Cherly Beaumont (63) welcomed the Philips Dreamstation in her bedroom with joy. Because of sleep apnea – which regularly causes her to stop breathing at night – the Amsterdam woman became chronically tired and forgetful. So when the gleaming white device was placed on her bedside table in 2016, her life improved significantly. “I felt reborn.”
The joy proved short-lived. The Dreamstation suddenly started showing puzzling side effects last year. ‘I got a dry throat and a burning sensation in my nose. And sometimes I wake up with water in my nose.’
Beaumont isn’t alone in distrusting her apnea device. Since Philips recalled 5.5 million Dreamstations in June last year, the electronics group has been in dire straits. Foam particles could crumble, potentially causing cancer. Worldwide, thousands of shocked users went to court to recover health damage suffered from the manufacturer.
Philips is allocating nearly a billion euros to carry out repairs, but that does not inspire much confidence in investors: the value of the share has halved in a year. Some investors, including the Vereniging van Effectenhouders, are pushing for the departure of CEO Frans van Houten.
The Netherlands has 100 thousand users of the Dreamstation, including Greet Van Buren-Hardebol (78) from Geldermalsen. Pretty soon after she started using the machine in 2016, she started experiencing complaints such as headaches, dizziness, irritated eyes and a sore throat. In addition, her condition has taken a serious blow. ‘I used to cycle 80 kilometres, now I am already panting after 20 kilometres.’ Her doctor blames it on heart failure, but she doubts that. “I blame that device.”
The question is whether the bad reputation of the Philips device is justified. from a sample of the RIVM last year shows that few particles are released and that the devices generally do not cause any negative health effects. The institute does recommend that further research be conducted into the release of styrene. There is still no agreement about the extent to which this plastic is carcinogenic.
That conclusion roughly corresponds to what two independent toxicologists conclude. They were engaged by Philips to analyze the available data. Martin van den Berg, emeritus professor of toxicology at Utrecht University: ‘Particles are released and they can penetrate deep into the lungs. That could theoretically lead to irritation, but I don’t have any indications for this.’ The toxicologists see no increased risk of lung cancer. The Philips researchers have not received any data about styrene.
The company calls it “extremely annoying” that users are shocked, but says it had to do it last year. “When we announced the recall, we assumed a worst-case scenario. We had limited information and could not rule out that some particles could cause cancer. That left us with a choice: either you recall all the devices and startle everyone, or you create a sense of false security.’
Although the group believes that the actual risks are not too bad, it is having additional research carried out to exclude all risks. The results are expected within two months. This is eagerly anticipated, not only by American lawyers preparing mass claims, but also by Dutch lawyer Mark de Hek. He represents more than five hundred Dreamstation users who hold the group liable for health problems.
They want to know exactly what damage the device is causing. An equally great annoyance is the slow pace of replacement. Because of the 5.5 million devices worldwide, 1.4 million have now been replaced. This means that the vast majority (4.1 million) is still in use, 75 thousand of which are in the Netherlands. Philips wants to have 90 percent replaced by the end of 2022, the spokesperson says, but he also asks for understanding. ‘We normally produce a million Dreamstations a year. Now we want to replace five times as much in a year. A huge operation.’
Users such as Van Buren and Beaumont therefore have to wait patiently. It presents them with a dilemma: take the complaints for granted and continue to use the Dreamstation, or stop using it. A choice between two evils, Ed van der Goes (60) knows, who has had the device at home since 2019. ‘If my breathing stops at night, I’m short of oxygen. This can lead to heart or kidney damage. But in the meantime I still don’t know what the consequences are of using the Dreamstation.’
Users try to escape this dilemma by switching suppliers, who loan them the device. Because where existing apnea patients have to wait for Philips to replace the Dreamstation, new patients immediately receive a new or repaired model.
This shortcut is being stopped: suppliers no longer take over customers from each other since last summer. This hinders switching for consumers. Although the suppliers consulted each other several times, spokespersons for Mediq and Vivisol emphasize that they each took the decision on their own initiative. They are afraid that massive switching will mean that no devices will be left for new patients. It is currently unclear whether this violates competition laws. Supervisor Authority for Consumers and Markets is still considering a position.
Until then, most users are forced to surrender to the Dreamstation. Also Cherly Beaumont, although she carefully stores used filters from the device since last year and records telephone conversations with the group. They are signs of a deep distrust of the manufacturer. She hopes that Philips will come by soon to replace the machine. But much rather she is no longer dependent at all. “I pray to God daily that he heal me.”
