Health Secretary Wants Every American To Be Sporting a Wearable Within Four Years (gizmodo.com) 371
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a major federal campaign to promote wearable health tech, aiming for every American to adopt a device within four years as part of a broader effort to "Make America Healthy Again." Gizmodo reports: RFK Jr. announced the initiative Tuesday afternoon during a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee meeting to discuss the HHS' budget request for the upcoming fiscal year. In response to a question from representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) about wearables, Kennedy revealed that HHS will soon conduct one of the agency's largest ever advertising campaigns to promote their use. He added that in his ideal future, every American will be donning a wearable within the next four years. "It's a key part of our mission to Make America Healthy Again," RFK Jr. stated in an X post following the question.
You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
...would make Americans healthy?
Vaccinations.
Re: (Score:2)
When you're dead, you don't have to worry about getting sick.
Re: (Score:2)
This only accelerates methane production, which is a far worse greenhouse gas.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
...would make Americans healthy?
Single payer healthcare.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Informative)
Taxes, i imagine we could have much better coverage without spending way more money, the first question to ask is where is the money going, i mean, how can we say that when the health care costs look like this?
Per capita:
United States: $12,555
Switzerland: $8,049
Germany: $8,011
Austria: $7,275
Netherlands: $6,729
France: $6,630
Belgium: $6,600
Sweden: $6,438
Australia: $6,372
Canada: $6,319
United Kingdom: $5,493
Japan: $5,251
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Interesting)
Brit in America here:
Only anecdotally, but while Brits love to complain about the quality of NHS healthcare, American healthcare has always been worse in my experience. Doctors are lousier. Waiting lists are absurd (9 months to register with a new doctor!) The forced rationing of healthcare by cost resulting in a reluctance to even use it until it's too late.
The reality is American healthcare is subpar. It has some positives, you can get treatment for a lot of obscure conditions you can't anywhere else in the world, but something as simple as a bone infection can result in months of expensive, poor, wrong headed doctors pretending the symptoms are within their ballpark and pocketing the money as a result rather than referring to a doctor that can help.
I never experienced anything remotely as terrible as in the UK despite all the complaints. People complain in the UK because it's actually effective, politicians know they're on the hook if a constituent cannot get healthcare, so they do something about it.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Interesting)
Companies currently pay for health insurance for their employees. If you tax employers then most people won't notice the change. That's effectively how it works in Europe: technically part of the social security payment may be paid by the employer and part by the employee, but it's deducted at source. Since the point of the single payer system is that a monopoly has a strong bargaining position, the expectation is that it would be cheaper than the current system.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Interesting)
A big reason why health care is more expensive in the USA than in other nations is because the USA has a for-profit healthcare model. That means that the US healthcare consumer isn't only paying for actual healthcare, he is also paying for:
- "Increasing shareholder value" (read: funneling as much money as possible from sick people to Wall Street investment bros)
- Huge salaries for CEOs of healthcare and pharmaceutical companies
- 24/7 TV advertising of questionable drugs to people who aren't even remotely qualified to determine if they are appropriate or not
- Free lunches and treats for the staff of doctors' offices 5 days a week (because it gives the pharmaceutical rep a chance to promote their products to the doctors, and capitalize on the conflict-of-interest introduced by the doctor's satiated stomach)
- Huge numbers of full-time Congressional lobbyists (to help bend regulations towards what is more profitable and away from what helps patients)
- Large campaign donations every election (ditto)
If we switched to a non-profit model we'd be able to repurpose all that money towards providing health care. Then the USA could afford a single-payer health care system, like most other countries can, because our per-capita spending would be similar to theirs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But then you would get bureaucratic creep and ineficient services.
I'm in Canada. Our service is horrible here.
Don't get me wrong, there is lots to improve in the USA for sure. The for profit system is not 100% to blame for high costs. But I agree some thing could and should be changed. Pharma Advertising should be banned for 1. It only serves to control the media.
Much of Europe has a public / private health system. Single payer, but services are given by both the private sector (for profit) and public (not
Re: (Score:3)
You think American healthcare isn't crippled by bureaucracy? It most certainly is. Every healthcare provider ends up spending a small fortune on managing the entire process of dealing with multiple insurers and multiple insurance plans, with doing the appropriate coding, etc, and it still ends up being broken at the end of the day with most claims, in my experience, being screwed up.
