REPOST: Shaking up the wearables

The road to fitness is not an easy one to navigate. Only those who are truly determined get to see the result of all their hard work and sacrifices. But these days, we have innovations like digital fitness trackers that are designed to help us accomplish our fitness goals. But are we effectively utilizing these gizmos? The Economist explores the topic further in the article below.

Image Source: economist.com

WHEN an earthquake of magnitude 6.0 struck Northern California on August 24th at 3.20am, it not only shook the ground—it also shook people awake. Strikingly, it is possible to identify the tremblor's epicentre by measuring the disrupted sleep suffered by thousands of people in the area who use a bracelet pedometer and sleep-tracking device made by Jawbone (see chart below). The company spotted trends in how long it took people to return to their slumber, and noted that 45% of people within 15 miles of the epicentre were unable to go back to sleep at all.

Image Source: economist.com

The fitness-tracking devices—often called “wearables” or “wearable computing”—emerged on the tech scene a few years ago. They promised to transform the burgeoning field of personal electronics: calculating the number of steps walked, calories burned or hours slept. After all, as computers get smaller and closer to people's bodies, gadgets for self-tracking seemed the next logical step beyond the smartphone. By 2013 they were a $238m market around the world, with products by Fitbit, Nike and Jawbone accounting for 97% of all smartphone-enabled tracker sales. Yet despite the fascinating data that can be collected from them, like patterns of behaviour during an earthquake, the devices still have a long way to go to match the early optimism that surrounds them.

The immediate problem is their limited appeal. They are primarily aimed at fitness fanatics, yet well over half of all Americans do not exercise regularly, and thus have little interest in the product. Fitness trackers also fail to keep the attention of those health-conscious consumers who do go out and buy them. Strikingly, one-third of users discard their devices after six months, according to research by Endeavour Partners, a consultancy. Some industry insiders speculate that the true number may be much higher than that. Wearable fitness-trackers are just not as addictive as smartphones and the like, it seems. The novelty of being able to track your steps, calories or other metrics is appealing at first, but swiftly wears off. Use a fitness tracker regularly, and you get pretty good at guessing the numbers.

Next, it is unclear at what pace the technology will evolve. The computer and smartphone industries advance quickly because there are many players and their products are indispensable. Not so self-tracking wearables. The uncertainty over the commitment of hardware-makers was underscored in April, when Nike fired the majority of the team responsible for its device, called FuelBand, and cancelled a new version of the product scheduled for release later this year. It shelved other similar projects as well, and said it would focus on software and fitness-tracking apps (which run on smartphones) instead.

One measure of a wearable device's success is whether you would turn around for it if you were halfway to work—as you would for a smartphone. Yet market research suggests that consumers are not willing to make an about-face and fetch their fitness trackers. In fact, Sonny Vu of Misfit, a wearable-computing company, expects the market for fitness trackers to contract over the next few years.

Some still hope that more capable wristbands, like “smartwatches”, might be the right interface to collect bodily data that is then sent to the smartphone (or perhaps one day replace the smartphone). Apple is said to have such a device in the works, and has hired people from Nike, presumably to work on it. The difficulty will be persuading consumers to make room for yet another device in their lives.

Self-tracking gadgets will probably only become a mainstream market once they shed their image as computerised jewellery or conversation-starters for fitness freaks and data geeks, and start collecting much more useful information related to health, such as vital signs and a wearer's biochemical changes. The data might be analysed to uncover health trends or to spot diseases before their full-blown symptoms appear. One can even imagine health-insurance companies offering discounts on premiums to people who wear the gadgets, just as car-insurance firms do for drivers whose cars are equipped with wireless devices that track where and when the car is on the road. By that time, the impetus to wear the self-tracking devices will be practical, not simply recreational. But until then, wearing a fitness tracker is a step further than most people are willing to go.  

I’m Kevin Foote, originally from Denver, Colorado, and a proud owner of a fitness-tracking device. You see, I like knowing if I have met my target number of calories burned for the day, all in the name of health and fitness. Do you own one? Let’s trade notes here.

How unplugging can help beat stress and keep people healthy

Stress does not only result from managing difficult situations at home, school, and office. It can also be caused by technology burnout.

Image Source: lessons.tradingacademy.com

Every day, people spend around 11 hours to do many activities online—from following the news to communicating with friends to playing interactive games. These tasks require a vast amount of time and attention, which can drain one’s energy in the long run. Done repetitively on a daily basis, people could become exhausted and unenthusiastic to go outdoors, meet new people, and follow a healthy lifestyle.

Image Source: gadsublilminalhypnosis.blogspot.com

One way to avoid technology burnout is by unplugging or completely turning off the TV, mobile phone, computer, and other digital devices for a couple of hours a day to perform real-world activities.

Unplugging may not be easy but it is possible. Extroverts can start substituting their lost online time by engaging in social activities, like joining a fitness class or dining out with colleagues after work. Introverts, meanwhile, can make themselves busy by jogging or walking out their dogs to a nearby park. Once people are out in the open and become engaged in activities that keep them moving and having fun, they become energized and motivated again.

Image Source: popsugar.com.au

Those who are having a hard time pausing from online activities and following a daily fitness routine can also seek help from a friend, workout buddy, or a personal trainer. Friends and fitness trainers do not just give moral support and a good company, they can also provide genuine advice and fitness plans to follow.  

