Fitbits: Are you getting what you’re paying for?

            If you would have walk around and look at peoples’ wrists 30 years ago, all you would find adorning them was jewelry and wrist-watches. Fast forward to 2017, and now another item has been added to the list. Maybe it’s just because I’ve grown up in Colorado, but it seems like I see more and more people wearing fitness trackers on their wrists every day. These incredible little devices are one of America’s newest attempts to encourage physical activity, but do they help or hinder their wearers?

            A study conducted at University of Nevada Las Vegas looked into these fitness trackers, the fitbit flex specifically, in order to see how accurate they really were. The study focused on the two main values people focus on from the trackers: Step count (SC) and Energy Expenditure (EE). They recruited participants from UNLV student and staff, and had them walk at different paces (1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 mph) on a treadmill. The fitbit was worn throughout the experiment while EE was also being calculated using data from a respiratory monitor attached to the subject, and SC also being calculated with a manual counter; these values were used as the “control” against the fitbit.

            The results of the study not only shocked me, but it also went against the researchers’ hypothesis. The SC was significantly underestimated at all speeds, and the EE was significantly overestimated for two speeds, only accurate when the subject walked at 2.5 mph. These results are not only statistically significant, but the EE results also have a significant impact on society. The average fitbit wearer references their SC and EE values in tracking diet and exercise. As the paper aptly pointed out, if the fitbit is telling the wearer they’re burning more calories than they actually are, then the wearer will likely be frustrated when they don’t see expected weight loss results. Further, individuals could also believe they have a great “food allowance” than they truly due, which could lead to possible weight gain, instead of loss. While the EE results are potentially harmful, the SC results could be “helpful”. If a wearer has the goal of reaching 10,000 steps in one day, they would likely exceed that goal before the fitbit would reach 10,000 steps, therefore burning more calories.

            So, are fitbits worth it? I still believe they are, but with one exception. Wearers need to be made very aware of the potential inaccuracies, and recognize the values as approximations more than concrete numbers. The reality is that can be said of almost all fitness trackers, as the most accurate trackers likely involve a laboratory, hoses and wires, and some calculations. However, there is something to be said about the physio social impacts of fitness trackers like the fitbit. There are now a multitude of apps where wearers can upload and share the data with their friends, which in turn builds a kind of exercising community. Wearers can be inspired/motivated by others activity, and push themselves to reach their goals. America desperately needs to slim down, and something like a fitbit may certainly lead to change.

https://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPonlineOCTOBER_5_2017_Montes.pdf