Your Watch Isn’t Accurate at Tracking Calories. This Wearable Is Better
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 июл 2024
- A new wearable designed at Stanford University claims to be far more accurate at calculating calorie burn than the smartwatch on your wrist. It measures leg motion and works for lower-body exercises including walking, running, cycling and climbing stairs. We compare it to a lab-grade calorie-tracking tool.
Read more on CNET: www.cnet.com/news/the-most-ac...
How you can build the leg wearable yourself: www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
Patrick on Twitter: / pjslade
Lexy on Twitter: / lexysavvides
0:00 Intro
0:59 Why aren't smartwatches good at calorie tracking?
2:27 Designing a new wearable for the leg
3:35 Walking, running, cycling, stair tests
5:13 Results
7:00 Upper body workouts
Subscribe to CNET: / cnettv
Like us on Facebook: / cnet
Follow us on Twitter: / cnet
Follow us on Instagram: bit.ly/2icCYYm
Follow us on TikTok: vm.tiktok.com/ZMd2h6yac/ 
Наука
Well if I’m actually burning more calories than my watch is telling me, I’ll take that as a win because it’s way better than the vice-versa.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. I’ll rather my watch underestimate than overestimate
It's not a win because you can lose weight too fast and that's not good for body. Could be a really bad for someone and I would say half of the people. A lawsuit waiting to happen.
@@ceciliaasmr2599 just wanted to clarify this is not a lawsuit waiting to happen.
See figured out my watch tracks way more steps than I actually take. So I feel like I just can't trust it for anything else. I mean if there was a way I could calibrate it, that would be nice
@@ceciliaasmr2599 yes, yes it is a win
Something they didn't mention, but is important, is consistency. For weight management, a scale doesn't need to be accurate, but it does need to be consistent. This is definitely also a factor in measuring calories. If the wearables are consistent in their readings, they still provide useful data.
Absolutely. And not just on calories or weight.
Step count doesn't need to be accurate, just consistent. Only if you're comparing your performance to someone else do you need comparable accuracy.
It’s the same principle with dynos for cars when they measure the hp and torque after modifications.
Yes consistency is more important. You can have an accurate tool that cost a lot and is bulky but doesnt matter if you use it once in a while since theres so much variance between the measurement. If you have a lower accuracy measuremnt but more consistent that can collect a lot more data in time, you can at least improve on based on the trend.
Very true.
YES. There's really no reason to wear a backpack worth of equipment going around if your goal is to track weight progression. Whether your goal is to gain muscle mass or lose weight, it's just not feasible to go for these equipment that provide max accuracy. The reason why smartwatches are so widely used despite its obvious inaccuracies is they are what they are, just a watch. Easy to wear and forget about. Gives you consistent estimates which you could then measure your weight daily and adjust your diet/exercise according to results. That's always going to be the best way to go, not wearing 20lbs of equipment lol. 😐
Every breath you take
And every move you make
Every bond you break
Every step you take
I'll be watching you
I see what you did there 👀
That immediately came to mind for me too when I heard that 😄
I was going for that one!!😬 Too late! 😅
this comment is actually underrated and funny xd
Would be nice to test it specifically on the Apple Watch (or a specific watch) instead of generalizing. I used to own a Galaxy Active and it doesn't use HR to calculate calorie burn, just time. My workouts are usually the same duration but my heart rate fluctuates depending on what I want to do, and my calories burnt is always the same.
lol it of course it uses HR 🤣 just by time you can't
UnFortunately it doesn't matter which watch. There are so many factors in play that you can well have plus minus 30% of the actual expenditure on either watch. You will need to measure carbon dioxide differences in your inhalation/exhalation to be able to get even close.
Not anymore brother. They fixed the issue with Galaxy watch 4
@@dyvel bruh I think they understand that after watching the video. They just would like them to use the most popular watch which is the Apple Watch
Well it does not matter to me now because if my smartwatch says 500 calories, it could actually be a 1000! 🤣🤣🤣👌🏾
Mine's been telling over 3000/day almost everyday the last week or so. I'm feeling pretty special.
I tested Samsung Galaxy Watch 5 Pro and a Polar H10 on a treadmill. Same Time same Velocity. The data was almost identical. Only 5 kcal off by the Watch 5. Its incredible that a watch with only optical sensors is 99% accurate to a ECG Cheststrap.
All right, very interesting. Wonderful presentation. Thank you.
Excellent video, I didn't find anyone else who talked everything about this subject!
When you want to measure calories and fight Batman at the same time.
Exactly.
