Cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Concern about radiation from Fitbit trackers

ANSWERED
Replies are disabled for this topic. Start a new one or visit our Help Center.

Hi! I was considering buying a fitbit flex and I wanted to know the amount of radiation I was going to be exposed to.  I was wondering if when I turned off the automatic syncing, it would reduce the amount of radiation I was exposed to at all.  Or would the amount remain the same no matter what? 

 

Moderator edit: Updated title for clarity

Best Answer
86 REPLIES 86

People would be well served by reviewing the simple questions raised online with articles like "Why a Fitbit Harms Health More than it Helps Fitness Goals."

 

Remember, we are electromagnetic beings.  Every cell has an EM field, and thus all cells in the body including the brain/nervous system are quite susceptible to EM fields interfering with normal function.  These issues can come from the cumulative impact of ever increasing numbers of sources of wireless signals like WIFI and other mobile communication systems among others including wearable technology.  We dealt with interference constantly in the world of telecom from numerous sources just as a point of perspective. 

 

You will find almost no information on the long term impact of all these many systems simultaneously on a brain, or short term impact for that matter, including those that sleep with a bank of 40 smart meters just outside the wall at their apartment building where they have 40 WIFI systems hitting them too since everyone has one.  One need only research baby monitors for some truly scary data from again another industry that simply touts their systems "meet required levels".  Once the body is impacted by the interference, all bets are off on its ability to function properly.

 

One might research Apple's iphone warning to never carry your iphone in your pocket because you may exceed allowable levels.  The fine print is a bugger.  This can occur when WIFI is connected.  The industry of course mobilized to attack the information.  You dont see the industry rushing to make this clear to the public.  Who else might just follow the herd with their devices not taking all the many factors into account so the public can make a proper decision?

 

Did i mention these systems fail, and create terribly different emissions?  My team routinely tracked down interfering cordless phone systems in people's homes as sources of major interference in our cell phone systems. 

 

This may leave some wondering what a device sitting on your body most of the day, sometimes night too as many track sleep now, regularly transmitting and putting additional fields on your body, will do over the long or short term.  I would offer that companies rely on data from the wireless industry/govt and typically hang their hat on that.  "Bluetooth is ok, so our device is ok".  This is not very scientific much of the time because the devil is in the details including their manufacturing quality/consistency.

 

We see a great deal of severe EMF sensitivity now in the populace including something as simple as chronic/acute anxiety.  We also are now seeing more issues with chronic illness than ever before (and no, i am not trying to attribute all the chronic illness to EMF, but we are now finding links to autism and much more).  We know that autoimmune responses, nervous system issues, chronic fatigue, pain syndromes, cellular stress, etc, can be brought on by electromagnetic radiation, and/or exasperated, and long term this is not good.  Yet, everyone simply parrots back "meets safe levels established by this and that".  Most cell phone studies were done on adults, do not take into account the numerous other systems bombarding the body at the same time, and most did not look at children who have much less dense craniums and thus are much more impacted at the brain as much less signal is absorbed in their skull.  I offer these examples as food for thought on whether one is getting what one is being told.

 

I was involved in engineering and managing engineering teams involved with the roll-out of cellular phone systems and microwave systems for 14 years.  Our industry obfuscated at every step the health impacts we were seeing with regard to those systems.  Through some of my positions I was involved in fairly high level discussions on this topic.  The industry secured many of big tobacco's lawyers in order to fight a very long battle of kicking the can down the road for the eventual day big tobacco type settlements will be paid out.  

 

Much of the strategy is the usual stuff - delay, bludgeon financially, lobbying at every level, misrepresent, fudge, parade "experts" in the media and scientific communities to scoff at anyone raising a question publicly particularly those with independent studies injurious to the industry.  But one of the primary ways to avoid real study/insight into this subject is simply to push most conversations into "does it create cancer or not". These are mostly very long studies that drag things out and can be challenged much more easily or at a minimum delay clarity (do one, "inconclusive, needs more study", do another, etc.....30 years go by).  What most do not realize is that as soon as you use a cell phone, or sit next to it when transmitting (even the touchscreens are dangerous) you are having changes at a cellular level.  Those deciding what are "safe" levels to the general public of course are immune to the propaganda, money, and stacks and stacks of documents they are drowning in from the telecom industry.  One may find it odd that almost all independent studies on the effects are in contrast to the industry's stance on the topic.  Hmmm.  Your govt, whether here or Europe, etc. relies on the industry itself for most "policing".

 

What does this all have to do with a fitbit?  I will leave it simply as very low levels, well below the "harmful" levels touted by industry/govt entities cause cellular distress.  How that plays out on your own nervous system is impacted by many, many factors. 

