Wearables Are Great, But Won't Make America Healthy Again

President Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, approved last week by a sleep-deprived U.S. Congress, slashes healthcare spending and potentially impacts Medicaid coverage for millions of Americans – but Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. insists he’s got other ways to Make America Healthy Again.

His “vision,” he told members of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy Committee during a hearing last month, is that “every American is wearing a wearable within four years.”

Kennedy was referring to wearable devices – watches, rings and wristbands – that not only track the number of steps you take each day, but can also monitor biometrics like heart rate, blood oxygen levels, skin temperature, calories burned and sleep quality. That data is then uploaded to your phone and into cloud-based companion apps for analysis, personalized insights and goal-setting purposes.

The secretary’s proposal is surprising – not because it’s a bad idea, but because in 2020, he promoted a conspiracy theory that COVID vaccines were developed to track and control people’s behavior via injected microchips. He seems less concerned about privacy threats now, arguing that biofeedback can help consumers make better lifestyle decisions and put them in control of their health.

He’s all in – and even promised lawmakers in his June 24 Congressional testimony that his department will soon “launch one of the biggest advertising campaigns in HHS history to encourage Americans to use wearables.” Kennedy also touted the use of glucose‑monitoring devices, the kind typically used by diabetics.

Share prices of U.S. medical-device companies surged that afternoon. Pharmaceutical company investors, on the other hand, probably weren’t as enthused when Kennedy quipped, “You know, the Ozempic is costing $1,300 a month … if you can achieve the same thing with an $80 wearable, it’s a lot better for the American people.”

No argument there. But smartwatches and other wearable tech can cost several times that $80 price – and require expensive annual subscriptions that might be beyond the reach of the low-income Americans at highest risk for diabetes, heart disease and certain cancers.

While knowing your glucose levels could save your life if you have diabetes, doctors say that watching your blood sugar fluctuate throughout the day is pointless if you don’t have diabetes – and expensive, at an average cost of $2,400 per year.

Wearables are cheaper than GLP-1s and anything is cheaper than treating chronic Disease. But do we need an expensive watch to tell us that eating cupcakes, lying on the couch all day and staying up late can take a health toll?

Some studies have found that wearables can empower patients by helping to diagnose emergent conditions, change behaviors for the better and promote self-monitoring. Gamification might get us to go to bed a few minutes earlier, motivate us to hit those 10,000 daily steps or close those activity rings.

But so far, researchers haven’t found consistent improvements in health outcomes. Health experts also worry that eating disorders, exercise addiction and anxiety can be aggravated when consumers drown in endless streams of biometric data that can easily be misinterpreted and might be inaccurate.

And if too much health data sends your heart rate soaring, imagine what can happen if your most intimate information lands in the wrong hands.

Health-tech companies like Apple, Oura, Whoop and dozens of startups jumping into the lucrative wearables market aren’t healthcare providers, so they aren’t governed by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. They play by their own rules, detailed in voluminous fine-print terms and conditions that disclaim liability, put the onus of data protection on the consumer and in some cases cap damages at $100.

Apple watches are ubiquitous, virtually every weekend warrior wears a Garmin watch and Oura says they’ve sold more than 2.5 million rings. That regularly updated treasure trove of data is just sitting in the cloud waiting for hackers and, perhaps one day, insurance company underwriters, credit bureaus and prospective employers who could use the information to make decisions that fundamentally alter people’s lives.

If data is the new currency, genetic data and health data represent the most precious commodities in this emerging economy.

The DNA information of 15 million Americans who used 23andMe’s genetic-testing services was recently put up for auction, and for a cool $305 million will stay with a nonprofit spinoff run by the bankrupt company’s founder. Remember, hackers hit 23andMe in 2023 and gained access to personal information from about 6.9 million profiles.

Meanwhile, San Francisco-based Strava – with 150 million users worldwide – gained some unwanted international attention this week after security personnel inadvertently revealed sensitive locations of political figures by uploading their runs and bike rides into the public fitness-tracking app.

Kennedy’ modern-day push is reminiscent of the nationwide fitness campaign his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, championed in 1962 as part of a broader Cold-War era emphasis on public health that included immunizations, disease control and access to healthcare through the 1965 creation of Medicaid. America wasn’t any healthier then – but at least we knew that we shouldn’t be left to our own devices.

A version of this article first appeared on InnovateLI.