This website is shady as fuck and gave my phone one of those "U HAV VIRUS" ads so they can go straight to hell. Here's the entire story. Next time don't use a shady as network assholes.
Users of FitBit’s Surge and Charge HR, wristband-style activity and heart rate trackers, are suing the company over their display of inaccurate heart rate data.
Recently, researchers at California State Polytechnic University carried out a study to test the reliability of the Fitbit Charge HR and Fitbit Surge fitness trackers by comparing them to hundreds of thousands of heart rate readings to a time-synced electrocardiogram (ECG).
The group of researchers behind the study executed various exercises and activities at different levels of intensity to test the two Fitbit devices at their lowest and full capacities. The researchers discovered that the Charge HR device demonstrated an average heart rate difference of 15.5 bpm while the Surge fitness trackers recorded an average difference of 22.8 bpm.
Thus, researchers at California State Polytechnic University stated that Fitbit trackers are not reliable sources of heart rate data as they tend to display heart rates that are off by great margins, often by 19.2 bpm.
“The PurePulse Trackers do not accurately measure a user’s heart rate, particularly during moderate to high intensity exercise, and cannot be used to provide a meaningful estimate of a user’s heart rate,” explained Edward Jo, PhD and Brett Dolezal, PhD, who led the research.
The company has already been sued numerous times earlier this year for faulty heart rate tracking. Users ranging from professional athletes to casual trainers have expressed their concerns with the unreliable data of Fitbit.
According to a court data submitted in January of 2016, a Fitbit Charge HR tracker displayed a heart rate of 82 bpm, when measured by a personal trainer with professional heart rate monitoring system was actually 160 beats per minute.
“Plaintiff Black’s personal trainer manually recorded her heart rate, which was 160 beats per minute (“bpm”). In stark contrast, her Charge HR indicated her heart rate was only 82 bpm. Plaintiff Black was approaching the maximum recommended heart rate for her age, and if she had continued to rely on her inaccurate PurePulse Tracker, she may well have exceeded it, thereby jeopardizing her health and safety,”read a section of the court document.
The Fitbit team still hasn’t responded yet to the increasing number of complaints from its users. We will continue to update the article as soon as we receive new information directly from the company or our close sources.
Sources: California State Polytechnic University Photograph: Fitbit, Leeroy