Apologies for posting a pay walled article. Consider subscribing to 404. They’re a journalist-founded org, so you could do worse for supporting quality journalism.

Trained repair professionals at hospitals are regularly unable to fix medical devices because of manufacturer lockout codes or the inability to obtain repair parts. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, broken ventilators sat unrepaired for weeks or months as manufacturers were overwhelmed with repair requests and independent repair professionals were locked out of them. At the time, I reported that independent repair techs had resorted to creating DIY dongles loaded with jailbroken Ukrainian firmware to fix ventilators without manufacturer permission. Medical device manufacturers also threatened iFixit because it posted ventilator repair manuals on its website. I have also written about people with sleep apnea who have hacked their CPAP machines to improve their basic functionality and to repair them.

PS: he got it repaired.

  • meco03211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I’d temper that by saying a manufacturer would need to provide a reasonable option. Some things could become dangerous or even deadly if repaired incorrectly. Or it could be dangerous or deadly to even attempt to repair it.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      55 minutes ago

      Yes, dangers exist from third party repairs.

      Refusal or even simple failure to provide critical repair data to the end user or their agent denies the end user the ability to make an informed decision about repairs.

      The company should be liable for all damages from a botched 3rd-party repair unless they provide to the end user complete specifications and unrestricted access to the device in order to make informed decisions about repairs.

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      In the medical field when a device can only be repaired by the manufacturer then you can expect long wait times, bad repair jobs and having your own equipment sent in for repair destroyed for “safety”.

      We let people repair their own car’s brake pads… we shouldn’t give up ownership rights for a unwarranted claim to safety. If something is potentially dangerous then making it more difficult to repair is a bad idea.

      • atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        We probably shouldn’t let people repair their own brake pads but that’s another argument. Not enough people die from randoms repairing their own brake pads. Repair an insulin pump the wrong way and it will absolutely kill you. Oxygen masks, CPAP machines, pace makers. So many medical devices that people rely on for life or death care.

        I’m all for right to repair. But having seen some of the thing people have done to repair safety items I have serious doubts about the efficacy of someone repairing something wrong and killing their grandma. I can appreciate that not everyone feels the same way. I can appreciate that there are absolutely people out there who can and do repair their own devices, cars, machinery etc, and they may do it well. But there are always going to be people out there who don’t know what they’re doing but will try and then we’ll hear about them on the news because they touched a capacitor or something.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          36 minutes ago

          We probably shouldn’t let people repair their own brake pads

          What kind of auth-dystopian nonsense is that?

          Repair an insulin pump the wrong way and it will absolutely kill you

          You’re just as dead if you can’t get that insulin pump repaired or replaced because the manufacturer won’t or can’t support it. When they go bankrupt because other customers have sued them into non-existence, you still own the device they manufactured, and you still need it repaired.

          Further, you presume the manufacturer can provide the best repairs. It is entirely possible and plausible that a competing engineer or programmer can improve upon the device, rendering it safer or providing superior operation. Car Mechanics can install a better braking system than the cheap, generic calipers and pads provided by the factory. Repair technicians can replace generic parts of medical devices allowing superior operation.

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The argument that because some people can’t, or won’t do a good job, no one should isn’t a very good one. Under that same logic you could exclude wiper blades.

          You end up like New Jersey where you can’t pump your own gas. There are already guidelines and fixes for this wrapped around repairing your home power. You’re not allowed to architect major changes without the sign off of somebody who is a registered professional but you’re absolutely allowed to fix things that are already there.

          For more people die from not fixing their brakes, because it’s difficult and expensive than ones who fix their brakes incorrectly.

          • atrielienz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            That depends entirely on who’s safety is on the line. When you repair your brakes wrong (to follow the original example), and it causes a pile up that kills 4.or 8 or 10 people, someone should be held liable for that.

            When you repair the electrical box in your basement wrong and it causes a fire that takes out the houses on either side of you, someone should be held liable for that.

