Anecdotally, the heart rate data they have isn't very good. I had a Fitbit to track my HR while running, and the HR reading would change dramatically based on what I set my stride length to in the app. I would run on the treadmill, and it would guess how much I ran. If my stride length was set to a longer length, it thought I was an elite athlete and told me my resting HR was sub 50 BPM. If I set a normal stride length, my resting HR would be 60+. That's when I stopped caring about health trackers.
Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
91–100 of 137 posts
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
One problem facing insurance companies is the asymmetric information between buyer and seller. Should we be able to keep our age secret when buying life insurance? How about sex or weight? My teenage son is in all likelihood a less safe driver than the average teenage woman, should a woman pay the same for her insurance as the generally more reckless man? With regard to our health information, should we be keeping in…
Seems to me like one should pay more for risky things one can control (still smoking, excessive drinking, eating poorly if you can afford to eat well, etc.) but not for things one cannot control (genetics, sex -- insert typical list of protected classes here). And that is super complicated.
Super complicated. For an insurance company collecting verifiable data on things people can control is way harder then collecting data on things they cannot.
If everyone wasn't so incredibly uptight about paying a tiny bit more than their fair share all this would be a lot easier. Would it be so awful if we all had to pay a little extra so that a smoker could afford life assurance, or so a young man could afford to insure a car?
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#93Anecdotally, the heart rate data they have isn't very good. I had a Fitbit to track my HR while running, and the HR reading would change dramatically based on what I set my stride length to in the app. I would run on the treadmill, and it would guess how much I ran. If my stride length was set to a longer length, it thought I was an elite athlete and told me my resting HR was sub 50 BPM. If I set a normal stride leng…
For me, doing hill sprints on a bicycle sometimes completely fails to register on the Fitbit. My heart rate will sometimes show up in the 90-100 range on the Fitbit, despite my Garmin (which gets data from a chest strap monitor) showing me 160-170, which is far more believable.
And then there are weird situations while merely walking around where I'll see strange spikes (160+) on the Fitbit when I know my heart rate is near 90 or so.
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both right? You may not like it but which research wouldn’t benefit from a large useful dataset? And to the post above re: assuming consent, sure maybe they should make it crystal clear up front how they’ll use your data.
How would you suggest making it clear up front? Providing a link to a privacy policy and making people check a box saying they've read it?
A list of information shared would go a long way. Assuming it's a short list (hah), it wouldn't be hard to prominently display it aside from the privacy policy.
Edit: Also, turn ALL of this into a single step, and make it easier to find: https://blog.fitbit.com/go-incognito/
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#95Anecdotally, the heart rate data they have isn't very good. I had a Fitbit to track my HR while running, and the HR reading would change dramatically based on what I set my stride length to in the app. I would run on the treadmill, and it would guess how much I ran. If my stride length was set to a longer length, it thought I was an elite athlete and told me my resting HR was sub 50 BPM. If I set a normal stride leng…
Guess what the digital bathroom scales are just as bad when it comes to body fat measurements, and even worse when it comes to weight measurements.
(The algorithm that shows your weight has hysteresis built in, so that if you step on, get a reading and step off, then step back on with a 1- or 2-lb weight, it will give you EXACTLY the same reading. This is to fool you into thinking its accurate)
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
This large scale data analytics is probable the best (or at least usually fastest) way to solve the worlds big health challenges I would guess. Nobody forced anyone to wear a smart watch or health tracker. I for one thinks the world is slightly better off because of companies like Fitbit!
If used by researchers, for research. Not sitting in vaults of private companies, doing God knows what. I don't even know what they need that data for. Sure, now that's there, it could be useful. But why can't we ever go about collecting such data the right way? Opt-in, and for the right purpose?
> If used by researchers, for research.
Sure, but that's application. Great things usually can do terrible things depending on application.
At some point we have to take a leap of faith and acknowledge that some things, like heart data ingestion, is an amazing advancement for humanity. Lets not try and stop it, lets try to move it in the right direction. Ie, not private, etc.
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#97> modern smartwatches and fitness bands can track your pulse continuously, day and night, for months. Imagine what you could learn if you collected all that data from tens of millions of people! Please no. Surely nobody thought collecting health data from all their users was a good idea, right? > That’s exactly what Fitbit (FIT) has done. It has now logged 150 billion hours’ worth of heart-rate data. From tens of mil…
I'm currently thinking about buying a fitness tracker, and this article definitely rules out a Fitbit. Does anyone know a fitness tracker that does not share my personal health data with anyone?
Apple Watch? There's a heart study you can participate in by sending your heart data, but it's opt in (and you have o be 23). If you don't have an iPhone I'm sure there are a couple heart rate trackers that don't upload to the cloud, but you may have to drop down to a "dumb" device to ensure this.
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#98Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
If used by researchers, for research. Not sitting in vaults of private companies, doing God knows what. I don't even know what they need that data for. Sure, now that's there, it could be useful. But why can't we ever go about collecting such data the right way? Opt-in, and for the right purpose?
> If used by researchers, for research. Sure, but that's application. Great things usually can do terrible things depending on application. At some point we have to take a leap of faith and acknowledge that some things, like heart data ingestion, is an amazing advancement for humanity. Lets not try and stop it, lets try to move it in the right direction. Ie, not private, etc.
I can imagine potential good uses. I just don't trust this particular actor.
Re: Fitbit's 150B hours of heart data
#100> modern smartwatches and fitness bands can track your pulse continuously, day and night, for months. Imagine what you could learn if you collected all that data from tens of millions of people! Please no. Surely nobody thought collecting health data from all their users was a good idea, right? > That’s exactly what Fitbit (FIT) has done. It has now logged 150 billion hours’ worth of heart-rate data. From tens of mil…
I'm currently thinking about buying a fitness tracker, and this article definitely rules out a Fitbit. Does anyone know a fitness tracker that does not share my personal health data with anyone?
Garmin and Polar fo rexample, if you sync the device with self-hosted service.