Kevin R. Foote is a fitness advisor who believes that a physically active lifestyle is important to health and quality of life. Keep updated on the latest fitness news and updates by following him on Twitter.

REPOST: The crucial FDA nutrition label battle you probably don’t know about, but should

Not everyone is convinced on the proposal to tweak the Nutrition Facts label to include the"added sugar" section. Read what other experts say about the changes proposed by the FDA in the article below.

The devil is in the details. (FDA) Image Source: washingtonpost.com

At the beginning of this year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration made an announcement. For the first time in more than a decade, the FDA was mulling over making significant changes to the Nutrition Facts label (pdf) found on just about every food item sitting on grocery store shelves around the nation. More than five months later, the agency is still hearing vehement support from a number of advocacy groups and vicious dissent from several major food associations, and much of it is about one subtle but crucial proposed addition: an "added sugar" label.

The labeling (as pictured and pointed to above), is meant to communicate how much of any given food's sugar content wasn't in the food before it was produced and packaged. The FDA proposed the addition because, simply put, the American diet has become too saturated in sugar, and sugar, as it turns out, is too often added, rather than inherent, in foodstuffs. "On average, Americans eat 16 percent of their daily calories from sugars added during food production," the FDA noted in its news release. That's a sizable chunk we could all do without, or, at least, considerably less of.

Many health experts agree. "Added sugars exert deleterious health effects beyond empty calories," Frank Hu, a nutrition and epidemiology researcher at Harvard Medical School in Boston, said at a public meeting held by the FDA last week.

But not everyone is so convinced. Namely, just about any and every industry and association such a label might negatively impact.

In a letter written on behalf of the American Bakers Association, American Beverage Association, American Frozen Foods Institute, Corn Refiners Association, International Dairy Foods Association and National Confectioners Association last month, the groups reached out to the FDA in what can only be interpreted as an effort to delay the proposed rule change. At the same public meeting held last week, a representative for the American Frozen Food Institute said he believes "certain aspects of the proposal lack some merit, particularly the addition of added sugar.” Andrew Briscoe, the president of the Sugar Association, expressed reluctance about the additional labeling, too. “There is no preponderance of evidence to justify an added sugar label," he said.

The reality is that Big Sugar is likely reeling in remembrance of what the addition of trans fat to labels in 2006 did to the ingredient (it's now virtually non-existent). Evidence of sugar's adverse effects on health is actually fairly preponderant. Several organizations, including the World Health Organization and American Heart Association, have warned against the harms of excess sugar intake, which has been linked to a number of diseases, including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. And Americans, as it happens, have been particularly good about over-consuming the stuff.

Per capita sugar consumption in the U.S. is still more than twice the recommended daily amount.

Image Source: washingtonpost.com

 

Part of that is undoubtedly linked to the country's growing appetite for, well, everything. Americans down almost 500 more calories today than they did 40 years ago.

But part of it is also likely due to the preponderance of extra sugars found in today's food supply, and, perhaps more specifically, the varying and increasing ways in which they're being buried in exhaustive ingredient lists and disguised with technical names like evaporated cane juice, fruit concentrate, glucose, diastatic malt and dextrose. There's sugar in just about everything today, and the vast majority of it is added during food production.

An explicit, quantifiable measure of added sugar would help pack any and all potential for misinformation into a single, easily digestible line on the back of food products. Sure, from an industry perspective, an added sugar by any single, identifiable name might not sell as sweet, but that's for Big Sugar to swallow — not the American populous.

For Kevin Foote, fitness and nutrition specialist, there's no shortcut to a lean and physically fit body. Like this Facebook page for more of his health and fitness advice.

Does keeping fit mean giving up on bacon? Not really

Fats, in the right amount and with the right kind, can fit into a healthy diet. But does that mean bacon doesn't have any place at all in our diet?

Let's tell it like it is: fat makes up a huge part of bacon. Almost half of this processed meat’s fat composition is saturated, and saturated fat has long been known to raise bad cholesterol levels. The American Heart Association thus recommends limiting saturated fat intake to just 13 grams a day on a 2,000-calorie diet.

 

Image Source: wowmuseum.org

Also, bacon, like any other processed meat, can put you at higher risk of certain cancers, especially when it contains large amounts of nitrates.

A wise advice: Try, as much as possible, to eat real fat, the kind that is untransformed by the human hand, like organic butter, extra virgin olive oil, and nut butters; perhaps even bacon straight from the pork belly.

 

Image Source: shockinglydelicious.com

But for the sake of convenience, you can also have bacon straight from the grocery chiller, though in moderation. Three strips, equivalent to nearly 1 ounce of bacon, are enough to tide over a craving. Choose the ones that have less saturated fat and calories per ounce, or try leaner alternatives like turkey bacon. This helpful guide lists the fat and calorie content of some brands.

 

Image Source: todaysparent.com

Also, you might want to rebrand bacon as a condiment instead of your main meal. Bacon lends a strong enough flavor to salads and sautés. Try it with vegetables like asparagus, beet greens, and spinach.

I am Kevin Foote, born and raised in Colorado, and a fan of everything that's good and non-fattening. Subscribe to this blog for more options for healthy eating.