 

Good luck in your decision making. 

 

p.s. The govt's response to Fukishima was to raise the allowable limits of radiation, and to turn off sensors along the west coast.  Canada i think did similar.  What a curious response from those tasked with keeping you safe. 

Best Answer

Doing a search for your article i find most are just copied/pasted with only one dmall section on the radiation concearns. The link to the pictures are fine, but without any base line photos are totally uses. What good is a study with only the with tracker and no without tracker.

I did however find a Fox article that went deeper into the EMF, and they admitted that Fitbit is the best ones on the market in controlling the SAR. Not defending just passing on info.

 

Further down a lot was said about fetal development and RFI.

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/20/experts-why-wearable-tech-could-pose-health-risks

 

Would it be possible to back your post with your credentials? 

Best Answer

@hbliving333@Rich_Laue This thread got lively suddenly! 

 

To add Fitbit's position: Fitbit trackers operate far below FCC compliance levels for RF power levels. So low in fact that they're exempt from the evaluations required for other RF devices like cell phones. Also, the fact that your tracker only transmits intermittently further decreases exposure to RF energy.

 

In addition, you can safely wear your Fitbit tracker while pregnant. 

Actively managing your weight? Find accountability buddies on the Manage Weight board

Best Answer

intermittent BLE, zero issues.

I moved your query to a thread that contains a lot of great insight on the subject.

RF is one of my career specialties, no worries here regarding BLE.

 

Community Council Member

WmChapman | TX

Ionic, Versa, Blaze, Surge, Charge 2, 3 SE, AltaHR, Flex2, Ace, Aria, iPhoneXR "Every fitbit counts"

Be sure to visit Fitbit help if more help is needed.

Best Answer
0 Votes

Hi wmchapman, thanks for your info.  I need a bit more though.  Fitness trackers have been banned at my place of work because of the fear that they may affect computer systems - cause 1s to become 0s and vice versa.  I believe this is a knee jerk reaction but I need something to back up my claim.  Do you know if there is any info or research that could help me prove that computer systems are not affected by BLE?

Best Answer

My resume is quite extensive on RF technologies, dating way back to the USAF and CTC.

My former bosses and trainers went to work for the FCC while I expanded into fiber optic transmission and transport technologies. RF is a lost art - abandoned in the 90s as a "buggy whip" in colleges as antique and obsolete and skipping a full educated generation. And then "all of a sudden" the technologies were resurrected with the advent of the cell phone. Early cell phones required a lot of power and were quite disruptive; but new smart phones generate a fraction of the power for a single reason - there are more cell phone towers!  The more towers the less power required to stay in network.  Similarly early bluetooth was not RF, not even close and used to primarily "beam" apps from messaging device to messaging device.  Modern BLE is RF but limited to its own specific channels - these channels and levels will not interfere with your work wifi systems but could confuse "Smart" devices or RFID trackers if in close proximity (a meter or two). Not block, just confuse. Confusion like your tracker experiences when it  "loses" a handshake during a sync,  the data is still there for the next sync but that particular sync fails.  No big deal unless it is mission critical.

Everything in your workplace is mission critical as the owners want everything to run smoothly, an unrecognized smart tag or deferred RFID track slows the workflow down and costs money.  Your employer is not making a selfish request asking cell phone bluetooth be switched off and personal bluetooth smart devices be lockered at the factory.  There are a limited number of channels in the BLE range.  Its not the frequency, its the capacity and workforce efficiency your employer is concerned with.

Only interference study I've ever seen - again, about efficiency not "damage" - certainly not to you or computer systems. Power requirements are coming down, not up as well, nature of the technology, same (maybe a little slower transfer) payload at a slower speed = less power consumption = smaller and smaller batteries. The smaller (and longer lived) the battery, the more popular the smart product and higher the demand, BLE will continue to be a bigger part of daily life numerically; but at fractions of present power levels just as cell phone powers are negligible compared to the "hot ear" days of old - now those were the days you needed to adhere to the small warning label posted on page 302 of the manual you never read, "limit phone calls to 3 minutes maximum"; "if your cell phone feels warm, switch ears, it's not your phone getting hot, it is your tissue, alternating removes your head from being between the device and the tower". The mw level days are long over - remember the scramble for "free" upgrades from analog to digital networks no matter how stubborn you were about holding onto a flip phone, lol. A half-trillion dollar a year industry now those days have passed, pretty soon consumers will send more texts than voice calls, eliminating the issue completely - who'd have "thunk" it?

figure_1.png

Community Council Member

WmChapman | TX

Ionic, Versa, Blaze, Surge, Charge 2, 3 SE, AltaHR, Flex2, Ace, Aria, iPhoneXR "Every fitbit counts"

Be sure to visit Fitbit help if more help is needed.

