5 ms·

Maybe, but since we don't have currently good way to use our health data for health purposes, this might be good development. They will provide a way to sync wh

Maybe, but since we don't have currently good way to use our health data for health purposes, this might be good development. They will provide a way to sync which others will emulate and it will be one standard. Should Google and others be regulated, oh yeah.

ch4s3 6y ago
Fitbit, and the like generally don't provide much data that's useful in a healthcare setting. The sensors aren't great, and people don't necessarily wear them consistently.In broad strokes they can tell you/your doctor if you are generally active. However, you could probably determine that yourself. The heart rate monitoring is good enough for monitoring the intensity of your own exercise but not good enough for anything diagnostic. Now you can but sensors and smart phone connectable heart rate and bp monitors that are medically useful, but they're not going to fit on your wrist.
- breck 6y ago
  Computers, and the like generally don't provide much functionality that's useful... -ch4s3 in 1950
  - ch4s3 6y ago
    That's not at all what I'm saying. My point is that fitbit and similar wrist mounted consumer devices aren't currently useful for real health purposes. I was responding to: > Maybe, but since we don't have currently good way to use our health data for health purposes My criticism is that the is NO WAY you could use this data, because the data is junk. I even pointed out that there are larger devices that do work. But there are real physical limitations in trying to measure heart rate through the wrist by bouncing light off of the veins. Measuring blood flow through tissue downstream from the heart is an indirect measurement at best. Skin, sweat, tissue composition, and motion all add confounding variable that are hard to correct for in software. The data you do get from the device is do you regularly exercise while wearing the device or not.
    - breck 6y ago
      I won't disagree that the data could be better. It can always be better. But it gets better. With every. single. update. You're just wrong about no ways to use this data. I've personally dramatically improved my health via wearables over the past 7 years. A close friend with a heart condition has perhaps had his life saved by these things. Check out the FitBit forums or subreddits. When you have a lot of data with high dimensionality and apply modern ML/DL methods you can discover connections that just aren't visible with fewer dimensions. Healthcare is going to have its "What Just Happened?" moment sometime in the late 2020's.(https://moalquraishi.wordpress.com/2018/12/09/alphafold-casp13-what-just-happened/ https://moalquraishi.wordpress.com/2018/12/09/alphafold-casp...)
      - ch4s3 6y ago
        Color me skeptical, but I've read a mountain on research on this very topic, and know some people on the medical side of this space and it just doesn't seem like the quality of the data is there for medical use. You could maybe do something with ML/DL on resting heart rate measurements for some kinds of people (thin but not too thin, and with lighter skin). I'm totally willing to believe that cool things are happening in med-tech, but I don't believe optical blood flow sensors mounted in a watch band are one of those things. If someone produces some real research where they get meaningful diagnostic info out of these devices, then I'm open to changing my mind.
- desireco42 6y ago
  That is a very limiting belief on your end :)
  - ch4s3 6y ago
    Only because optical heart rate sensors aren't very accurate under many real world conditions that have nothing to do with the quality of the sensors, other hardware, or the software. There's a good long history of medical research here, and not a lot of reason to believe that someone is going to develop a medically useful wrist strap based optical sensor.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  Some of the sensors are reasonably useful for "perhaps you should see a doctor" or at least "explaining what the sensor saw when this happened to a doctor". The SpO2 sensor, which never worked on my Fitbit anyways, is particularly helpful to keep an eye on if you have COVID, as it so happens. In my case, I found sometimes I'd start feeling really odd when I hadn't eaten much lately, and I discovered due to my Fitbit that my heart rate was spiking even while I was pretty much sedentary during those times. When my best description of the event prior was "feeling weird", having that info from my Fitbit is pretty nice if I want to explain to a doctor what's going on. Is the sensor extremely precise on those figures? No. Is the general trend of being hooked up to them both during baseline living and during an unexpected medical event pretty useful? Absolutely.