Service isn't good, last minute cancellations, hour or two delays between your appointment date and being seen is normal, you
Re: (Score:2)
i mean currently we cannot afford the single payer systems we DO currently have : Medicare, Medicaid and the VA system.....
This system puts most of the healthy people in a different group with self-funded or employer-funded healthcare. So only the most expensive to treat will be on these plans and those taxpayer funds are considered an "extra" expense to the people who already have their own insurance.
This is very little different from what will happen to public schools if private school voucher plans came into wide effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Medicare focuses on the elderly, it's not really a great metric for how much healthcare should cost. The VA system also swings towards the elderly, and also supports a minority much, much, more likely to be suffering serious health problems than average. Which leaves Medicaid, which has multiple levels of bureaucracy (often corrupt) in addition to the normal levels you'd expect because it's a combination federal and state program.
There's no real reason to suppose single payer would cost more than regular pr
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is....there's no real viable way we could afford that in the US.
How is there "no real viable way we could afford that in the US" when other countries can afford it? Very clearly it's affordable given the number of countries currently using such systems.
How would you propose to fund such a system as you propose? We'd have to have basic tax rates on everyone well over 50% I'd estimate...likely higher and I don't think that would fly well here in the US.
Other countries have done socialized medicine just fine without this which shows that this is unnecessary.
What are your suggestions?
Copy what other countries have done. We have a wealth of formats to chose from that other countries have shown us work much better than our own. All we have to do is copy one.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
...would make Americans healthy?
Vaccinations.
Weren't these the same nutbars who said we should take horse de-wormer instead of proven COVID vaccinations because the vaccinations had 5G chips in them?
Now they want us all to get 5G chips on our wrists that are tied to some of the most morally ambiguous companies on the planet.
Riiiiiiiight.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep and we have those. What is the leading cause of non-trauma death in the USA? Heart disease. That's what the wearables for for - gaining vast amounts of data for use by doctors for screening to catch trends much earlier, before some major acute event happens.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep and we have those. What is the leading cause of non-trauma death in the USA? Heart disease. That's what the wearables for for - gaining vast amounts of data for use by doctors for screening to catch trends much earlier, before some major acute event happens.
Wait, these wearable devices are for surveillance so that doctors can collect data from the masses for the good of the masses? I'm sure that type of data gathering wouldn't go over well in slashdotland.
As for individual monitoring, my doctor told me to quit the continuous glucose monitoring because it just induces stress and detracts from the controllable good health habits that I should be concentrating on instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like everyone is already carrying a wearable in the form of their cell phone. If there's something to be gained here (which is debatable), they should provide it in the form of a free app, and/or add any necessary hardware to future cell phones, rather than trying to get everybody to remember to keep a second device charged and on their person 24/7 for the rest of their lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Also: Universal single-payer healthcare so Americans don't need to choose between death and bankruptcy.
Re: (Score:2)
...would make Americans healthy?
Vaccinations.
Monitoring our health, isn't what is up for debate.
Having to sacrifice our financial health while trying to believe those out to heal us aren't out to harm us for profit, is.
One could sell the idea of mass wearables. You just can't sell that kind of idea in America and expect people to believe you're doing it for health reasons.
Re: (Score:3)
You give one to your kid, and the kid gets REALLY sad. Maybe the saddest you've ever seen them. You start to wonder if that painful moment is the moment they got autism. It wasn't, it just hurt.
Whereas hardly anyone worries about the problems of multigenerational uses of antibiotics.
Re: (Score:2)
Whereas hardly anyone worries about the problems of multigenerational uses of antibiotics.
I'm not really sure what you mean here - the "problem" of multiple human generations taking antibiotics? I'm pretty sure it's commonly thought that antibiotics have saved probably countless lives and likely improved just about everyone's life since they've been discovered and developed.
And they're needed more now than they used to be with the increase across at least the eastern US of tick borne bacterial diseases like
Re: (Score:2)
"Make America Healthy Again" -> "Monitor Americans' Health Always".
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Informative)
> I don't think there are vaccinations against fat.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.10... [pnas.org]
=Smidge=
Re: You know what... (Score:2)
Thereâ(TM)s no vaccine for stupid.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
Facts and critical thinking, both sorely lacking in right-wing nutjobs.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
The distinction between “prevent or mitigate illness” and “make people healthy” is one without a difference in the context of healthcare interventions. There’s no meaningful so-what in the fact that exercise makes you healthy while a vaccine prevents you getting sick. They’’re both aimed at the same broad objective — adding years to life, and life to years.
