Study shows less weight loss with wearable technology than without

[Dominique]

New study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA):

Effect of Wearable Technology Combined With a Lifestyle Intervention on Long-term Weight Loss

"Conclusions and Relevance: Among young adults with a BMI between 25 and less than 40, the addition of a wearable technology device to a standard behavioral intervention resulted in less weight loss over 24 months. Devices that monitor and provide feedback on physical activity may not offer an advantage over standard behavioral weight loss approaches."

Bummer 😉

[wmchapman]

That's because the folks in their study didn't have @CallieM as a cheerleader.

For wearables to work you need team play, most people lose interest solo.

Just my opinion, I'd like the study redone with group competition as the centerpiece.

Secret sauce of weight loss.

[BartLin]

Edited due to actually reading some of the study:

Changing your body whether it be to lose fat or gain muscle, etc is not rocket science. It's all about changing your habits. And if you are trying to lose weight but you're not working on permanent healthy habits then you are doing something very wrong, like a yo-yo diet.

So, one question is what does wearable technology do to help you change your habits? Nothing really. At least I find this to be true for me. I use this technology out of personal iterest more than anything else. I find it interesting to see that I hiked 140 km through the mountains in a month, but that doesn't change my behaviour nor does it motivate me in any way.

So, the next question is does wearable technology do anything that would discourage weight loss? I think it  can. For instance, it can create bad habits such as relying heavily on "calories in vs calories out". That was just bad science in the 1970s and it's still bad science now. That's why you have so many dissapointed people saying things like "I'm in a 500 calorie deficit but I'm still not losing weight! What's wrong?" What's wrong is calorie counting doesn't work well. It's very inacurate. I'll make a quote here from someone far more educated on the subject than me: "I think the notion of “calories in vs. calories out” is ridiculous." Source: https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/ 

Finaly, let's think about motivation. What technology does is it exports a lot of the effort required to do something outside of you. My watch can count my calories spent, my caloric intake, etc. That actually in and of itself is enough to affect motivation. For example, you can now say "my watch said I was in a caloric deficit but I didn't lose weight. It's the watches fault."  Now you've shifted accountability from inside of yourself to something outside of yourself and unfortunately motivation is created when you feel personally (internally) accountable for your success or failure. 

Just thinking out loud. I haven't read the whole article yet.

[Dominique]

I understand hard work, willpower etc. are required, but why would people who don’t use a tool such as an activity tracker be working harder, have more willpower etc. that people using a tool?

[Choice]

Came here to paste the same study.  Fascinating conclusion they reached.  Many hypothesis are being thrown around to explain it.

I can speak from experience that a pal of mine will consume more food (and beer!) as a reward once he's hit a certain threshold.  I remarked that the beer alone was more calories than he just burned, but he just shrugged it off.

If he didn't have something telling him how much he'd just burned, he'd be less likely to have that beer.  I wonder how many people work on such a reward system...

[wmchapman]

interesting @Choice

humans are odd creatures; self reward even if self defeating if someone/thing is patting you on the back. Good observation. 

[Ukase]

First, thanks for sharing the article. 

Second - I'm not at all surprised. Any weight I've lost has been in spite of the Fitbit, not because of it. It's too easy to overcount energy burned, whereas I have a tendency to undercount calories when I'm not measuring/weighing things out. But, that's just me. 

[JamieS_Wisco]

I was listening to this on the radio on my way to work as well.  Bear in mind that I haven't had time to research the full article.  But from what they said on the radio, it gives some a false sence of doing well.  As in, someone that may do many arm movments but may not actually getting as many steps as they might think.  Example: a person who may work at a cash register, moving their arms a lot but not actually moving their body. 

I think we all know this is one tool that we use to either get or stay on track.  It is not the end all and be all, as we all stress diet and other factors.

Looking at this, I think it says that both groups were given the same couciling at the beginning and after 6 months one group was reduced to self- monitoring via wearable technology.  I think it is easy to get tripped up if one is not holding themselves accountable nor do they have a support network or person who is holding them accountable.