  - ch4s3 6y ago
    I don't disagree broadly, but there's a big difference between something that give's you the user a heads up and something that is backed by evidence and is medically useful. Chest strap heart rate monitors that cyclists use produce useful data, but obviously you aren't going to strap one on every day.
    - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
      I mean, the margin of error is definitely larger, but I wouldn't say you can't call Fitbit data "evidence". And again, I would definitely say it's medically useful to have a general daily baseline to compare against. If my Fitbit says I'm usually here and then all of a sudden, I am here, the sensor may not be super precise, but it's absolutely evidence that the measured value has changed.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - ch4s3 6y ago
        I mean "evidence" as in evidence based medicine. Which is to say, there isn't research showing that these devices are useful in a clinical setting which is my only claim. Plenty of people find them highly useful for their own individual reasons, and I wouldn't claim otherwise.
- drivebycomment 6y ago
  > Fitbit, and the like generally don't provide much data that's useful in a healthcare setting. They are not meant to. > people don't necessarily wear them consistently What are you basing this on ? Anecdotally, I and a few of my friends who are fully into Fitbit are wearing them dutifully. I was also somewhat skeptical but I figured it's not that much money to try. It completely changed my view on Fibit after trying it, and I've been very consistently wearing it. > However, you could probably determine that yourself. Not really. There's nothing like honest data and clear metrics to show how behind someone is. It also very successfully turned "fitness" into a game for me - clear, achievable goals and a way of tracking it easily did wonders to keep me motivated. > The heart rate monitoring is good enough for monitoring the intensity of your own exercise but not good enough for anything diagnostic. It's not meant to be a short-term diagnostics tool, and if you expect that, I think your expectation is completely misplaced. But it very clearly would be a useful data for the long-term baseline. They say an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - Fitbit is doing enough "nudge" to improve that prevention department for me, for a dirt cheap price. It's been an extremely useful and valuable tool and a service for me. I've never consistently tracked my weight, nor exercised consistently - and I have no doubt majority of people fall into a similar bucket. Not everyone would benefit as much, but clearly there's sizable population that would, and Fitbit, for that price, is doing a lot more to keep me motivated and exercise than gym memberships or private trainer or group exercise classes or most such things I've tried in the past. I actually wish Fitbit would allow us to share the exercise records with my primary care doctor - that would keep me even more honest, and would provide better insights and long-term trend data for my doctor.
  - ch4s3 6y ago
    > They are not meant to. I know, that's my whole point. They aren't medical devices and aren't useful for medicine/healthcare beyond showing that you are or are not active. > What are you basing this on ? Anecdotally, I and a few of my friends who are fully into Fitbit are wearing them dutifully Optical blood flow sensors need to be held flat against your skin with minimal movement up and down the arm. That's just hard to do. > It's not meant to be a short-term diagnostics tool Again, that's exactly what I was saying. My only claim was that the "health" data they produce isn't useful for healthcare in a clinical setting. This is the reason health record systems don't import that data. I worked in the medical record space for quite a bit of time, and never met a doctor that wanted this kind of data in a medical record.