Re: (Score:3)
I don’t know what you think you are getting at with this, but it doesn’t mean anything. There are many forms of exercise that are highly targeted and there are many drugs that have multiple systemic effects (Mounjaro being an excellent example). But in any event, the clinical purpose of both exercise and medications and indeed all health interventions is to extend healthy life years.
If you talk to a medic about “life to years and years to life”, they’ll recognise the phrase str
Re:You know what... (Score:4, Informative)
I don’t think the OP was claiming that vaccines *alone* make America healthy. I think that’s a massive over-read. The OP was clearly employing rhetoric to point out that vaccinations are an essential *component* of how modern populations get and stay healthy, and that RFK is notorious for repudiating them.
You claim that the OP is being reductive, but that’s a claim that only makes sense if you yourself treat what they said reductively, insisting on a plain reading of the text, and ignoring the obvious fact that it’s a rhetorical reversal using echoic mention (the repeat of the phrase “make America healthy”) and ironic reframing (pointing out the contradiction between RFK’s stated goal of a healthy America and his opposition to vaccination, which will lead to lots of ill health in America). Human communication is too subtle to insist on only plain interpretations of text.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
What facts and critical thinking do you think are relevant here?
Where did RFK Jr. Obtain his medical degree and license to practice medicine? Wait, he has neither.
How about RFK Jr's own words: I don't want to seem like I'm being evasive, but I don't think people should be taking medical advice from me https://www.cbsnews.com/news/r... [cbsnews.com]
Certainly not sending their best...
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Insightful)
The key thing is his predecessors listened to the experts.
There's no foul in someone managing a department without the same skills as his underlings. The issue with RFK Jr is he thinks he knows more than they do, while using the "Hey, I don't know" shrug as a get-out.
No matter what your political persuasion, virtually everyone on Slashdot has experience of bosses that listened to them, and who were successful, and bosses who tried to impose some ideological twaddle on them, refused to listen, and made everyone miserable and caused direct harm to their employers. RFK Jr is the idiot who claims we shouldn't have a predictable release schedule and should rush everything at the last minute to make for an arbitrary release date.
Re: (Score:3)
He's just a plain nut job. I doubt even he has any kind of meaningful political affiliation. He's just deranged.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
He's what republicans think a democrat is.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Interesting)
*All* of the immunotherapy treatments can be considered vaccinations, not just the ones that we give as preventative medicine.
And there are some new ones that are just stunningly good. I've recently seen a presentation on a vaccination for hard cancers that get injected directly into the cancerous mass and don't just improve things, like most radio- and chemotherapies, but *eliminate* the cancer by activating the latent immune cells within the mass. It allows the body to cure itself by removing the cloak of invisibility that cancer creates. This fellow might just win a Nobel. The idea is simple, brilliant, and shockingly effective.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but what about this 5g transmitters in the vaccine? Sure, your cancer is cured, but then you're under mind control of China and may even have an unquenchable desire for sex selective surgery so you can go into women's washrooms...
Re: (Score:3)
You may have a semantic point: preventing you from contracting or suffering from some disease is not exactly the same thing as making you healthy. I would argue that's a distinction without a difference: from one's lived experience, avoiding disease amounts to the same thing as staying healthy. Unfortunately, as with a lot of beneficial things that happen in the background, it becomes easy to take it for granted. You'll certainly miss it when it's gone
Re: (Score:3)
The point isn't "lived experience", but how you achieve the desired goal, and the different mechanisms involved are really damn important if you want to make that a fairly reliable outcome. That is why doctors take so many measurements, run so many tests, watch for trends over time, and use a lot of words with very specific meanings. Blurring distinctions to make a cheap political point undermines the goal of having a long, healthy lives -- and is a huge part of why the RFK Jrs of the world generate so ma
Re: (Score:2)
What vaccinations do you think make people healthy?
I think you missed the part where being dead is unhealthy. I think I can say at least 9 out of 10 doctors would agree with dead == unhealthy. Just spitballing.
