With the rise of the fitness band over the last couple of years, companies now have access to a myriad of data that had previously been manually input into web services and apps. Never before in history have we been able to gather so much human data on a day to day basis. Never before in history have we been able to use that data to learn more about human habits, cultural fitness levels, and human movement.
So what do we do with all that wearable data?
The obvious answer is that we use our personal data to motivate ourselves to push harder towards our fitness goals. We know how fast and how far we’ve gone, now let’s go a little bit farther a little bit faster.
We can also use the data to compare our fitness levels with our friends. We connect via our favorite fitness app and voluntarily share our data so we can see who is doing what. Our competitive nature takes over and, BOOM, we get motivated.
But it doesn’t stop there.
We can use anonymized wearable data to compare our fitness levels to our community, our city, our state, or overall. We can see regional baselines, or national averages and know where we fall.
All that seems like a pretty good use of data. The question then becomes, do we need to draw the line somewhere?
More and more fitness trackers are coming with GPS. Should companies, or government agencies have the right to use that data? Are we voluntarily tracking ourselves for purposes we did not intend?
Forbes recently reported on wearable data being used in the courtroom.
…A law firm in Calgary is working on the first known personal injury case that will use activity data from a Fitbit to help show the effects of an accident on their client.
The young woman in question was injured in an accident four years ago. Back then, Fitbits weren’t even on the market, but given that she was a personal trainer, her lawyers at McLeod Law believe they can say with confidence that she led an active lifestyle. A week from now, they will start processing data from her Fitbit to show that her activity levels are now under a baseline for someone of her age and profession.
In her case, the wearable data should show that her ability to live the life she once lived has been diminished by her accident. That’s a good thing. She can prove her claims are legit, and justice is served. But, if this data can be used in court for good, then it can also be used for evil. Fitness tracker and other wearable data could be used to identify the whereabouts of a person. And, if this is permissible in court, then it is very likely that people will begin tampering with wearable data which means the whole pool of data that these devices were created for is infected, and therefore less reliable.
To be fair,
The lawyers aren’t using Fitbit’s data directly, but pumping it through analytics platform Vivametrica, which uses public research to compare a person’s activity data with that of the general population.
It would seem only a matter of time though before the data is used directly. The next question becomes, can we force someone to wear a fitness tracker to prove, or disprove their claims?
What’s intriguing (and a little creepy) is that cases like Muller’s could open the door to wearable device data being used not just in personal injury claims but in prosecutions. “Insurers will want it as much as plaintiffs will,” says Muller, for assessing sketchy claims.
Insurers wouldn’t be able to force claimants to wear Fitbits as part of an “assessment period,” like Muller’s client, but they could request a formal court order from whoever holds the data to release it to them, says Dr. Rick Hu, co-founder and CEO of Vivametrica. “We would not release the information,” he adds. Insurers could instead request it from a law firm or even from Fitbit directly.
Time will tell how this data is used. The public will surely chime in with their approval or disapproval of how corporations and government agencies can use wearable data. But why wait? Leave a comment below and tell us how you feel about it.
Source [Forbes]