Good running technique that does not harm the body. Nice to see. You get rid of less energy if you lift your legs more, but if you are looking to burn calories, the style is perfect.
doesn’t matter as long as you stay consistent with your goal, use whatever number as a baseline and adjust as needed. Eat more to gain weight eat less to lose weight. Of course its more complicated than that but in general thats how you do it
Great study.
What's the smartwatch used on that?
my garmin keeps it good enough for me to have lost 60 pounds based on a daily caloric intake/defecit. i'm good. also, if your actual calorie burn from the leg device is higher than your watch, wouldn't that be counterproductive to weight loss? if you think you have less calories than you actually do, and your weight loss method is caloric, then you will intake less calories going by the watch right?
So, I'm a big guy, and I had the problem of all of the trackers over-estimated my TDEE because of assumptions they make about body composition.
Someone who is 6'5" and 400 pounds can't just double the numbers for someone who is 5'9 and 200 pounds, because small errors in how they factor in body composition will be magnified when you just double everything.
I didn't specifically try a garmin, though, just a samsung phone and a fitbit, and garmins look nicer (and should be for the price) - maybe they did their math better.
I lost 20 kilos without any watch. :P
These equipments are very convenient to use compared to just a watch on your wrist. What a time to be alive!
This is very interesting, as a person that works with these things for a job I know that they are not that accurate but at least for energy expenditure I think it is good to have some sort of bench mark and for it to be actually lower than what the real expenditure is (as measured in the lab) - this way if you are going off of that number to inform you how much you should be consuming you are still on the side of slight energy deficit, and yes that's for the freaks like me that actually track calories and macros.
I kind of assumed it wasn't based on the title. I just figured something's is better than nothing. A ball park estimate was better than a shot in the dark so to speak.
Too minimalistic, it needs more parts and robotic sidekick to shout out when you are running to calculate calories accurately.
What proof is there that his device is more accurate? This was just 3 sets of numbers from different devices, any of which could have been the closest to accurate.
Reporting error rate for smart watches, when 1 smart watch brand was tested on 1 person is a bit of a stretch, especially considering each company uses a different combination of HR sensor and software...
Did that breath measurement mask restrict breathing compared to not wearing a mask? That might affect calorie burn.
SO THE REAL QUESTION IS:
What are the accuracies of the popular smartwatches???
Has anyone done the test of the Apple Watch versus Fitbit versus android watches versus other wearables?
Check put dc rainmaker videos on youtube. He does goo comparison videos of fitness tech.
Check the Australian guy he’s a scientist that does reviews on smart watches here on RUclips I forgot his name
@@alvarogonzalez8807 The Quantified Scientist. He is great :)
@@alvarogonzalez8807 lol hes Austrian, not Australian
It would be so useful for calibrating my smart watch.
It really depends on how you use the data the watch spits out. I use mine to compare to other workouts I do during the week. Calorie count is just another metric.
OH SO YOUR UNDER THE IMPRESSION IMPERIAL IS BETTER. LOL RICH AMERICANS
@@hoodyk7342 haha. I LIVE in metric. Way better.
I'm a scientist that studies thermodynamics of chemical reactions within the body. The most important factor is the delta energy value, meaning the change in energy values, rather than the absolute energy value. What this means is that measuring the change in your calories from one day to another could be a better use for the watches.
Limitations: With that said, when you get more fit, your body will become more efficient with energy usage, so you'll actually use less calories, and this complicates the use of the delta value (after all, thermodynamics is for systems in equilibrium, not when they are non equilibrium).
Conclusions: use it as a good reference and to motivate you to keep exercising, rather than quantify your body's energy usage.
Smart Clothes is at least 5-10 years away. Double or triple that where it becomes cheap enough for it to be standard of everything.
Clothes need to last for 2 to 5+ years.
Electronics and water don't mix.
If it really becomes standard on clothes, E-Waste is going to become a lot worse.
I think it would make more sense to make some thing that could slip into existing clothes that make them smart
I think it takes in to account your basal metabolic rate too
Nice video 👍
My wife has a fitbit and I have a garmin. We train together, eat the same things and we're only a year apart in age. My garmin gives me way higher calories burned then her fitbit. We never take calories seriously because it's all in the math of the company's algorithms and they're idea of measurement. It is a good tool to keep motivated though.
You're a guy (based on your name) so even if you're about the same height and weight yours should be a little higher. Men are generally PFP leaner than women at the same approximate cardio fitness level (assuming they are similar arges and hormonally normal)
@@KissMyConverseFool ha didn't know. Thanks.
@@dazzbedl now I m confused..
I thought everybody already knew this because you have to agree to the disclaimer that it may not represent accurate health data and that you should seek your physician for proper information. Watches are only meant to be a guide to give you an average, which is clear to me because I’m a pretty thin guy and after a bike ride it says I only burn about 30 to 40 cal which is inaccurate, because I know with my body type I’m burning way more.