Re:You know what... (Score:5, Informative)
I love the fact you think that's some kind of gotcha. Those of us on the left, together with those who sit somewhere in the middle of American politics, do indeed get ourselves and our children vaccinated. As a results we're not the ones getting Measles, and when we do get things like Flu or COVID it's usually less frequently than right wingers, and is rarely as bad.
If I were a psychopath I would encourage you to not vaccinate, to cull your herd, but I'm not, I'd love you to have the benefits too even if I can't stand your politics, and there's a selfish reason for me wanting you to vaccinate to which is herd immunity: if 90% of a population are vaccinated, it's tough for any disease vaccinated against to spread at all, while if 50% are, the disease will spread, and impact not just the intentionally-by-choice unvaccinated, but those who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, or who tried but the vaccine failed for whatever reason to take effect.
Go get your shots. Like we do.
Palantir needs data (Score:5, Insightful)
So y'all will oblige and subscribe to the service.
You'll be free to share it with all other "AI" providers available, except DeepSeek, because China uses it to spy on you.
Cost? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Cost? (Score:2)
Yeah, tracking devices for everybody! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now there is a good core fascist idea! Hitler and Göring (founder of the GeStaPo) would be so proud of this guy! Now put in a microphone and network the things with speech recognition, and finally, nobody can say anything "bad" anymore without being found out. Oh, and foreign hackers can listen to everything too!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now there is a good core fascist idea! Hitler and Göring (founder of the GeStaPo) would be so proud of this guy! Now put in a microphone and network the things with speech recognition, and finally, nobody can say anything "bad" anymore without being found out. Oh, and foreign hackers can listen to everything too!
What I find interesting is the party of people who believed that the Covid vaccine had tracking chips in it has now become the party of "Here this tracking device will that makes all your data belong to us and makes you really healthy!" is now the path forward.
Re:Yeah, tracking devices for everybody! (Score:5, Insightful)
Then where's the conservative outcry against everyone wearing a tracking device?
Re: (Score:2)
As long as it's voluntary there is no problem. It's when the All-Glorious State mandates it that it becomes a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Conservatives sure - probably many progressives too, though for different reasons. What about MAGA/MAHA? They seem to love all the Trump crowd.
Re:Yeah, tracking devices for everybody! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You know, the irony is that I'm less worried about the tracking portion than the fact companies will use it to jack up insurance rates on people... or try to track whether or not women are pregnant in Gilead states.
You're less worried about the tracking than the tracking?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wearable cancer machines (Score:4, Insightful)
More Accurate Headline: (Score:5, Insightful)
"Health Secretary Wants Every American Wearing a Tracking Device Within Four Years"
Re: (Score:2)
Being connected is getting expensive: $600 for a mid-range phone, $400 for mid-range wearable, plus $50-100/month to actually use the phone. Software obsolescence means general-purpose phones have to be replaced every three years. It's difficult to imagine a wearable being software incompatible but will a wearable have that problem too?
Re: (Score:3)
"Most people already ..." is not a reason
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty easy to get that to $15-$25 a month by doing pre-paid via a number of options for 5g service. Phones got more expensive because tariffs and inflation, but I know 2 years ago I got a OnePlus for $250 at Best Buy near christmas time - IDK if you'd call it mid range or not, but it does pretty much everything if you're OK with Android.
Re: (Score:3)
$50-100 to use the phone? I have a perfectly good T-Mobile pre-paid plan that's $15/month. Generally have access to WiFi, so I don't need more than 5GB of data.
The phone? Android device (dual SIM with micro SD card so that cloud storage isn't needed) bought for $120 in Europe.
Surveillance state incoming (Score:5, Interesting)
First, wearables don't do shit unless the person acts on the readings. How many decades have people been told about the dangers of obesity yet America keeps getting fatter?
Second, we've already seen attempts by Republicans to have girls submit a record of their periods to the government. So far, all have failed, but imagine the bonanza of data which could be gleaned to penalize women for one excuse or another if they wore a wearable.
Third, it will be interesting to see what, if any, mental machinations supporters of this quack perform to justify daily tracking of Americans for "health" reasons.
Fourth, who's going to pay for it? Does he expect everyone to shell out money for these along with the monthly subscription fees? Many people are struggling just to get by, but now he wants to burden people even further?
That worm definitely did damage to his brain.
