Wearable technology, with its flashy dashboards and real-time metrics, promises a utopia of self-knowledge. However, the article “A Framework to Make Better Use of Wearables Data” cracks open the myth of continuous tracking as an unequivocal good. The lure of data can often become a labyrinth, trapping you in an endless cycle of quantification without meaningful context.
Here’s a hard truth: Optical technology, the backbone of most wearables, isn’t as reliable as we’d like to think. This becomes glaringly apparent when our bodies are in motion. Suddenly, the heart rate monitor acts like a compass in the Bermuda Triangle—wayward, and highly prone to error. For me, this underlines the critical importance of context and timing when interpreting data.
So, why the fascination with 24/7 monitoring? Is it genuinely beneficial, or is it a sleight of hand to keep us engaged with the device? Data for the sake of data is an empty endeavor. It’s like obsessing over the metrics of your business without understanding what those numbers actually mean for its health and growth. The notion that wearables offer a holistic view of our wellbeing is an attractive but misleading narrative.
The article recommends a more mindful approach—spot checks in the morning or continuous monitoring only during sleep. This method may not shower you with data, but what you do collect is likely more useful. Why? Because it’s data that can be meaningfully interpreted.
Let’s recalibrate our perspective on wearable tech. Continual monitoring isn’t inherently useful; meaningful data is. Just like in entrepreneurship, it’s not about having all the data but knowing which data matters. It’s about precision, not abundance.
Read more at: A framework to make better use of Wearables data
Go one level up : Data MOC You may also be interested in: The problem with tracking and wearables