Turns Out the Wrist Might Not Be the Best Place to Track Your Health
Key takeaways
- For as long as I've been covering health and fitness trackers, which is basically since the dawn of the category, they've been synonymous with the wrist: Apple Watch, Fitbit, Garmin, Samsung Galaxy Watch.
- That is, until I reviewed the Whoop band.
- The Whoop appeared like any other wrist tracker, except it had no screen, and its sensor could be placed in different locations to passively measure health data.
For as long as I've been covering health and fitness trackers, which is basically since the dawn of the category, they've been synonymous with the wrist: Apple Watch, Fitbit, Garmin, Samsung Galaxy Watch. Sure, exceptions exist, but most wearables are designed for the wrist, likely for the same reason the pocket watch moved there a century ago: convenience. Nobody really questioned it, least of all me.
That is, until I reviewed the Whoop band.
The Whoop appeared like any other wrist tracker, except it had no screen, and its sensor could be placed in different locations to passively measure health data. After realizing the arm band was more comfortable for sleep, I started exploring other ways to wear it. The same sensor can be worn on your bicep, tucked into a sports bra or even clipped into underwear.