4 ms·

Yesterday my Healbe GoBe 2 healthband arrived, it has an array of non-invasive sensors which values can be used to take a good guess at how much calories are bu

Yesterday my Healbe GoBe 2 healthband arrived, it has an array of non-invasive sensors which values can be used to take a good guess at how much calories are burned from carbohydrates, proteins and fats. Each time you eat you have to push a button. https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitness-band-that-knows-what-youve-eaten-review https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitnes...

mtw 10y ago
Quite an interesting device. But sounds a little too good to be true for $179? It'd be great to have clinical trials and also qualified people (doctors, diabetic users etc.) to review it and compare with other devices
- bigtimeidiot 10y ago
  >It'd be great to have clinical trials and also qualified people (doctors, diabetic users etc.) to review it and compare with other devices If there is no potential for harm (like with medications), throw it out there and see what happens. The market will validate the technology, one way or another.
  - gedrap 10y ago
    There is some potential for harm: people making decisions based on incorrect information. Yes, you shouldn't trust such a device completely. But if you can't trust it... What's the point, other than an expensive cool toy?
    - fsiefken 10y ago
      Hi gedrap, even if the calorie-intake tracker doesn't work, it has a gsr, heartrate, sleep, steps and hydration tracker which work for certain (i'm using it now).
- dmix 10y ago
  This seems like a simple thing to disprove. Anyone with access to high quality sensors could compare results. Any professional with a bit of spare time... I'm sure if it was inaccurate that it would come out pretty quickly on review sites. Edit: the article the person above linked to includes exactly that > When the first GoBe band was released in 2014, it was the target of some harsh criticism. The medical blog The Doctor Weighs In, for example, made this call based on Healbe's marketing pitch [...]
iplaw 10y ago
I've investigated every device that claims to be able to accurately track calories expended and/or calories ingested. On the calories expended side, the clear winner is a power meter on a bicycle. The power meter measures actual power output and energy expenditure, which is easily and accurately converted to kCal. For the indirect devices, it's a massive mixed bag with some very unexpected observations. Measuring galvanic skin response ended up being quite inaccurate. Garmin devices without a heart rate strap were insanely inaccurate, sometimes reporting 300% higher-than-actual calories expended. The best device has actually been the Apple Watch paired with an iPhone. The calories reported are usually within 5% of actual. As for the devices claiming to track calories ingested, every device has been either outright fraudulent or, at best, vaporware.
- pure_ambition 10y ago
  Do you have any research to back this up? I'd love to see more about the methodologies and results you say.
- anu7df 10y ago
  I am sorry but I cannot see how the power meter on a bicycle is "accurate" in this context. I am not trying to measure the part of the energy expended to run the cycle (which the power meter accurately measures) but the total energy expended by me while biking.An example; what if I put on some ankle weights while biking. How does the power meter know that? To explain with an almost farcical extreme example, if I attach a power meter to a step/chair while doing a step up step down exercise, it will register zero calories burned always. But I would most certainly be burning calories doing the exercise.
  - iplaw 10y ago
    You're not understanding how the power meter works. Nor did I say that a power meter can be applied to every possible workout or piece of equipment. In your ankle weight scenario, the added weight would, in effect, cancel out. You'd get a free boost to power output for 50% of a pedal stroke, and added resistance to the other 50% of the pedal stroke. These forces are being applied simultaneously on either side of the cranks. While one side is combating the added weight, the other side is feeling the boost of the additional weight. And sure, there are additional caloric expenditures while cycling - increased heart and respiration rate, utilization of muscles in your arms and torso, etc. - but they are marginal compared to the generation of 300-400W using, primarily, the muscles in your lower body. Further, these differences are factored into the athlete's efficiency in turning calories into mechanical output. A trained cyclist is 25% efficient. You seem to be attempting to be deliberately obtuse.
user1178 10y ago
Reputable sources have basically called it a scam: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/can-you-spot-the-fake-health-gadget/372788/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/can-you-s... Also the reviews on Amazon are pretty bad. If they do claim that it works based on noninvasive blood glucose monitoring that's also a red flag; many have tried to solve that problem, and the obvious application would be a monitoring device for diabetics.
- fsiefken 10y ago
  There are also positive reviews on this feature, see: http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/healbe-gobe-review/3/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/healbe-gobe-review/3/ http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30681002 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30681002 https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitness-band-that-knows-what-youve-eaten-review https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitnes... and supposedly they have improved the device in generation 2 which I'm currently testing. Sleep, step, hydration status and heart rate tracking work well, based on these reviews, a science article on bioimpedance and non-invasive glucose monitoring https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3500977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3500977/ I have hope I can confirm that calorie tracking works.
  - user1178 10y ago
    Those reviews seemed mixed at best (especially that BBC one). Tech like this is a major breakthrough. It's just not something you see come from a crowd funding campaign. I'm extremely skeptical. Be interested to know what your personal experience with it is though. Best of luck.