            This is like saying “just because some people who drive drunk kill people doesn’t mean that everyone shouldn’t be able to”. The difference here though is that we know there’s a statistically significant increase in the likelihood of death or serious injury from driving drunk.

            There’s a statistically less likely chance of death or bodily injury when people repair their own devices, but I would wager that has a lot to do with the fact that the pool of people doing it have the knowledge to do so and aren’t completely ignorant of how those devices work, or it takes into account that right to repair also encompasses people getting a third party who is qualified to repair the device to do it, but outside of what the manufacturer allows per user agreement. Once more random laymen start doing it because they are allowed or perceived themselves to be allowed, I would expect that the number of wrongly repaired devices would go up.

            Some states have mandatory car inspections. So for instance, if you repair your brakes wrong and leave a caliper bolt off or don’t grease the slides or any number of other things there’s another qualified person looking over that and noting it. So there’s less possibility that it won’t be fixed properly. We do not have anything like that for medical devices except when they are repaired through the manufacturer.

            I’m not even arguing against the right to repair. I’m just pointing out the hurdles that are going to be there and saying they should be addressed. I’m actually generally for people learning how things work so that they can do simple repairs or even complex repairs if they need to.

            But I still think that some things should be handled by professionals. Or at least with a professional QC’ing the work.

            In the field I work in, work can be done by the owner but only with a qualified and licensed A&P present. Would you suggest that any old person off the street should be able to repair a plane and fly over your house?

            • linearchaos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              49 minutes ago

              I don’t think there’s any solid argument that precludes people from doing maintenance on their own car. There’s always some form of inspection or monitoring that can be done. Brakes in particular are perfectly reasonable. I particularly miss ease of maintaining drum brakes. They were literally designed to be maintained by the end user, you pull the wheel, The drum slides right off and the parts are readily available. If you want to get fancy you could buy a tool to help you remove the spring.

              Things should be designed to be maintained by the end user and the end user could choose to go to a mechanic if they wanted to.

              Honestly what we’re running up against at this point with car maintenance is design to cost. Every part that is maintainable on a car could be designed to be easily maintainable for a cost. Rather than the manufacturer paying that cost, there making us pay the cost at the mechanic. You can literally buy repair parts that are easy and convenient to work with that are improvements over OEM.

              In the case we’re talking about for this article it’s literally a wire on a lithium ion battery pack in a wrist mounted device that failed that they’re refusing to replace.

              And it’s not like he’s going to fall out of the sky and land in somebody’s backyard.

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          The FDA found there isn’t evidence that 3rd party repair is any less safe than 1st party repair.

          If one part needs to be replaced and the company who owns the patients/copyright tells the manufacturer to not sell it to others then the patient cost is needlessly a whole new machine. How many lives would be saved by lowering cost of getting medical equipment working?

          • atrielienz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            I read the article. Third party repair not being your grandson who’s replacing the seal on your CPAP mask, because that’s not what I mean not does it mean going to a third party repair place.

            It being less safe for the vast majority doesn’t mean that there aren’t going to be people who get it wrong. People repair their brakes wrong all the time. It’s absolutely caused accidents. But not enough to be statistically important in the grand scheme of 8 billion people. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen or that it can’t.

            There’s a reason a lot of YouTube videos that show you how to repair things are “for educational purposes only”. It’s because they can be held liable if something bad happens because you followed their guide.

            • tabular@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 minutes ago

              You focus on an incompetent grandson hypothetical but it’s not as if the 1st party repair is immune from hiring people who can make negligent mistakes, or even take malicious acts. If it’s difficult to replace a seal on a mask then perhaps it’s a CRAP design.

              Companies will preach safety when lobbying against right to repair then when the mask is forced to berecalled for sound/vibration dampening material entering people’s lung they will kick and scream.

              Safety is not my main goal, freedom to do what you want with what you paid for is.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              27 minutes ago

              People repair their brakes wrong all the time. It’s absolutely caused accidents.

              It also allows end users to install parts superior to OEM, improving braking capabilities, and preventing accidents.