Best Answer

I'm trying to convince my company that it is ok to wear Fitbit's in close proximity to computer systems (not wifi or bluetooth enabled systerms), but they are worried that interference is possible if the device is transmitting.  There are a few things i'm interested in finding out and I'm quite interested in the Fitbit view of this:

 

1. Could you tell me what class of Bluetooth Fitbit's use - I assume it's class 2 but wanted to be sure.

 

2. Somebody mentioned on this thread that the Fitbit is just a listening device and only transmits when it connects to something that it recognises or is paired with - is this true?

 

3. Is is possible to say what the power output in mW of Fitbit devices is in general?

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

Best Answer

Again thank you for your input wmchapman, but I think I need to expand my criteria slightly more.  Cell phones are already banned at my place of work and the only thing I'm trying to make a point for is fitness trackers (not smartphones or smart watches).  WiFi and Bluetooth are not currently used anywhere on our site so the interference is not possible on that level.  The issue, as I see it, is if you stick your hand (with a Fitbit attached) inside a cubicle containing a 25 year old server, is it possible that it could affect the data on that server or the Ethernet network that it is attached to?  If it is possible, how far away would you need to be to make it impossible?

Best Answer

The ethernet is a wired cabled,  25 years old it probably is a 75 ohm coax cable and not ethernet. The tracker can not affect it.

 

Like i said the tracker simply is listening and will not do anything else until a nother device, your phone, calls it.

 

Mw are extremely low, look up BTLE.

The overall radiation so low as has pointed out Fitbits are exempt from a lot of the tests cell phones need to go through.

 

But does all the above really matter if the boss says no, is it really worth pushing the limits?

 

And that 25 year old system? I bet the emf of those are high. 

Best Answer

Couple of things maybe i should mention.  First, in many ways I love the idea of Fitbit or other fitness motivating/measuring devices.  Mentions or questions being raised from my end pertain to the vast majority of wireless devices, thus would pertain to much of the fitness devices made by other mfrs as well and are not specific to Fitbit (same goes for other impacts like the impact of having plastics/chemicals/metals next to sweating skin every day).  Nothing is intended to be directed at any particular wireless device, rather raising questions for persons to consider when using any/all wireless devices.

 

Further, the article posted was simply a layperson providing questions as fodder for one's own research.  It was obviously not intended as any great technical discussion, any great answer to life's questions, rather  again just another way of looking at this equation.  And when I say equation, I mean the totality of the cumulative impact of numerous technologies impacting a person's physiology including their whole nervous system all day long every day.   To be clear, I would lump in sitting next to that computer monitor and computer all day at the office, as well as any number of other EMF sources such as home wiring laden with high frequency noise from the numerous appliances, noisy lights, and wireless sources of all shapes and sizes.  These collectively bathe most persons all day and night and the collective wiring of a home/building acts as a sort of antenna to whatever is in the environment. Obviously, being in the country outside of so many sources can be quite supportive for anyone, or even getting out of the city into the country each weekend e.g..  One may be amazed at the change to one's mental state to unplug not only from the hustle and bustle but from the EMF rich environment.  One might also consider CFL bulbs (with mercury -lots to consider here including the frequency of mercury laden bulbs and the flickering of such devices) and of course other scenarios as well.  None of this is meant to be an additional fear  burden (we already have a society that deals in fear 24/7 through the information IV most are plugged into thus creates a perpetual mental stress response in the body) but rather for empowerment's sake of how one might consider what's best for them and their family.  We will see quite a bit more in the issues of health as time progresses watching the first generations grow up in a ubiquitous blanket of EMF. 

 

Additionally, my credentials are an electrical engineering degree, and being an engineer and then senior manager with various wireless consulting companies and cellular companies themselves for 15 years.  This gave me access directly in many cases to high level meetings with engineering decision makers within folks like Verizon, Sprint et al, that support the legal efforts within the company to comply with regulatory agencies from zoning scenarios and their health related questions to information being provided to the press, other govt agencies including the FCC, and how for sales and others to communicate the realities of the system including for tower placement on schools, etc. (sold to folks as a great revenue service for the city/county etc for many of their schools).  I guess I should also mention I am now involved in bioenergetic medicine (same tech utilized by some very large name NBA and NFL players) and thus follow in a daily practice the impacts of environmental toxicity in its many forms including EMF for my clients.  I of course have a great deal of experience in the impact to my own body through those years in telecom and beyond in use of these technologies and have seen the impact of countermeasures or avoidance for myself and many others.  And no, considering the nature of the web and the "foreverness" of information planted there I have no interest in further disclosure of who I am specifically.  Lastly, I can add I have been fortunate to have several closed door sessions and otherwise with some great physicists that tackle areas like this and more.  This has expanded my more specialized telecom related knowledge with regard to EMF and health.  There is a bit more to the background but it gives a flavor.  I am perfectly happy for anyone to disagree with any assessment I might provide, but I would encourage persons to seek information outside those that have a profit motive.  I have seen the realities of that equation in more than one high profile industry.  When a person's livelihood is involved things can get a bit distorted, so its of course important to explore carefully information from those with no profit motive. 