Interesting information though.

[A_Lurker]

It doesn't surprise me either.  Lots of people reward themselves for good behaviour.  In other words, I worked out, or hit X number of steps, so I can have that extra piece of pizza.  It's been a good tool for me, but I can see it giving some overconfidence.  Lots of people look at steps without understanding it's just a number.  Same with me, who looks at calories burned.  Again, it's just a number.  You can take the data and use it, or just ignore it.

ETA: although the results may be statistically significant, the average weight loss was 3.5kg and 5.9kg.  Kind of sad over a 24 month period.  I may not be finished at the 24 month mark, but I'm determined not to be that little difference from my starting weight.

[emili]

This was broadcast on our local news station yesterday or the day before. Towards the end, the reporter said that people just used the tracker not the data that the tracker gives you like calories in, out, HR. So yes, if you are only paying attention to steps and eating to celebrate of course you won't lose weight. I get studies are needed and its important to have all sides so one can make an informed decision, but I don't know why some go to such great lengths to hate on something that actually helps you and keeps you informed about your own habits. No tracker is going to lose weight for you. But, its going to give you a very clear picture of what you do, how you do it and what's missing. You still have to do the work. Or maybe I am just grumpy and ready for bed.

[HeyJules45]

Here's the thing about weight loss and health. The calories you put into your body are more important than the calories you burn off. This is where Fitbit could improve matters. Most people overindulge in carbs, sugar, and cholesterol-laden foods. If you can see how much of these deadly items you have ingested each day, you will cut down on them and lose weight. I lost three kilos in 8 weeks by cutting down on carbs alone.

Fitbit's Food Report includes carbs but omits cholesterol and sugar. We need to see these figures.

[BartLin]

I agee about the carbs and sugar. I too lost a lot of weight, 17 kg, by sharply cutting back on carbs.

I'll quote a doctor about the cholesterol: "the effects of cholesterol-rich foods on blood cholesterol are small and clinically insignificant" and "dietary cholesterol actually reduces the body's production of cholesterol."

Now that second quote is important because the cholesterol in your body is actually produced by your liver and doesn't come from the food you eat. You don't lower your cholesterol by eating less cholesterol. Besides, regardless of how much cholestorol has been villainized it plays an important role in your body. Your hormones are produced from cholesterol as is vitamin d. Your brain is comprised of 70% fat and it doesn't work efficiently when your cholesterol is too low. Again, quoting science. This is not just opinion.

[ActiveMike]

What disappoints me most about this report is how the media have misrepresented the study, some even suggesting that a wearable device can make you fatter.  Clearly a ridiculous statement to make. A wearable device can neither make you fatter nor thinner.  Weight loss will be something that is up to the individual, by choice or the circumstances in which they find themselves.  I do find it sad that the press will have deterred some people from investing in a piece of technology which they could have benefitted.

During the interviews that I listened to, the authors readily admitted that there could be many reasons why the weight loss difference occured between the two groups. They did not know for sure but one suggestion was that a wearbale device might be most effective to those already taking an interest in their own health and wellbeing and thus already motivated to use the data the device provides. The trial group may not have contained enough of these types of individual. It is only one study of a small sample group.

That said I would agree that for me my FitBit Blaze is not a weight loss device instead it is a fitness tracker so that I can log and monitor trends over time.  It is the App that has far more useful functions in terms of my weight loss program.

I take the point about the inaccuracies in calorie counting but I have yet to learn of a better model. Indeed nearly all weight loss programs are based on the CICO model.  Furthermore, technology and science have made plenty of improvements in recent years in the calorie counts of foods, I'm sure advances will continue as knowledge increases. 

I am content to work with the margins of error and then make the necessary adjustments either to my intake or activity.  What I am quite certain of is that these devices will increase in popularity as long as consumers continue to invest in them.  Already there is talk about linking the data from wearables to  patients health records in doctors surgeries for example as reported here in a proposal by the UK National Health Service.

