So What, Who Cares (vol 10, issue 11) Who has exciting news? I DO.
Hello!
There's an exciting new development in So What, Who Cares. You will still be getting this newsletter on Wednesdays and Fridays, but if you want to read it a tad earlier, you can.
(And you don't even have to time travel, which is fortunate because we all know about the butterfly effect and how, with one wrong move, you're in a diner sitting across from Ashton Kutcher and asking about your alternate lives.)
ANYWAY, here's how you can read this newsletterbefore it pops up in your inbox: Go to the New York Observer, where So What, Who Cares will be running as a column every Wednesday and Friday. The Observer version won't have my awesome Futurama screengrabs or the pop culture recommendations, but maybe that's a tradeoff you're willing to make.
And if you want to keep getting the pop culture recommendations and some personal notes, stay subscribed to the newsletter.
*
Fitness wearables don't help you lose weight -- news that's breaking right as more companies are embracing the idea that good health and lower insurance costs can be linked to wearing the gizmos. A recent NYT Upshot column explains:
A large, well-designed study ... truly teased out the contribution of wearable tech to weight loss programs. Last year, the results of such a study, the IDEA trial, were published.
The trial took place at the University of Pittsburgh between 2010 and 2012, and it involved more than 470 adults between the ages of 18 and 35. All of them were put on a low-calorie diet, had group counseling sessions and were advised to increase their physical activity. Six months into the intervention, all were given telephone counseling sessions, text-message prompts and study materials online.
At that time, though, half were also given wearable tech devices that monitored their activity and connected to a website to help provide feedback. All participants were followed for 18 more months.
At the end of the two years, which is pretty long for a weight loss study, those without access to the wearable technology lost an average of 13 pounds. Those with the wearable tech lost an average of 7.7 pounds.
In other words, people who did not sport wearables lost more weight than those who did not. The link between wearing a fitness-tracking gizmo and become swole, ripped or super-fit? Not supported by the science right now.
This runs directly counter to other fun stats floating around, namely the healthcare analytics firm Springbuk's claim that over a two-year period, employees who opted in to a wearables program cost their employers $1,292 less in insurance expenses than employees in a control group. There's been a sustained push among wearable companies to team up with insurers and employers in an effort to boost their business.
So what? Employers who offer health insurance have already established precedents for linking employee benefits to specific behaviors. At some places, people who smoke pay higher health insurance rates than those who do not. Or people who are overweight pay higher premiums than those who are within a normal BMI. At Safeway grocery chain, they did both. The premise that fitness wearables are linked to better health has been disproven. But there is one possible reason for workers to wear the gadget: Because their insurance rates will rise if they don't.
And there is one possible reason for insurance carriers to request employees wear a wristband: To collect data -- data that may not even be accurate, by the way, and presents real security and privacy risks -- that can be used to justify hiking up insurance rates.
Who cares? People who rely on their employer for access to affordable health insurance. There's not a lot of bargaining room there from the employee's end -- it's a perk, after all -- and if their insurance rates are now predicated on them consenting to wear a device that captures data which could end up jacking up their rates? And studies show the device has little to no impact on acquiring or maintain healthful habits? That's a situation where the only parties who benefit ... make wearables.
*
A little bit of self promotion: You all may or may not know I do podcasts regularly with the Incomparable network -- I co-host Phil and Lisa Ruin the Movies, I host the Flash Flashcast, and I pop up on The Incomparable, especially if there's a Comic Book Club. This month is our membership drive month.
If you join as a member, you get a special feed with exclusive podcasts, you get access to a members-only Slack and a members-only Facebook group, you get fun swag, and you get to make me do stuff. Join now! And if you're already a member, thank you so much for your support.
*
Your pop culture recommendation: Part of the fun of going to Ikea is observing and admiring how very thoroughly engineered the entire retail experience is. (I have a broad definition of "fun.") I enjoy seeing how my path is pushed past bins full of plushy fake-fur pillows or rows of sparkling glass tealight holders; I like observing how the merchandise is grouped to tempt even the most disciplined listmaker into thinking, "So long as I'm here for the napkins, why not get that cute laminated tray? It's only five dollars."
So reading Horrorstör: A Novel by Grady Hendrix this past weekend was a treat, because Hendrix has taken the hyperengineered atmosphere of a nordic big-box store and the brand-washing, brain-washing nature of work when you're ordered to provide customers with an "experience" -- then added a Lovecraftian element.
This is a fast, funny read with just enough creepy-crawly in it to make a reader think twice before looking in any laminate wardrobes at their local flat-pack furniture store.
*