Awesome Tips Your Watch Isn’t Accurate at Tracking Calories. This Wearable Is Better
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.
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:
How you can build the leg wearable yourself:
Patrick on Twitter:
Lexy on Twitter:
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:
Like us on Facebook:
Follow us on Twitter:
Follow us on Instagram:
Follow us on TikTok:
Deals for Days. Big home savings are happening now.
They shouldve revealed the brand of smartwatch they used in the test.
A wearable fitness watch has to be tight. Not many people realize this. After a workout. I loosen mine a little
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.
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.
Robocop.
This is great now I know that when my watch say 800 it’s more like 1500
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.
can we try with an apple watch instead
Should only be taken as an INDICATION. Not gospel. Duh….
I think it takes in to account your basal metabolic rate too
Oh yeah they grossly overestimate caloric burn
*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 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
Watch is more for motivation
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).
This is only good news. I'll take an understimaaation to an overestimation.
We knew this already like come on
wasnt there such a chip you could plant inside sole from Adidas? what is new here?
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.
Well that reminds me of the story of the kid who made a watch that looked like a bomb.
What about the Apple watch which can measure oxygen levels in the blood?
How about Oculus Quest 2? They seem to have much more information to factor in.
Lol she runs funny
These equipments are very convenient to use compared to just a watch on your wrist. What a time to be alive!
3:14, how does that feel ? : yes.
in other news, water is wet!
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)
Batman may arrive any minute!
When you want to measure calories and fight Batman at the same time.
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.
Of course it's not accurate
Why would anyone think it is
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.
Did anybody actually believe that to be even close in terms of accuracy?
😍Lexy
I figured out how inaccurate these new smart watches were tracking calories. I lo key miss my old fit bit
No kidding. I heard the sky is blue too.
Even a broken watch is right twice daily.
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
Did that breath measurement mask restrict breathing compared to not wearing a mask? That might affect calorie burn.
HUAWEI are 100% yesss, HUAWEI have worlds best technology 🙂 .
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.
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.
My smartwatch is now up for sale. Accepting bids now😂😂😂
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.
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.
i love lexy