A recent article in the NY Times technology section had the author "seeing what provided a better workout: a real personal trainer or a personal training app." Obviously I'm biased. As a tech guy, I was rooting for the app! (Weren't expecting that, were you?) And her conclusion in this single-sample unscientific study was indeed that the app was better for her. (Although it didn't match her original thesis: the trainer actually provided the better workout.)
So what gives? For one thing, it wasn't quite the test it purported to be. Since she had a personal trainer at the same time as she was using the app, she benefited from one of the biggest advantages of a trainer: learning how to do exercises correctly. (There are questions about the training plan she was given; the article doesn't provide enough details.)
Up against the trainer was an app called FitStar (never heard of it) plus MyFitnessPal (I've used that one!) for nutritional tracking. (The trainer provided a nutrition plan in spreadsheet format.)
In a nutshell, it came down to this:
- App cheap, trainer expensive ($100/session).
- App convenient, trainer across town. (That's never a good idea.)
- Trainer more motivating, app more convenient.
So she picked the app, which is kind of a no-brainer when the alternative is regular cross-town trips to pricey training sessions. In particular she picked it as a better long-term option, despite saying, "I skipped my workouts when I went on vacation" and citing the statistic about more than a third of people abandoning their fitness devices within a few months.
The FitStar CEO and co-founder did say his app "could also be used alongside a personal trainer’s regimen." That's at least getting closer to our Blended Fitness model where trainer and technology are combined (or "blended") into one integrated program.
But back to the technology.
Fitness apps are very common and often free (or "freemium"). They generally give you various workouts to choose from with some kind of images or videos to show how they should be done. Some of them let you enter what you've done to keep track of it.
The bigger deal these days are "wearables" like the FitBit or the FuelBand. These are mostly fancy-pants pedometers, which is OK if your main objective is just to move more (and in particular, walk).
A newer item is the PUSH (I'm not sure if this is an acronym for something) band. It measures acceleration and can be used to "measure" intensity of exercise by seeing how fast you complete reps. It's an interesting concept, but still doesn't tell you if you're doing the exercise correctly or even if it's an exercise you should be doing.
The latest gadget is the Apple Watch (why isn't it the "iWatch"?) due out in April. In addition to even fancier activity measuring, it also claims to be "giving you real-time stats for a variety of the most popular workouts." I'm not sure what this means. But anyway, it's another example of technology instead of trainer.
So what's better for you? Someday the technology may be available to tell if you're performing movements correctly (that is, in a way that won't lead to injuries or compensations, and will give you the best results for your effort), and to do a reasonable evaluation to determine what exercises you should be doing in the first place (and how much, how fast, etc.) For now, those are things trainers can do best.
But if an app or device can get (and keep) you moving, that's a good thing.
What do you think about fitness tech?
Be seeing you.
-gary