mtw 10y ago

Quite an interesting device. But sounds a little too good to be true for $179? It'd be great to have clinical trials and also qualified people (doctors, diabetic users etc.) to review it and compare with other devices

bigtimeidiot 10y ago
>It'd be great to have clinical trials and also qualified people (doctors, diabetic users etc.) to review it and compare with other devices If there is no potential for harm (like with medications), throw it out there and see what happens. The market will validate the technology, one way or another.
- gedrap 10y ago
  There is some potential for harm: people making decisions based on incorrect information. Yes, you shouldn't trust such a device completely. But if you can't trust it... What's the point, other than an expensive cool toy?
  - fsiefken 10y ago
    Hi gedrap, even if the calorie-intake tracker doesn't work, it has a gsr, heartrate, sleep, steps and hydration tracker which work for certain (i'm using it now).
dmix 10y ago
This seems like a simple thing to disprove. Anyone with access to high quality sensors could compare results. Any professional with a bit of spare time... I'm sure if it was inaccurate that it would come out pretty quickly on review sites. Edit: the article the person above linked to includes exactly that > When the first GoBe band was released in 2014, it was the target of some harsh criticism. The medical blog The Doctor Weighs In, for example, made this call based on Healbe's marketing pitch [...]

iplaw 10y ago

I've investigated every device that claims to be able to accurately track calories expended and/or calories ingested. On the calories expended side, the clear winner is a power meter on a bicycle. The power meter measures actual power output and energy expenditure, which is easily and accurately converted to kCal. For the indirect devices, it's a massive mixed bag with some very unexpected observations. Measuring galvanic skin response ended up being quite inaccurate. Garmin devices without a heart rate strap were insanely inaccurate, sometimes reporting 300% higher-than-actual calories expended. The best device has actually been the Apple Watch paired with an iPhone. The calories reported are usually within 5% of actual. As for the devices claiming to track calories ingested, every device has been either outright fraudulent or, at best, vaporware.

pure_ambition 10y ago
Do you have any research to back this up? I'd love to see more about the methodologies and results you say.
anu7df 10y ago
I am sorry but I cannot see how the power meter on a bicycle is "accurate" in this context. I am not trying to measure the part of the energy expended to run the cycle (which the power meter accurately measures) but the total energy expended by me while biking.An example; what if I put on some ankle weights while biking. How does the power meter know that? To explain with an almost farcical extreme example, if I attach a power meter to a step/chair while doing a step up step down exercise, it will register zero calories burned always. But I would most certainly be burning calories doing the exercise.
- iplaw 10y ago
  You're not understanding how the power meter works. Nor did I say that a power meter can be applied to every possible workout or piece of equipment. In your ankle weight scenario, the added weight would, in effect, cancel out. You'd get a free boost to power output for 50% of a pedal stroke, and added resistance to the other 50% of the pedal stroke. These forces are being applied simultaneously on either side of the cranks. While one side is combating the added weight, the other side is feeling the boost of the additional weight. And sure, there are additional caloric expenditures while cycling - increased heart and respiration rate, utilization of muscles in your arms and torso, etc. - but they are marginal compared to the generation of 300-400W using, primarily, the muscles in your lower body. Further, these differences are factored into the athlete's efficiency in turning calories into mechanical output. A trained cyclist is 25% efficient. You seem to be attempting to be deliberately obtuse.

user1178 10y ago

Reputable sources have basically called it a scam: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/can-you-spot-the-fake-health-gadget/372788/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/can-you-s... Also the reviews on Amazon are pretty bad. If they do claim that it works based on noninvasive blood glucose monitoring that's also a red flag; many have tried to solve that problem, and the obvious application would be a monitoring device for diabetics.

fsiefken 10y ago
There are also positive reviews on this feature, see: http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/healbe-gobe-review/3/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/healbe-gobe-review/3/ http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30681002 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30681002 https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitness-band-that-knows-what-youve-eaten-review https://www.techwalla.com/12049437/healbe-gobe-2-is-a-fitnes... and supposedly they have improved the device in generation 2 which I'm currently testing. Sleep, step, hydration status and heart rate tracking work well, based on these reviews, a science article on bioimpedance and non-invasive glucose monitoring https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3500977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3500977/ I have hope I can confirm that calorie tracking works.
- user1178 10y ago
  Those reviews seemed mixed at best (especially that BBC one). Tech like this is a major breakthrough. It's just not something you see come from a crowd funding campaign. I'm extremely skeptical. Be interested to know what your personal experience with it is though. Best of luck.