I'm so glad people are finally admitting to this. It's a freaking watch. 😂
The big question is how accurate is that gaint bag pack thing? 😛
Every new instrument has high accuracy as long as an better instrument arises...
Thanks for sharing this. CHEERS from over seas UNITED STATES 🇺🇲
Calories don't even well represent anything as far as food or used energy. It was originally only used to measure sun energy in a given substance (not just food)
How about Oculus Quest 2? They seem to have much more information to factor in.
this video is quite dated, even at the time that it was produced. For example, the Fitbit will also use body composition in its calculation. Older versions of Fitbits struggled with calorie burn for exercises such as stair climbers and bicycles where your arms were relatively stationary. However, that has changed and they are far more accurate. That said, if you are looking for something to give you an accuracy down to the calorie, then that is simply absurd.
I started tracking my daily calorie intake, usage, and weight for a 3 month period. Over that period I calculated an error of only 138 calories per day, (4%) and the majority of that is due to rounding up calorie intake.
3:14, how does that feel ? : yes.
So if my Apple Watch series SE says that I burn 300 calories I’m actually burning more?
If your Apple Watch says you burned 300 calories the answer is Yes. If you believe the Apple Watch is underestimating the caloric burn the answer is still Yes. If you believe the Apple Watch is overestimating caloric burn......Yes.
My bixing sessions often say I've burned 900 to 1k calories. Be nice if that number was low.
All that equipment looks way more convenient and comfortable than wearing a watch……
Unless you’re a professional athlete or training for the Iron Man competition I’m sure a watch is fine for tracking workouts as long as it’s consistent
This would be great for people like me, a paraplegic.
i find it a little hard to belive that such light workouts of 5min lead to calorie expenditure in the hundreds. For example the stair climber one, it seemed like a fairly light exercise, and that amount of calories burnt meant that in an hour she would be burning something like 1600 kcal, wich is probably over her bmr.
The fittrackers are unreliable(in my experience by considerable overestimation) but this sistem doesnt seem that accurate either.
Its so obviously if a man and his crew came up with a almost perfect way to accurately show cals burned it can be done
Its no way companies cant do that and couldn't have years ago the reason why they won't is cause if they do it wont be a need to keep selling the ones they been selling its all about cash
i love lexy
wasnt there such a chip you could plant inside sole from Adidas? what is new here?
Even a broken watch is right twice daily.
Well it's not about correct or not smartwatches are just normal everyday standard meter of calories as we compare it from yesterday or 1 month ago data or with someone with same watch and compare if calories burn increased or decreased or have i walked more today than yesterday not that i want accurate data
My smartwatch is now up for sale. Accepting bids now😂😂😂
I’ve worn an Apple Watch since they first hit the market and haven’t lost a pound. In fact: during the pandemic I gained about 20 pounds like many other people. I was too lazy to hit the gym.
That’s why I don’t buy those kids toys.
This is why you should not track your calories.
Tracking active minutes is a more reliable metric.
Ok, but is anyone else glad that it underestimates? I've seen a couple other studies that all seem to align with the ideal that watches are more likely to underestimate than overestimate.
**I was hoping they would use Apple watch Series 7 in their test. But no, they had to use a local brand, instead of market leader in smart watches :(*
I use wearable not to track my calories, but to track heartbeat and sleeping quality
I never rely on it from my watch but it’s not the worst thing in the world to look at
This is great now I know that when my watch say 800 it’s more like 1500
can we try with an apple watch instead
I really just check heart rate. I’m looking for average heart rate per workout.
I’m guessing this is a better gauge.
Well that reminds me of the story of the kid who made a watch that looked like a bomb.
All that equipment make her look like she came from Chernobyl
😊😊 Take a minuet. Ya, Lexy
Its so obviously if a man and his crew came up with a almost perfect way to accurately show cals burned it can be done
Its no way companies cant do that and couldn't have years ago the reason why they won't is cause if they do it wont be a need to keep selling the ones they been selling its all about cash
A wearable fitness watch has to be tight. Not many people realize this. After a workout. I loosen mine a little
Jeeeez Louise! There merely obvious is enough...
the thumbnail gives big immortan jane vibes
I think it's HILARIOUS that people think you can get an accurate calorie burn from something strapped to your wrist! 🤣 It's also funny how people think something that is literally on your wrist can count the literal number of steps you take! The only thing any kind of smart watch is good for is tracking the time and distance using GPS. Everything else is guessing.
Duh, any consumer gears are a joke when you compare them to their sophisticated professional counterparts. Trying so hard to make headline
You dont say
Did anybody actually believe that to be even close in terms of accuracy?
