Apple Watch has proven to be a life-saving device in many cases around the world. In the most recent case, as reported by AppleInsider, the Apple Watch’s blood oxygen sensor saved the life of a 14-year-old boy. The boy reportedly fell victim to acute altitude sickness, but his father was able to keep an eye on him through the use of an Apple Watch equipped with a blood oxygen sensor.

This came to light when the young boy’s father Joseph reached out to Apple CEO Tim Cook and explained what happened when he was able to use the Apple Watch when needed. Later, he shared Cook’s response with the publication. Joseph told that the same thing had happened in Peru at an altitude of 14,000 feet.

Altitude sickness can be dangerous if not monitored, and that’s why the Apple Watch came in handy as the father was able to monitor his son’s blood oxygen levels until help arrived to rescue him. Reached.

According to the report, when Tim Cook sent Joseph an email about this, he replied: “This sounds like a terrible situation. I’m sure he’s OK now,” Cook said. He added, “Thank you for sharing her story with us. Please give him your best.”

The recent Apple Watch ban counters this potential benefit

Incidents like these support Apple’s narrative of having health tracking features like blood oxygen sensing technology in Apple Watches, but it raises the question: will a ban on selling Apple Watches with blood oxygen sensing affect consumers in the long run? Is it, especially if they choose not to purchase other dedicated health-tracking devices?

For starters, the Apple Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2 were subject to a ban within the country. The ban was imposed as a result of a patent dispute with medical device manufacturer Masimo regarding their blood oxygen sensing technology.

In response, Apple has implemented a temporary solution by shipping these watches with the above feature disabled, which effectively disables a potentially life-saving device for the average consumer (only watches sold after January 18 ).