Wearable electronics fiasco
J.S. Hertz is confident that the advertised fitness trackers are just an unnecessary trend that hinders the development of wearable devices for those who really need them. We translated its material, published on Wired.com .
The Internet of Things has become commonplace. We count the steps, track sleep cycles and track more and more activities using applications. But among all these figures and data, common sense is lost. Instead of moving further, the developers literally flooded an already oversaturated segment with their devices that collect a lot of superficial information. The main users they see are young people whose health is not in doubt and not at great risk.
')
This is embarrassing, because the interests of people are ignored: the elderly, the chronically sick, the poor, to whom these technologies would have come in handy. Companies are more interested in helping wealthy clerks to get cubes on their stomachs or run the next 5,000 steps than to figure out the bureaucratic intricacies of the FDA and HIPAA. And this is at a time when there is a real and profitable opportunity to shake up, finally, the ossified health care system and master trillions of dollars from the annual budget.
With Fitbit and Jawbone bracelets on their wrists and looking through the lenses of augmented reality glasses, visitors to the Wearables + Things conference in Washington saw that the industry was in a vicious circle. Performing various exercises on stage, Peter Lee, an inventor who studied biomedical engineering at John Hopkins University, demonstrated a fitness watch that accurately determines and counts the number of push ups and jumps. Nike's chief scientist emphasized the importance of intelligent algorithms for analyzing human performance and was skeptical about the data that smart watches collect: steps, temperature, oxygen in the blood — all this has little to do with sports. Adidas introduced the pulse rate sensor, which is mounted on a special biometric bra. Finally, it became clear that women are already running around with a bracelet around their breasts.
Against this background, the speech of Kabir Kasagud, director of business development for Qualcomm Life was supposed to be a cold shower for technology enthusiasts. By the way, the company produces the very semiconductors that are used in many wearable gadgets. He urged developers to distract from the oversaturated segment of fitness trackers and look at the problems of the medical industry. “It's time to finish with this kindergarten. If you really want to do something, study the FDA. Learn how HIPAA works. This is where an acute lack of innovation is felt. And that's where the money is. ”
Dorothy, a device from iStrategy Labs, which is mounted inside the shoe
But these words did not find a response from the audience. And this is understandable. Who wants to mess with this boring sphere? How to monetize? After all, there are solid prohibitions and restrictions when working with user data! Well, I do not. And in confirmation of this, after a few minutes, the Dorothy gadget from iStrategy Labs was introduced to the scene, which allows you to call the car with the help of Uber by clicking 3 times in heels. By the way, the device has become a real hit at the conference and has already managed to light up on the Good Morning America show.
As of September 30, there were 266 wearable devices (118 of them belong to the category of "fitness"), and another 23 appear on the market before the end of this year. And all young, healthy, educated entrepreneurs develop “unusually useful” applications and gadgets for people just like them. And so everywhere, in Silicon Valley or San Francisco, Austin and MIT. The Internet and social networks developed gradually: first, there were raw technologies, which were admired by geeks and spread throughout the planet. In the Valley believe that wearable devices face the same fate.
But in the pursuit of the dollar, coupled with a lack of understanding of the fact that the development of the health care sector is at hand, such assumptions are doomed. It is worth noting that wearable devices do not take root in the same way as smartphones, for example. More than half of US consumers who purchased activity trackers no longer use devices. A third of them even abandoned the gadget in less than six months.
Blood glucose test. One day in the life of a nurse. Bagnolet, France.
Who will use the device to track health? People with two or more chronic illnesses. According to a Pew foundation survey, 45% of the US adult population suffers from at least one chronic illness. While 40% of adults with one chronic disease and 62% of adults with two chronic illnesses monitor their health, only 19% of healthy US residents monitor their performance. This year, $ 2.8 billion has already been spent on wearable medical devices, and this figure is expected to rise to $ 8.3 billion over the next 5 years. And if you take all the smart watches and bracelets sold this year and multiply their number by 6, it will still be less than $ 6.3 billion, which is spent on the purchase of test strips of glucose in the blood.
People with chronic illnesses cannot afford to give up wearable devices. For them, this is not an attempt to stay in trend, but a way not to be in a hospital bed. But while the developers are thinking more about how to create a furore on the next hackathon, than to create an application or device that is so necessary for many people.
At some point, the question arises: is this situation really due to restrictions in the health sector, or are young entrepreneurs simply unable to create technology for people who are not like themselves? How, for example, an obese diabetic in a wheelchair? Or old women with memory loss? Or her guardian? Or the one who is forced through the city to get to the clinic?
