this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
107 points (95.0% liked)
Technology
59300 readers
5543 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Oh my SPO2 is dangerously low, at 82%?"
*adjusts watch to be a bit tighter*
SPO2 back to 98%
So yeah I do monitor it moreso than without, but understanding the limits of the tech, hasn't made me more worried. Bought one to record sleep schedule. Works very well for that.
82 is a bit below dangerous I'd say, especially if the wearer is unconscious.
If the wearer can see that value and understand it, it's probably a hardware failure.
That was my reasoning exactly.
The sensors are decent enough for something that cost less than 50 euro, but clearly there's room to improve.
Good contact is quite fickle if there are any obstructions or even dirt on the skin, but my experience are mostly with the fingertop or earlobe sensors which are quite sensitive due to only using a red led. Does the wrist one use another kind of tech?
It's more to do with me not keeping the wrist strap actually the tightest it would go, because it's annoyingly squeezing then.
Sometimes, on some angles, there will be a bit of space between the sensor and my skin which would explain the bad reading.
Pretty sure the tech is more or less the same tech as in the basic rubber thing that gets put on your finger at hospital. Except those alway used red imo, not green. But idk. I don't really need the SPO2 feature so I don't mind.
Thanks for indulging my curiosity :)
My pleasure.
Yes, I agree.
Which is why I only got one after being declined from a sleep clinic for absurd reasons.
Mine uses a green light, but afaik it's more or less the same as hospital ones. Just cheaper shit. Like how an aeroplane and a paperplane are technically both aircraft. You could study aerodynamics with paper aeroplanes, but it's gonna be much easier if you don't have to resort to that but can actually study the knowledge available to make reasonable choices.
the public healthcare here just plain up denied my referral from a psychiatrist. despite more than 20 years of sleep problems. if I could meet the person who made that decision, I'd have a few strongly selected words to tell them
Understanding the limits of the tech is key - I don't equate the sleep tracking to the quality of the same I'd receive in a sleep lab, but I do value understanding my perception of sleep quality (i.e., totally subjective and rarely valid) vs the partially objective tracking I get from the watch.
I think I responses to the wrong comment, here's the reply:
Yes, I agree.
Which is why I only got one after being declined from a sleep clinic for absurd reasons.
Mine uses a green light, but afaik it's more or less the same as hospital ones. Just cheaper shit. Like how an aeroplane and a paperplane are technically both aircraft. You could study aerodynamics with paper aeroplanes, but it's gonna be much easier if you don't have to resort to that but can actually study the knowledge available to make reasonable choices.
the public healthcare here just plain up denied my referral from a psychiatrist. despite more than 20 years of sleep problems. if I could meet the person who made that decision, I'd have a few strongly selected words to tell them