 

Again, I am not here to make decisions for folks, and to be very clear not here to single out any particular device manufacturer.  Rather, would rather simply provide food for thought as its an area of dramatic concern and something i have quite a bit of knowledge about.  I actually just happened upon this forum looking for more natural alternatives that are not wireless based for fitness tracking and saw what seemed to be a good opportunity to be supportive to folks. 

 

Hope it helps.

Best Answer
Thanks for the info Rich. The boss hasn't actually said 'no', he's said prove to me that it isn't an issue and corporate side are pushing him to make a decision, so with all these politics flying around there's always a chance. They banned it in the first place because it was easier than doing anything else, so it's important at this point to kick up a bit of a fuss, but I cant go in all guns blazing without any ammo! The trouble is, I'm going to need documented proof and that's the bit that I'm going to struggle with.
Best Answer
0 Votes

A analog watch with A light emits more radiation. Than a fit bit flex

 

Best Answer

True @Enaz, but it's a different type of radiation. The EMF and radio interference has not been proven to cause cancer,  the radium <1980 and trillium >1980s has been proven to distroy cells and cause cancer. However the amount on a watch is so low that it is considered safe. The fact is the only ones that where hurt where the painters that used their lips to shape the brush to a point. 

 

I don't think the boys is too worried about the tracker bothering Gintama, but that it might bother the electronics in the room. What the boss doesn't realize is that these machines put off a to  more interference the the tracker will ever be able to. 

Best Answer

So, where are we with the request to fitbit to add a "turn off bluetooth" feature?

 

It's a simple enough fix for all this speculation and concern.

 

Best Answer

Yes it does.

 

Wrong answer.

 

Its Tritium btw.

Best Answer
0 Votes

It doesn't look like Fitbit has any real desire to implement a feature to disable wireless signals emitting from the tracker.  I'll probably end up returning my FB and grabbing one of the various other competitors models such as Garmin or Polar, both of which offer "Disable Bluetooth" and/or "Flight Mode", respectively.

 

I could honestly care less FB's trackers were not tested because radiation levels were as low as they claim, it's the fact that the choice isn't there for users to make up their own mind and have the option to turn it on or off at their leisure.

Best Answer

@Jayce99 :

There's got to be a way of getting an official response out of the company. Twitter? Facebook?

 

Am seriously considering jumping ship as well -- this thing is on my teenage son's wrist. 

 

 

Best Answer

@Jayce99 @dad_tracker Welcome to the Fitbit family! Interesting idea! I was making some research on the feature suggestions board and was able to find this suggestion which is kind of popular. It is asking for an option to disable Bluetooth. That's the information I was able to find for you. Feel free to vote for the idea.

 

Hope this helps. See you around! Smiley Happy

Santi | Community Moderator, Fitbit

Like my response? Vote for it! Also, accept as solution!

Best Answer

Honestly the only way to stop EMF is by turning the tracker off..

I hope you guys carry your phones at least a foot away from the body.. Don't use any BT device and certainly don't place a wired headphone in the ear.. Speakers work by a coil generating an EMF. 

Best Answer

@hbliving333 you have pointed to a video of a test in 2005 Fitbit was founded in 2007 and a about 8 years before the Flex. 

A cell phone has a lot more electronics and at least 4 types of radios Bluetooth, WiFi, cellular data, and the cellular for calls, then we can add radios for the additional signals like LTS.. Back the the Bluetooth Low Energy (2011) that the Flex uses did not exist.. The Fitbit rarely is held against the brain but Bluetooth headphones are. Then headphones in general give if EMF since that is the force that moves the coil. I'm not sure if it is safe to use any type of headphones. 

 

Your flex uses very little current and uses the newer BT Low Energy, both of which creates way less END than a typical phone, it is lower then a pace maker. In fact it is so low that the Feds don't require all this certifications found on a phone. 

Best Answer
0 Votes