Escape Velocity
Why Data May Not Help You Diet
In the beginning, there was the pedometer. Bulky, ugly, their existence served a single purpose: to count. Onward, upward, forever forward in time and space, it was a simple technology that literally embodied the march of progress. As they gained popularity, pedometers, and the data they produced, were hailed as a leap forward, a technology that could curb the health risks of a sedentary lifestyle. With a standardized call set for 10,000 steps a day, those armed with the crude devices could step not only in a new direction, but to a new lifestyle.
Personal tracking has come a long way since then. Smarter, smaller wearable computers seem poised to usher in a new frontier. With a smartphone and a bracelet, the promise goes, individual potential can be unlocked, and greatness achieved. Run farther, eat healthier, sleep better. A holistic system with the body at its core, built to achieve a single end: live longer. By soaking up the data that once slipped by in the minutia of daily life, the Self, quantified, could be fully redesigned. Healthier habits formed in the rubble of the old routine. But achieving success in weight loss requires more than analyzing digits in a spreadsheet. Though they are sold as the future of health, wearable fitness trackers are still a stopgap, a half-measure that focuses on only a part of the problem they are trying to solve. The solution to sustainable health is less about the data shared between devices than the informed discourse between people.
It’s no wonder the market for fitness trackers like bracelets and belt clips will explode in 2014. Relatively cheap and packed with potential, they’re the perfect accessory for anyone’s smartphone. Nike, Jawbone, Adidas and others have all released devices in various styles and flavours, hoping to corner the emerging market. And, of course, ever-lurking in the shadows is Apple, rumoured to be waiting for the right time to release a companion device for iOS to compliment that new M7 co-processor. All the while, people continue to snap up more trackers in hopes of finally slimming down and getting fit. It will take a master stroke of ingenuity to crack this problem, a problem that, much like the devices sent to fight it, was born of rapid technological innovation.
Food is not what it used to be. From the assembly line-like construction of fast food hamburgers to tinkering with the genes of seeds, eating isn’t so much a necessity but another modern day metric. Dinner is no longer a family ritual over which parents and siblings bond, but the inevitable conclusion of a complex system, a web of relationships spanning continents and companies, culminating in a meal being served, consumed and, importantly, enjoyed. Most of this is hidden from view, of course. For some lone individual in a remote corner of the first world, sustenance is a fleeting thing, dealt with in the moment. But it is at that final stage, the enjoyment of the steak or pie or pear, where the scales are significantly tipped. Behind the food we eat there is a war going on. The players are multinational corporations, with armies of scientists and advertisers, who battle not only for control of your taste buds, but for your brain’s very chemistry.
It’s called the “bliss point,” and it is the end result of an equation. After decades of research, the concept, pioneered by Dr. Howard Moskowitz, spells out a methodology for creating foods that are truly irresistible. By finding the perfect combination of certain ingredients, like sugar, salt and fat, nearly anything from chips and pop to tomato sauce can be made to trigger a craving on the tongue and in the mind, driving a person to overindulge. Michael Moss, who interviewed Moskowitz in an article for The New York Times Magazine, described the painstaking detail that goes into making foods taste just so.
“In the process of product optimization, food engineers alter a litany of variables with the sole intent of finding the most perfect version (or versions) of a product. Ordinary consumers are paid to spend hours sitting in rooms where they touch, feel, sip, smell, swirl and taste whatever product is in question. Their opinions are dumped into a computer, and the data are sifted and sorted through a statistical method called conjoint analysis, which determines what features will be most attractive to consumers.”
Much of the food found on store shelves owe their signature flavour to a concoction of ingredients most can barely pronounce let alone understand. But those formulas, according to such exhaustive testing, were chosen because they drive the taste buds wild. When a potato chip brand says you can’t eat just one, it’s not just a marketing slogan, but scientific fact.
Finally, Moskowitz himself explains what this avalanche of data means for the company behind the food, as well as the people eating it.
“‘The mathematical model maps out the ingredients to the sensory perceptions these ingredients create,’ he told me, ‘so I can just dial a new product. This is the engineering approach.’”
An invisible, slick machine exists behind the scenes, built solely to crunch the numbers that make up your meal, determined to uncover what makes you tick, snack, and reach for more. No wonder then that people have constant cravings for junk food and obesity rates continue to skyrocket. Only another fighting force, equally formidable in the ways of data collection, could hope to best it. This is what the new generation of wearable trackers hopes to be, the body armour that gives the wearer the intelligence to fight against bad food and bad judgment.
The step counters of yesterday no longer cut it. The data provided by the devices of today aim to go far deeper, pinpointing the affects of every nutritional decision. In addition to tracking steps taken and calories burned, the new Nike FuelBand SE, for example, also encourages wearers to move for a certain amount every 60 minutes to “win the hour.” Small gains for bigger results. Jawbone’s UP and the Fitbit Force bands go a step further, combining exercise data with meal and sleep tracking to provide a snapshot of health that can extend over weeks, months, or even years. With an at-a-glance view of one’s health, the wearer should be inclined to make better choices about food, sleep and exercise. Approaching your calorie limit for the day? Skip the cookie break. Only a few points shy of a new record for calories burned? Go for a quick jog around the block. Once the day’s goals have been hit, post the progress to the web to share the achievement with friends. Health made simple.
If only it were that easy. A successful campaign for better health requires three things: diet, exercise and communication. The first two are obvious, but they are also contingent on the third element. By letting the people around you know about your efforts, they are much more inclined to lend their support. From extending congratulations for an early morning jog to not offering up a sugary snack at the office, distributing the fitness burden amongst friends and colleagues means a greater chance for success. This is where the new age of wearable fitness trackers fail. There is a danger in falling into a glamour trap, relying too much on the technology knowing what’s best. The relationship is not an equal one between partners, but one of cold mechanics that simply dictates. Calories consumed, steps taken, hours slept — these devices emphasize short-term gains in isolation, and then try to offload the most important aspect of fitness, the communication, to social networks. Rather than create a system that strengthens the wearer’s resolve to get healthy, these devices create the illusion of progress, and punish mistakes or moments of weakness with bright red warnings, a glaring indication of failure. Without the constant reinforcement of a real-world social network, it becomes easy to slide back into familiar habits. One more cookie, one more serving. Weak ties masquerading as strong bonds.
The true formula for success is not easy, but it is simple. With or without a Bluetooth-connected band on the wrist, a person must create a one-to-one connection with family, friends, peers and, yes, the self to achieve the goal. It is only through such dedication and determination that one can have the confidence to fight off the perils and pitfalls that spring up at every occasion, that line every grocery store aisle, and reach the momentum necessary to escape the reach of the foods and habits that pose a risk to one’s health. Technology alone is not enough. Indeed, it has not yet mastered the task, though people have and continue to adjust their habits without knowing the exact number of steps taken that day.
Though they have evolved in form and function since the lowly pedometer, the devices of today are far from being independently effective in fighting off the onslaught of data-driven temptation that people face every day. Until they become truly smart, integrated completely not only with our phones but our selves and the people around us, wearable fitness devices will continue to be an illusionary crutch, a placebo, the ghost of progress. Electrons to ashes, data to dust.
This article was origially published in Issue #16 of The Loop Magazine.
