they tryed hard enought they could probly bet crack leiglized !!!!!!

this is true to a very very small effect. The legal issues go way beyond money and you cannot say this with any truth behind it, and Dangle, you just love to thank everyone dont you....

 

[asb2106]

I would have to disagree that it has nothing to do with being harmful. Weed makes one irritable and lazy. Denial of these effects are always measured by Marijuana advocates. How do I know of the affects of weed? I smoked it for 8 years and still do on very rare occasion. Although I am all for legalizing it as the war on drugs is completely useless. And smoking marijuana is a lot less detrimental to a person than alcohol.

The second part of this I would like to retract my statement about the harmful effects of weed. A lot flipping drugs do that even over the counter.

as a fellow ex-pot smoker I agree, the war on drugs is rediculous and there is many other things out there that are much worse for you, hell, you can go buy a bottle of cough syrup and it will be much worse for you than any amounts of marijuana. And acholol, I think its a joke that people fight it so lightly but then make a huge fit about pot. Marijuana could be a great med for pain.

The way this topic has changed is really funny, all these things we are now talking about are no way related, and I do have to agree, anything that has electronic moving parts could be bad for pacemakers or any other life sustaining electronic device. It could interfere and cause troubles. Not to say it will but there is that chance

 

[Ravenas]

as a fellow ex-pot smoker I agree, the war on drugs is rediculous and there is many other things out there that are much worse for you, hell, you can go buy a bottle of cough syrup and it will be much worse for you than any amounts of marijuana. And acholol, I think its a joke that people fight it so lightly but then make a huge fit about pot. Marijuana could be a great med for pain.

The way this topic has changed is really funny, all these things we are now talking about are no way related, and I do have to agree, anything that has electronic moving parts could be bad for pacemakers or any other life sustaining electronic device. It could interfere and cause troubles. Not to say it will but there is that chance

Yes but there's a difference, the government makes money on cough syrup but they don't make money on weed!

Think about how many things in our nation have been funded from sin taxes alone.

 

[asb2106]

Yes but there's a difference, the government makes money on cough syrup but they don't make money on weed!

Think about how many things in our nation have been funded from sin taxes alone.

yah but they could make a fortune on it! Being around it and noticing how many people use it, the government could cut the price in half with good distro channels and they could make a fortune!!

 

[ChillyMyst]

I would have to disagree that it has nothing to do with being harmful. Weed makes one irritable and lazy. Denial of these effects are always measured by Marijuana advocates. How do I know of the affects of weed? I smoked it for 8 years and still do on very rare occasion. Although I am all for legalizing it as the war on drugs is completely useless. And smoking marijuana is a lot less detrimental to a person than alcohol.

The second part of this I would like to retract my statement about the harmful effects of weed. A lot flipping drugs do that even over the counter.

hell i get those effects from extended drinking of the dew!!!!!

as a fellow ex-pot smoker I agree, the war on drugs is rediculous and there is many other things out there that are much worse for you, hell, you can go buy a bottle of cough syrup and it will be much worse for you than any amounts of marijuana. And acholol, I think its a joke that people fight it so lightly but then make a huge fit about pot. Marijuana could be a great med for pain.

not according to drug companys who wouldnt make any $ off of pot smokers but who make massive profits off of addctive drugs.

Yes but there's a difference, the government makes money on cough syrup but they don't make money on weed!

Think about how many things in our nation have been funded from sin taxes alone.

this is a huge problem here, i can think of at least 3 kids who have died from buying/steeling that stuff and drinking it to get high, yet many of them do it because if they are caught with pot they go to jail, if they are caught with cought surip no biggie....... nice huh!!!!

yah but they could make a fortune on it! Being around it and noticing how many people use it, the government could cut the price in half with good distro channels and they could make a fortune!!

but the drug companys wouldnt make a ton off it, because its not a really a drug.....so they pour vast ammounts of $ into keeping it illegal and keeping the fear up.


i dont smoke pot, but most people i know around here do, and they are never hard to be around stoned, when drunk they are annoing, i hate drunks!!!!

fucking drunks piss me off.........

 

[Ravenas]

hell i get those effects from extended drinking of the dew!!!!!




not according to drug companys who wouldnt make any $ off of pot smokers but who make massive profits off of addctive drugs.



this is a huge problem here, i can think of at least 3 kids who have died from buying/steeling that stuff and drinking it to get high, yet many of them do it because if they are caught with pot they go to jail, if they are caught with cought surip no biggie....... nice huh!!!!



but the drug companys wouldnt make a ton off it, because its not a really a drug.....so they pour vast ammounts of $ into keeping it illegal and keeping the fear up.


i dont smoke pot, but most people i know around here do, and they are never hard to be around stoned, when drunk they are annoing, i hate drunks!!!!

fucking drunks piss me off.........

I can think of many people who have died from lung cancer, but the US government does nothing to outlaw cigerattes.

 

[ChillyMyst]

I can think of many people who have died from lung cancer, but the US government does nothing to outlaw cigerattes.

because the tabaco lobby has alot of $, alot of the polititions are also invested in taboco stock/companys, also remmber the govt makes ALOT off of ciggys due to taxes, its all about the $.

humm.....reminds me of a rap song.....lol