Wearables

Two years ago, at Churchill Downs, home of the Kentucky Derby, several racehorses died during the springtime meets or suffered severe injuries that caused them to be euthanized. This sudden occurrence was an eight-fold increase in racehorse mortality, where these horses were all previously healthy and fit.

What was the difference that year?

All the horses were fitted with the STRIDESafe device, about the size of an iPhone, under the saddle. Intended to monitor the horse’s movements, it emits 2400 pulses of radio frequency [RF] through the body of the horse that communicates both with an implanted RFID chip inside the horse’s neck and with global positioning satellites.

The STRIDESafe device is still in use from what I can tell, and it seems that few have called it out as the cause of the fatalities, despite it being the only new factor in the equation.

When HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. announced a campaign to encourage all Americans to use wearables to track health metrics, I connected these two things and decided to investigate further.

What are wearables? These devices are an assortment of bands, watches, rings, and clothing that contain technology to monitor the human body.

Most common are smart watches, fitness trackers, sports watches, smart jewelry, and smart clothing.

Their capabilities will vary, but common features are monitoring steps, sleep quality, walking steadiness, calorie expenditure, menstrual cycles, respiratory rate, heart rate, blood oxygen levels, blood pressure, exercise, and temperature.

Other features can include health metrics such as cardiovascular, neurological, dermatology, nutrition, reproductive, respiratory, and psychiatric.

These seem like helpful aspects. Are there any downsides?

When people rely on a device to inform them, there is always the risk of dependency and inaccuracy.

In seeking validation and success, it could contribute to obsessive behavior and perfectionism.

Most concerning is the reported inaccuracy regarding heart monitoring and exercising heart rate. The wearable cannot detect heart attacks, blood clots, strokes, or other heart conditions, yet the device may cause false alarms.

One study found that the fitness tracker could cause anxiety around food or sabotage weight loss efforts because the progress metrics were inflated. In others, the users experienced a higher rate of eating disorders.

The wearables can lead to decreased physical activity by encouraging the user to sit still and use the device, instead of engaging in physical activity.

People can get overwhelmed with the continual flow of information about heart, sleep, weight, and fitness – which can lead to obsessive behaviors.

More tangible side effects are skin irritation and allergic reaction, sleep disruption from notifications and buzzing, eye fatigue and headaches from blue light.

The epidermal layer of skin presents a challenge for data collection, since it protects the underlying softer tissue from ultraviolet radiation.

The resistance of the skin also adapts to the external frequency loads as needed.

This inherent protective structure of the skin creates a barrier between the wearable sensors and the internal systems and functions.

Biosensing is impossible without overcoming this obstacle.

Any self-calibration of wearable devices poses a challenge because of the unique factors for each person, such as diet, health, family history, etc.  Thus, early symptoms for disease diagnostics will vary accordingly.

Researchers suggest that wearable devices incorporate a level of machine learning technology for data analysis.

More concerning are the effects of long-term exposure to EMF [electromagnetic frequency] radiation.

These devices are intended for wearing 24/7, although it is probably a good idea to limit your exposure time, especially at night.

The research is mixed regarding the true health impacts of EMFs, with some studies suggesting that prolonged exposure could disrupt biological systems.

These effects include headaches, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. With long-term exposure, some results indicate greater risks of cancer, especially brain tumors.

All of this is something to consider for devices that continuously emit radio frequency radiation [RF] into the body through direct contact with the skin.

The wearable devices store and/or transmit lots of data – your private health care data. We must ask where this data is going and who has access to it.

In addition, one of the things the wearables can monitor is your location.

The company Secure Ideas is a security testing firm, and their CEO Kevin Johnson questions the government’s ability to protect this data, given a major security breach in 2018 [involving the Strava fitness app and soldiers’ locations at military bases]. 

He states that there are significant security issues with wearable devices, based on his and other companies’ testing of this technology. There are security lapses in the hardware and the software, where hackers can access both health care data and other personal data.

The CEO of Parameter Security, David Chronister, echoes these concerns, stating that no device or platform is completely secure… attackers often attack the backend systems, such as cloud servers, via compromised employee credentials or software vulnerabilities. Devices that rely on Bluetooth or Wi-Fi can also be exploited.

Health data from wearable devices is not protected like medical records, i.e., it is not protected under HIPAA [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996].

The following link is to the HHS Cybersecurity Program HC3 Intelligence Briefing on Wearable Device Security from March 2020 along with many supporting references. It's worth a look.

hc3-intelligence-briefing-wearable-device-security.pdf 

What does the future hold?

While there will be a push in the next few years for people to adopt the use of wearables, it is not mandatory. Yet.

Do most people require a monitoring device to know how to have healthy habits? My guess is no. What do you think?

Could this technology evolve from wearable devices to body implants down the road?

Implantable technology has long been in the works, and not just for healthcare monitoring.

A CNET article from 2016 reported that the mobile phone of the future will be implanted in your head. Microsoft founder Bill Gates has invested in electronic tattoo technology as a replacement for handheld phones. Elon Musk envisions Neuralink brain implants.

Either way it is merging humans and machines.

It is the future unless we say no.