Re: (Score:2)
.First, wearables don't do shit unless the person acts on the readings. How many decades have people been told about the dangers of obesity yet America keeps getting fatter?
You underestimate the gamification elements in these devices. Many, many people say things like "I need to get my steps in for today".
People go out of their way to reach all kinds of meaningless targets in games, gambling, etc. Using the underlying biological weaknesses to get people to do reasonably healthy things is something positive.
Having said that, health data and associated location data should be treated with much more care than it is today. Shoving all that data into some badly secured 'cloud' ser
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Surveillance state incoming (Score:4, Informative)
First, wearables don't do shit unless the person acts on the readings. How many decades have people been told about the dangers of obesity yet America keeps getting fatter?
Your post is pretty insightful but for one glaring thing. Obesity is not just an American thing. From Eurostat https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/... [europa.eu].
Second, we've already seen attempts by Republicans to have girls submit a record of their periods to the government. So far, all have failed, but imagine the bonanza of data which could be gleaned to penalize women for one excuse or another if they wore a wearable.
Third, it will be interesting to see what, if any, mental machinations supporters of this quack perform to justify daily tracking of Americans for "health" reasons.
Fourth, who's going to pay for it? Does he expect everyone to shell out money for these along with the monthly subscription fees? Many people are struggling just to get by, but now he wants to burden people even further?
That worm definitely did damage to his brain.
He's unhinged, straight out of the INGSOC playbook.
Re: (Score:3)
Obesity is probably going to become rare in the next 10 years, now we have really effective medication for it. The biggest step change will be when the patents expire and generic versions become available for a small fraction of the price they want today.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem isn't patents, th
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, that's about 4x the price they charge for weight loss injections in the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
We don't have "really effective medication", we have "somewhat effective" at reducing body weight by ~15% (depending on which medication you use). I hate to break it to you, but many people need to be more like 50% less weight to be considered not obese. These medications are amazing but not cures for obesity - just makes it better.
Re:Surveillance state incoming (Score:5, Insightful)
There's something dark to me about a future where people are medicating themselves against what are largely lifestyle diseases so they can continue with the lifestyle that causes the disease.
Don't get me wrong, I'm incredibly happy these drugs exist for those who legitimately need them but this future you talk of sounds kind of dystopian to me.
Re: (Score:3)
I know what you mean. It would be great if we could make food better quality for everyone. Maybe these medications will help force that. If people stop consuming the really bad stuff because it makes them feel too full, there will be less incentive to make it and more to concentrate on high nutrition stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
The risks seem to be low, and you could get hit by a bus going out for a jog.
Re: (Score:2)
First, wearables don't do shit unless the person acts on the readings. How many decades have people been told about the dangers of obesity yet America keeps getting fatter?
Your post is pretty insightful but for one glaring thing. Obesity is not just an American thing. From Eurostat https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/... [europa.eu].
Second, we've already seen attempts by Republicans to have girls submit a record of their periods to the government. So far, all have failed, but imagine the bonanza of data which could be gleaned to penalize women for one excuse or another if they wore a wearable.
Third, it will be interesting to see what, if any, mental machinations supporters of this quack perform to justify daily tracking of Americans for "health" reasons.
Fourth, who's going to pay for it? Does he expect everyone to shell out money for these along with the monthly subscription fees? Many people are struggling just to get by, but now he wants to burden people even further?
That worm definitely did damage to his brain.
He's unhinged, straight out of the INGSOC playbook.
While he is unhinged, I think this particular story is more about him following the corporate mandate. The tech companies want *ALL* the data, and they've cozied up to this administration tightly enough that the current cabinet is happy to pass along the recommendation that we all bow to this demand for all the data in ever imaginable way. Add in that certain segments of this administration want nothing more than to completely control bioreproductive health, and the best way to go about that is to have a di
Re: (Score:3)
How many decades have people been told about the dangers of obesity yet America keeps getting fatter?
Despite the incredibly obvious fact that Americans, as a whole, are more lazy and less self disciplined than everywhere else in the world, they are getting fatter than everyone else for an entirely different reason. It is their food. 30 years ago in Dubai, almost everyone was skinny. American food chains started opening up and lo and behold, the Arabs starting getting fatter. I watched it happen in the Middle East and started noticing the same types of fat in Europeans as I traveled through. There is someth
This should play well with evangelicals... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I think we're safe. Watches are normally worn on the left arm. :)
Re:This should play well with evangelicals... (Score:4, Informative)
made wear ? (Score:2)
so these devices... Where are they made?
lunacy get your supply chains in order
But it's the mark of the (Score:2)
insurance companies already gving them for free (Score:4, Informative)
How generous of them!