Can innovators challenge aging, disease, and inefficient use of medical budgets? Or their talent is only enough to click three times heels to call Uber?
The Internet of Things has become commonplace. We count the steps, track sleep cycles and track more and more activities using applications. But among all these figures and data, common sense is lost. Instead of moving further, the developers literally flooded an already oversaturated segment with their devices that collect a lot of superficial information. The main users they see are young people whose health is not in doubt and not at great risk.
')
This is embarrassing, because the interests of people are ignored: the elderly, the chronically sick, the poor, to whom these technologies would have come in handy. Companies are more interested in helping wealthy clerks to get cubes on their stomachs or run the next 5,000 steps than to figure out the bureaucratic intricacies of the FDA and HIPAA. And this is at a time when there is a real and profitable opportunity to shake up, finally, the ossified health care system and master trillions of dollars from the annual budget.
With Fitbit and Jawbone bracelets on their wrists and looking through the lenses of augmented reality glasses, visitors to the Wearables + Things conference in Washington saw that the industry was in a vicious circle. Performing various exercises on stage, Peter Lee, an inventor who studied biomedical engineering at John Hopkins University, demonstrated a fitness watch that accurately determines and counts the number of push ups and jumps. Nike's chief scientist emphasized the importance of intelligent algorithms for analyzing human performance and was skeptical about the data that smart watches collect: steps, temperature, oxygen in the blood — all this has little to do with sports. Adidas introduced the pulse rate sensor, which is mounted on a special biometric bra. Finally, it became clear that women are already running around with a bracelet around their breasts.
Against this background, the speech of Kabir Kasagud, director of business development for Qualcomm Life was supposed to be a cold shower for technology enthusiasts. By the way, the company produces the very semiconductors that are used in many wearable gadgets. He urged developers to distract from the oversaturated segment of fitness trackers and look at the problems of the medical industry. “It's time to finish with this kindergarten. If you really want to do something, study the FDA. Learn how HIPAA works. This is where an acute lack of innovation is felt. And that's where the money is. ”
Dorothy, a device from iStrategy Labs, which is mounted inside the shoe
But these words did not find a response from the audience. And this is understandable. Who wants to mess with this boring sphere? How to monetize? After all, there are solid prohibitions and restrictions when working with user data! Well, I do not. And in confirmation of this, after a few minutes, the Dorothy gadget from iStrategy Labs was introduced to the scene, which allows you to call the car with the help of Uber by clicking 3 times in heels. By the way, the device has become a real hit at the conference and has already managed to light up on the Good Morning America show.
As of September 30, there were 266 wearable devices (118 of them belong to the category of "fitness"), and another 23 appear on the market before the end of this year. And all young, healthy, educated entrepreneurs develop “unusually useful” applications and gadgets for people just like them. And so everywhere, in Silicon Valley or San Francisco, Austin and MIT. The Internet and social networks developed gradually: first, there were raw technologies, which were admired by geeks and spread throughout the planet. In the Valley believe that wearable devices face the same fate.
But in the pursuit of the dollar, coupled with a lack of understanding of the fact that the development of the health care sector is at hand, such assumptions are doomed. It is worth noting that wearable devices do not take root in the same way as smartphones, for example. More than half of US consumers who purchased activity trackers no longer use devices. A third of them even abandoned the gadget in less than six months.
Blood glucose test. One day in the life of a nurse. Bagnolet, France.
Who will use the device to track health? People with two or more chronic illnesses. According to a Pew foundation survey, 45% of the US adult population suffers from at least one chronic illness. While 40% of adults with one chronic disease and 62% of adults with two chronic illnesses monitor their health, only 19% of healthy US residents monitor their performance. This year, $ 2.8 billion has already been spent on wearable medical devices, and this figure is expected to rise to $ 8.3 billion over the next 5 years. And if you take all the smart watches and bracelets sold this year and multiply their number by 6, it will still be less than $ 6.3 billion, which is spent on the purchase of test strips of glucose in the blood.
People with chronic illnesses cannot afford to give up wearable devices. For them, this is not an attempt to stay in trend, but a way not to be in a hospital bed. But while the developers are thinking more about how to create a furore on the next hackathon, than to create an application or device that is so necessary for many people.
At some point, the question arises: is this situation really due to restrictions in the health sector, or are young entrepreneurs simply unable to create technology for people who are not like themselves? How, for example, an obese diabetic in a wheelchair? Or old women with memory loss? Or her guardian? Or the one who is forced through the city to get to the clinic?
Can innovators challenge aging, disease, and inefficient use of medical budgets? Or their talent is only enough to click three times heels to call Uber?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/362827/
All Articles