Some flaunt it, some crave it and others are talking about it. While some have started taking the stairs and are walking between office breaks, others walk the extra mile while returning home to meet the 10,000-step target.
But who decides the 10,000 steps? Is it even the right number? And is it the correct number for all? It will probably be a number that was fit into the application. For quite some time now, manufacturers are trying to prove that fitness devices promote weight loss. However, devices and health apps that ask users to walk 10,000 steps a day could be doing more harm than good, scientists have warned.
Lured by the promises of weight loss, heart and activity monitoring, millions are buying fitness trackers every year. But, Dr Greg Hager, an expert in computer sciences at Johns Hopkins University, said there is no real evidence that these apps and devices are useful. One-size-for-all fitness regime can’t suit all and this could be harmful in the long run, he says.
The 10,000-step system for all was based on just one Japanese study from the 1960s. It can’t be relevant even today. Then why is it even important?
Delhi-based cardiologist Dr Ashwani Mehta said, “Phone applications may be useful in managing ailments, both physical and psychological, but unfortunately manufacturers have missed out on the designing and testing process in the race for profit making.”
Also, an elderly person is not capable of completing 10,000 steps everyday. What should he do then?
“The number of steps a person should walk everyday, mostly depends upon the person’s BMI. Over exertion can harm a person. Also, people with heart ailments should gradually increase the number of steps walked,” Dr Mehta added.
Fitbits and other wrist-worn fitness devices promise to keep track of your heart rate, but a recent research has suggested that they are less accurate than thought during certain exercises.
“If you want to know your accurate heart rate while exercising—either because you are training for a marathon or have safe heart rate limits set by your doctor—don’t rely on wrist-worn monitors as they are less accurate than the standard chest strap,” Dr Marc Gillinov said in an American College of Cardiology study.
In the study, the heart rates on the wrist-worn devices were compared to those from a continuous 4-lead electrocardiogram (EKG) and a chest strap monitor. Like an EKG, the chest strap measures electrical activity of the heart.
Depending on the type of activity, the wrist devices were up to 34 beats a minute off. The wrist trackers could either overestimate or underestimate heart rate, said Gillinov, who is a heart valve research, thoracic and cardiovascular surgery expert.
Most wrist devices gave acceptable readings during treadmill activity, but were inaccurate while bicycling, the study revealed.