Media reports like this offer little to the overall benefits of such technology in my view.

[emili]

Mike, I agree with you completely.

[Choice]

Media reporting on anything remotely scientific has been a gong show for decades.

The study is interesting, and begs further research.  I don't think they set out to hate on Fitbit et al., just to measure their effectiveness.

For me (n=1), I found switching to a modified Paleo diet did far more for me in regards to weight loss than measuring CICO...

[tractorlegs]

Studies, studies, studies lol  ------- I swear I can go on the internet and find a "study" or a "legitimate" source to prove anything. So what if there's a study that shows trackers are ineffective? There's thousands+ of us that show the opposite. I'm not losing any sleep over this. 

I like this post from @Choice--

---

@Choice wrote:

Media reporting on anything remotely scientific has been a gong show for decades.

[Mukluk4]

Activity trackers are really used as a crutch.  The intention should be to create new habits.  

To test your journey, you should be able to leave the fitbit on the shelf for a month and still see the same progress that you had before.  I used to track everything and now I'm to a point where I just need the daily summary of activity.  My hope is by the time this one ultimately dies, I won't need another.

[A_Lurker]

@Mukluk4 - I have mixed emotions about what you suggest.  Some people will be able to fall into a natural rhythm, others not so much.  I'm willing to say that I need that information.  Oh, I certainly know the difference between a 2500 calorie burn day and a 4500 calorie burn day, but I'm not sure even after 6+ months of tracking that I can tell the difference between say 3000 and 3500.  I could pretty much mentally tally my food, checking newly cooked recipes only.  However, again, not sure I'm precise enough to do it that way for weight loss.

Now, a couple of years from now when I'm at a goal weight and maintaining, could I ditch the tracker and the logging foods and maintain.  Probably.  Will I?  Probably not.

ETA: This may be because I have 50 years of bad habits to break, and too many fad yoyo diet experiences.  YMMV

[ActiveMike]

---

@BartLin wrote:

So, the next question is does wearable technology do anything that would discourage weight loss? I think it  can. For instance, it can create bad habits such as relying heavily on "calories in vs calories out". That was just bad science in the 1970s and it's still bad science now. That's why you have so many dissapointed people saying things like "I'm in a 500 calorie deficit but I'm still not losing weight! What's wrong?" What's wrong is calorie counting doesn't work well. It's very inacurate. I'll make a quote here from someone far more educated on the subject than me: "I think the notion of “calories in vs. calories out” is ridiculous." Source: https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/ 

---

Thats quite an interesting article Bart but again mistitled in the URL the actual title is:

"Why “Calories in, Calories Out” Doesn’t Tell The Whole Story".  Which is a more accurate description of its content and aim.  Not to debunk calorie counting but instead to explain that it is more complex picture. Someone who was skim reading would have jumped to the wrong conclusion from the url title in the same ways as newspapers reporting weight loss with wearable technology.  

To quote the summary to the calorie counting article: "It is a drastic oversimplification that doesn’t account for the complex metabolic pathways that different foods go through, or the effects that foods have on our brain and hormones."

Agreed, but the general population needs a weight management system that helps them take control of their diet.  Since most of the population are not blessed with the intellect of a scientist or mathematician then a simple counting model is a good start and one which wearable technology can help.

The point raised about the negative effects of certain food types is currently topical at the moment especially in the fight against obesity.  What seems to be apparent, from media reports, I am no expert by the way, is the negative effects of refined sugars.  Again perhaps this is an area where wearable technology can help in the future by alerting end users to high sugar content foods and when consumptions levels are exceeded.  Not difficult to do even now.

It does astound me though that the very food we are being sold is so harmful and food manufacturers need to respond very quickly.  People really should not have to struggle with this.

[GershonSurge]

A more accurate title might have been "Lifestyle Intervention has no Significant Effect on Weight Loss."

Neither group showed impressive weight loss even after two years.