The research paper states:
“The Smartwatch was an Apple watch series 1 (42 mm)”
Also, the main problem was inaccurate and missing (!) heart rate data. I saw data of the Apple Watch Series 1 compared to the data of the Apple Watch Series 7. It has improved A LOT. The data of the series 1 was very spiky with a lot of gaps due to inaccurate IR sensor measurement when moving the wrist or holding things. This doesn’t happen anymore (or much less) on newer Apple Watches, but still on other smart watches. You can also use the ECG function of the watch for a much more accurate measurement. Btw, the researches were also using ECG. Apple now uses similar approaches to approximate body movement on newer watches. I guess this experiment is outdated (at least for newer Apple Watches).
So my series 3 watch is pretty accurate?
in other news, water is wet!
Who other than the brands and ambassadors said that its accurate
Watch is more for motivation
No kidding. I heard the sky is blue too.
A few issues. 1. Wearables wont ever even be close to accurate on fitness equipment as you arent actually physically moving. 2. I would never wear such bulky equipment 3. Its worthwhile testing a smart watch in combination with a compatible chest strap heart monitor.
Yes exactly. Also Ive got a Garmin Fenix + Strap and run. From the running it is albe to use the measured metrics GSP, respiration, HR oscillation ect along with my bodyweight to much more accuratly mesure my V02 MAX. Once it has that information its much better at estimating calories from HR. Using gym equipement with power measments and thus accurate cal burn, my garmin is pretty close.
Batman may arrive any minute!
I am... your fitness tracker.
What about the Apple watch which can measure oxygen levels in the blood?
We knew this already like come on
1 person, 1 watch?
Oh yeah they grossly overestimate caloric burn
Lexy is such a dreamboat.
😍Lexy
even if you burn 300 calories in a work out, that's about a small snack! and let alone the fact that working out makes most people more hungry!
if you want to lose weight, it's very simple, limit the amount of calories "Going In" not monitoring how much you are burning, your metabolism is a complicated system!
work out for you physical (mainly cardiovascular) and mental health! I don't get why people confuse these two with each other!
Couldn't agree more
Im just a dude in agreement with a dude who happens to be HRF Dude.
Yeah
Every product is a compromise. This leg sensor is utterly useless for commercial products because it can’t possibly be used for a mass market consumer device. You can’t really compare this research tool to smart watches on the market. You are making a straw-man argument here. Engineers who made the smartwatches clearly knew that it won’t be as accurate. Maybe if the Stanford researcher made an actually “wearable” sensor that was more accurate than Apple Watch or Galaxy Watch this would have much more meaning.
Obviously...
At least my watch doesn't make me look like I'm a cyborg, or worse, a Batman wannabe. LOL. Get back to me when this stuff is inexpensive, waterproof, and fashionable. Buh-bye.
raspberry pi
Well to be more precise you should wear a chest strap HRM as it is more accurate. This is a crucial piece in the algorithms used by smartwatch makers. Moreover depending on the smartwatch its algorithm and onboard tech will be more precise or more off track (fitbit vs garmin vs apple…). Interesting video, I rather my watch underestimate than over.
Heart Rate is quite accurate, it has about 5% error.
That's funny. Did anybody actually think calorie trackers were accurate to begin with?
Of course it's not accurate
Why would anyone think it is
This is only good news. I'll take an understimaaation to an overestimation.
I figured out how inaccurate these new smart watches were tracking calories. I lo key miss my old fit bit
No 💩...
Lol she runs funny
I rather get underestimation of how much calories I burn so I work out more
I don't see it downside to wearing the watches to be honest
Its so obviously if a man and his crew came up with a almost perfect way to accurately show cals burned it can be done
Its no way companies cant do that and couldn't have years ago the reason why they won't is cause if they do it wont be a need to keep selling the ones they been selling its all about cash
I doubt this bulky thing is going to stick🙅
I mean, you can barely tell people to wear a simple face mask 🤷🏾♂️
hahaha😂 but I think people will use it.. atleast for Halloween days...
Should only be taken as an INDICATION. Not gospel. Duh….
Jesus christ, i wouldn't walk around wearing that harness if i were you. Some self-proclaimed vigilante might accidentally jump to the wrong conclusion and make democracy rain all over you.
Yeah she kinda looked like a villian from a first person shooter game about to attack!😅
I still don't understand the use of an Apple Watch and why people get one. These watches are incredibly inaccurate.
Q-nuts are going to use this for a different story HAHAHA
What is a q-nut?
Good luck trying to convince customers look like a mororn on the streets !
Zombie apocalypse