              Any automotive technician can tell you that manufacturers take engineering shortcuts, resulting in a product with certain deficiencies. The manufacturer’s motivation is to put out a product that widely appeals to the general public. They want nothing to do with a product specifically tailored to the needs of a particular individual.

            • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              49 minutes ago

              So because some people are reckless, all people should be unable to fix their shit?

      • vrek@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        This depends on the area of medical device. I work in medical device but totally different from this, mine get implanted into your body.

        1. I doubt many people have the knowledge to to truly troubleshoot our devices beyond what the doctor is allowed to do. We need a bunch of expensive and specialized hardware to troubleshoot.

        2. We are legally required to investigate and report any complaints(https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm) . If we don’t get the complaint we can’t investigate and report it.

        3. If a certain number(honestly I don’t know the specific number) of complaints occur we are legally required to create a corrective action to help the patients immediately (or as soon as possible) and a preventive action to ensure it doesn’t effect other patients. If a person has an issue and “repaired” it themselves they don’t get counted in this and as such could cause more patients to suffer.

        While I agree with right to repair I think certain things should be exempt. That said then there should be a requirement of the manufacturer to ivestigate/repair the equipment.

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          When a defibrillator implant incorrectly shocks a pregnant women as an edge case she has to take meds to slow her heart so it doesn’t shock her. Doctors never think of the software running on it, and can’t get the code because it’s proprietary. People would be able to fix it, perhaps without even removing it, but can’t because business. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=easb_6LCFDI

        • tabular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago
          1. A person doesn’t need to study medicine or own surgical equipment to get their body repaired. Same logic applies for the repairing of their medical devices. Right to repair does mean you have to personally repair it.

          2+3. I don’t think that’s a problem. Presumably you’re already in contact with others to share information. Do that but as part of a larger, more open community.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It’s OK for manufacturers to say using aftermarket parts voids the warranty, it’s not OK for them to prevent using them entirely. Likewise if there’s a safety concern that should be handled by regulation and things like safety inspections, not by forcing all repairs to go through the manufacturer. If whatever it is is that critical to the safe operation it should be publicly documented so that third parties can manufacture it correctly to the needed tolerances.

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        if there’s a safety concern that should be handled by regulation

        Regulation won’t detail what a company does to that level. They might say something like “fasteners shouldn’t come loose” but it wouldn’t have a torque spec.

        If whatever it is is that critical to the safe operation it should be publicly documented so that third parties…

        That would run face first into proprietary info and corporate classified info.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Proprietary information and corporate classified information do not exist once they are incorporated into the device and sold to the end user. That information now belongs to the end user, who will continue to need it even if the company is out of business, or refuses service to the owner of the device.

          Any attempt to conceal that information from the end user should make the company liable for any failed repair performed by any individual, including harm arising from that failed repair. The only way to avoid that liability is to release all information to the end user, so they are fully informed when making a repair decision.

        • Otter@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          13 hours ago

          That would run face first into proprietary info and corporate classified info.

          The other side of regulation should be around purchasing. Bad repairability, delays in repairs, and proprietary parts need to be more important factors when deciding on what device to buy. Either at the government level for public institutions, or at least at the corporate level for private

        • orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          That would run face first into proprietary info and corporate classified info.

          Behold all the fucks I do not give. If it’s that critical they lose all claim to being proprietary. It’s just like patent, there’s no such thing as a secret patent, so anything that safety critical doesn’t get to stay secret either.

          Regulation won’t detail what a company does to that level. They might say something like “fasteners shouldn’t come loose” but it wouldn’t have a torque spec.

          It doesn’t now but it’s utterly trivial to fix that. Just make the regulations say that components must meet the manufacturer specifications and require manufacturers to publish and maintain all the specifications of all safety critical components. If they want to keep it secret then that means it’s not safety critical and they’re responsible for any accidents resulting from its failure.

    • ignirtoq@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      If it’s dangerous to repair it, it’s dangerous to own. That’s the domain for regulations by the government, not arbitrary software restrictions by software manufacturers.

      They don’t implement these to keep you safe. They do it purely to make more money.