[amrcnimgrnt]

The problem appears to me to be a design problem of the implanted devices, not the iPhone.

Unless I'm mistaken this is what's happening:

1. ICDs want/need to communicate with the outside (at least one way).

2.However, this is not trivial since a human body is a bag of salt water. Therefore low frequencies are needed.

3. Low frequencies are very difficult at the necessary length scales with electric fields, so they used the magnetic field instead.

So far, so good. But then they assumed that the person would never be next to a magnet? That's a design flaw on their end, not the iPhone's. There's magnets, and low moving large currents, everywhere!

The should have implemented a primitive type of port knocking.

[KineticLensman]

> Unless I'm mistaken this is what's happening:

The actual problem is that EM fields blind the device so that they can't sense the cardiac arrhythmias they are designed to fix, this rendering them useless.

> ICDs want/need to communicate with the outside (at least one way).

My St Jude Ellipse ICD communicates bidirectionally (control inputs in, telemetry out).

[amrcnimgrnt]

I'll leave it to you, a user, that strong EM fields also blind the devices. The signals the ICD is trying to measure are very weak. I can imagine that strong 50/60Hz surge currents really screw things up, especially in single conductor power distribution situations (UK ring circuits, rural farms, etc).

That being said, the article (TL/DR) appears to focus on "static" magnetic fields. The near field charging feature of the iPhone barely makes mention.

I think the "disable ICD" being a simple magnetized reed switch for an implantable medical device is a bit silly. At least tap a code into that reed switch a little!

[bdcravens]

The entire medical devices industry tackles this issue just fine (for example, I have a percussion vest for respiratory therapy that uses strong magnets, and there's no shortage of warnings).