ch4s3 6y ago

Fitbit, and the like generally don't provide much data that's useful in a healthcare setting. The sensors aren't great, and people don't necessarily wear them consistently.In broad strokes they can tell you/your doctor if you are generally active. However, you could probably determine that yourself. The heart rate monitoring is good enough for monitoring the intensity of your own exercise but not good enough for anything diagnostic. Now you can but sensors and smart phone connectable heart rate and bp monitors that are medically useful, but they're not going to fit on your wrist.

breck 6y ago
Computers, and the like generally don't provide much functionality that's useful... -ch4s3 in 1950
- ch4s3 6y ago
  That's not at all what I'm saying. My point is that fitbit and similar wrist mounted consumer devices aren't currently useful for real health purposes. I was responding to: > Maybe, but since we don't have currently good way to use our health data for health purposes My criticism is that the is NO WAY you could use this data, because the data is junk. I even pointed out that there are larger devices that do work. But there are real physical limitations in trying to measure heart rate through the wrist by bouncing light off of the veins. Measuring blood flow through tissue downstream from the heart is an indirect measurement at best. Skin, sweat, tissue composition, and motion all add confounding variable that are hard to correct for in software. The data you do get from the device is do you regularly exercise while wearing the device or not.
  - breck 6y ago
    I won't disagree that the data could be better. It can always be better. But it gets better. With every. single. update. You're just wrong about no ways to use this data. I've personally dramatically improved my health via wearables over the past 7 years. A close friend with a heart condition has perhaps had his life saved by these things. Check out the FitBit forums or subreddits. When you have a lot of data with high dimensionality and apply modern ML/DL methods you can discover connections that just aren't visible with fewer dimensions. Healthcare is going to have its "What Just Happened?" moment sometime in the late 2020's.(https://moalquraishi.wordpress.com/2018/12/09/alphafold-casp13-what-just-happened/ https://moalquraishi.wordpress.com/2018/12/09/alphafold-casp...)
    - ch4s3 6y ago
      Color me skeptical, but I've read a mountain on research on this very topic, and know some people on the medical side of this space and it just doesn't seem like the quality of the data is there for medical use. You could maybe do something with ML/DL on resting heart rate measurements for some kinds of people (thin but not too thin, and with lighter skin). I'm totally willing to believe that cool things are happening in med-tech, but I don't believe optical blood flow sensors mounted in a watch band are one of those things. If someone produces some real research where they get meaningful diagnostic info out of these devices, then I'm open to changing my mind.
desireco42 6y ago
That is a very limiting belief on your end :)
- ch4s3 6y ago
  Only because optical heart rate sensors aren't very accurate under many real world conditions that have nothing to do with the quality of the sensors, other hardware, or the software. There's a good long history of medical research here, and not a lot of reason to believe that someone is going to develop a medically useful wrist strap based optical sensor.
ocdtrekkie 6y ago
Some of the sensors are reasonably useful for "perhaps you should see a doctor" or at least "explaining what the sensor saw when this happened to a doctor". The SpO2 sensor, which never worked on my Fitbit anyways, is particularly helpful to keep an eye on if you have COVID, as it so happens. In my case, I found sometimes I'd start feeling really odd when I hadn't eaten much lately, and I discovered due to my Fitbit that my heart rate was spiking even while I was pretty much sedentary during those times. When my best description of the event prior was "feeling weird", having that info from my Fitbit is pretty nice if I want to explain to a doctor what's going on. Is the sensor extremely precise on those figures? No. Is the general trend of being hooked up to them both during baseline living and during an unexpected medical event pretty useful? Absolutely.
- ch4s3 6y ago
  I don't disagree broadly, but there's a big difference between something that give's you the user a heads up and something that is backed by evidence and is medically useful. Chest strap heart rate monitors that cyclists use produce useful data, but obviously you aren't going to strap one on every day.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    I mean, the margin of error is definitely larger, but I wouldn't say you can't call Fitbit data "evidence". And again, I would definitely say it's medically useful to have a general daily baseline to compare against. If my Fitbit says I'm usually here and then all of a sudden, I am here, the sensor may not be super precise, but it's absolutely evidence that the measured value has changed.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - ch4s3 6y ago
      I mean "evidence" as in evidence based medicine. Which is to say, there isn't research showing that these devices are useful in a clinical setting which is my only claim. Plenty of people find them highly useful for their own individual reasons, and I wouldn't claim otherwise.
drivebycomment 6y ago
> Fitbit, and the like generally don't provide much data that's useful in a healthcare setting. They are not meant to. > people don't necessarily wear them consistently What are you basing this on ? Anecdotally, I and a few of my friends who are fully into Fitbit are wearing them dutifully. I was also somewhat skeptical but I figured it's not that much money to try. It completely changed my view on Fibit after trying it, and I've been very consistently wearing it. > However, you could probably determine that yourself. Not really. There's nothing like honest data and clear metrics to show how behind someone is. It also very successfully turned "fitness" into a game for me - clear, achievable goals and a way of tracking it easily did wonders to keep me motivated. > The heart rate monitoring is good enough for monitoring the intensity of your own exercise but not good enough for anything diagnostic. It's not meant to be a short-term diagnostics tool, and if you expect that, I think your expectation is completely misplaced. But it very clearly would be a useful data for the long-term baseline. They say an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - Fitbit is doing enough "nudge" to improve that prevention department for me, for a dirt cheap price. It's been an extremely useful and valuable tool and a service for me. I've never consistently tracked my weight, nor exercised consistently - and I have no doubt majority of people fall into a similar bucket. Not everyone would benefit as much, but clearly there's sizable population that would, and Fitbit, for that price, is doing a lot more to keep me motivated and exercise than gym memberships or private trainer or group exercise classes or most such things I've tried in the past. I actually wish Fitbit would allow us to share the exercise records with my primary care doctor - that would keep me even more honest, and would provide better insights and long-term trend data for my doctor.
- ch4s3 6y ago
  > They are not meant to. I know, that's my whole point. They aren't medical devices and aren't useful for medicine/healthcare beyond showing that you are or are not active. > What are you basing this on ? Anecdotally, I and a few of my friends who are fully into Fitbit are wearing them dutifully Optical blood flow sensors need to be held flat against your skin with minimal movement up and down the arm. That's just hard to do. > It's not meant to be a short-term diagnostics tool Again, that's exactly what I was saying. My only claim was that the "health" data they produce isn't useful for healthcare in a clinical setting. This is the reason health record systems don't import that data. I worked in the medical record space for quite a bit of time, and never met a doctor that wanted this kind of data in a medical record.