You even get a discount!
https://moneywise.com/insuranc... [moneywise.com]
Fascists love this garbage (Score:2)
Monitor everyone, and if anyone says anything critical of the government, have them picked up by the secret police. ICE doesn't wear a uniform and wears masks, so they are effectively kidnapping people they don't like. It doesn't even matter if someone is a citizen, they will be moved to some place in another state or country without giving them their rights. RFK Jr. is such an idiot, no one should do ANYTHING he suggests anyway.
Doesn't help (Score:2)
Wrist is not ankle (Score:4, Funny)
Funny how much a difference there is between putting it on one's wrist and one's ankle...
Re: (Score:3)
Vax conspiracists (Score:2)
You know, the Nazis had pieces of flair that they (Score:3)
You know, the Nazis had pieces of flair that they made the Jews wear.
health monitors (Score:2)
Beneficial (Score:3, Interesting)
It's kind of crazy every comment to this point is so politically motivated that no one will even talk about the technical merits of wearables. I wear an Apple watch, and make a point to wear it when sleeping as well, because of the vast amounts of health data it captures. Quality of sleep, resting heart rate, heart rate recovery time, blood oxygen levels, respiratory rate, heart rate variability, etc. Heck, I even give myself an EKG from time to time.
One day I had some rare heart palpitations, so I did an EKG on the spot and caught a couple. Super useful for my doctor. The only other option in the past was to wear an expensive Holter monitor 24/7 to try and capture an event like that, but now it can be done at any time on-demand.
Sorry, but wearables are pretty amazing technology - almost like a dream come true. You may not like Trump or RFK, but to be ignorant enough to say this is an awful idea shows just how biased and politically motivated people are, especially on what is supposed to be a community that discusses technology.
This is simply a campaign to raise awareness and encourage people to use wearables in general - in whatever form factor or brand they may choose. This has nothing to do with government tracking, government control, government access to data, or anything like that. This has nothing to do with vaccines, or if a person's skin is orange, or what political party is in control.
If Obama went out and said the same thing it would be the most wonderful idea ever to the other set of individuals, while the right-leaning folks would then smash their wearables. Grow up people.
Re:Beneficial (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All the people in this thread that are complaining already have cell phones, and the government can (and does) already access that data.
They're reflexively mad over nothing. It is a good idea.
Oh really? (Score:2)
Make Americans Think They Are Achieving Something Even Though They Aren't.
MATTAASETTA really sums up the administration in general I think...
https://www.theguardian.com/so... [theguardian.com]
https://www.sciencedaily.com/r... [sciencedaily.com]
https://www.wired.com/story/sc... [wired.com]
What an asshole (Score:3)
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a major federal campaign to promote wearable health tech, aiming for every American to adopt a device within four years as part of a broader effort to "Make America Healthy Again.
Go fuck yourself, you delusional, lying psychopath. Even the worm died from eating your toxic brain.
Wearables are inaccurate (Score:4, Interesting)
Never mind that wearables are notoriously inaccurate. Try wearing several brands simultaneously. (We have.) They give wildly different results for how many steps you've walked, how much sleep you've had, etc.
The manufacturers also push pseudoscience, like claiming to detect your stress level from your heart rate. Duh. Hearts beat at various rates for all kinds of reasons.
Hey RFK Jr (Score:2)
That's not going to fly with the MAGA crowd (Score:2)
1984 (Score:2)
Just 41 years later than predicted.
How will the scam work? (Score:2)
Everything RFK Jr does is related in some way to his network of scam companies making money. Trying to figure out how this seeming nonsense fits into that MO.
Re:Made in China (Score:5, Interesting)
As usual with this alleged administration, always follow the bread crumb trail back into the pockets of the people "running" the alleged administration.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the plan is for an American company to profit from this, rather than the Chinese.
Yeah but the chinese will make it cheaper so what can you do?
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, that's BS. The idea of everyone having a wearable health device so Americans would be made "healthy" is ludicrous, no matter who proposes it.
Re: (Score:2)