No ... but tell us all the accuracy for the temperature sensor that YOU feel should be there ?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No body temp sensor!
- Thread starter hoodafoo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Incorrect, it uses infrared ...
You apparently are not reading the replies, you just keep pushing your point ...
Your post #10 says it all: "Because I had illusions of what I THOUGHT it SHOULD do at the very least"
AW doesn't have this capability for reasons stated in the many replies, accept that fact.
I'd be ok with 1 or 2 degrees off and they can tighten it up as years progress. If people think that's too inaccurate, they don't have to use the feature.
You could utilize the rectal/Bluetooth function of this one? Though I doubt you’d want to wear it 24/7 ...
www.kinsahealth.co
/s
Shop Award-Winning Smart Thermometers | Kinsa Health
We believe knowledge is power, especially when it comes to your health. So we created products that do more than tell you a temperature - they give you the knowledge and guidance to get better faster. Get symptom & age-based guidance in individual profiles, great for families with newborns to...
www.kinsahealth.co
/s
Never thought I'd see those two words in the same sentence.
You guys who are laughing have been programmed (in this case, by Apple) to believe that because the capability is not offered in the product that it's not important because knowing how much oxygen is in my blood is a lot more useful
What an absurd theory.
I hope they develop some watch against illusions.
One, I was not laughing at you and I do not think many others were, however, you DO NOT have to be a Medical Doctor like me to realize that taking your body temperature on the Apple Watch as it is designed now, even if it had a temperature sensor built into that main sensor array now is just not possible, or would be wildly inaccurate.
I'll explain a little more. So, for your Apple Watch to get your heart rate correct, ECG, as well as oxygen saturation you have to wear your watch relatively tight, or "firm against your skin" as Apple would say. Well, what does that do? When you wear your AW tight/firm that sensor is pushing against your skin and since not much air is getting through, plus you have body heat collecting up under the AW sensor, it would cause your temperature to always be higher than it is, which for a lot of people, especially in this time of COVID-19 might freak them out and cause unnecessary trips to the doctor or ED, which is a whole other problem that I will not expand on here.
So, now you are probably saying "so wear your Apple Watch looser". Well, the issue(s) with that would be one, if the sensor is too lose then your heart rate data (and everything that depends on the sensor array) is going to be inaccurate, and regarding temperature, if it is looser then air will get under the sensor (in-between your skin and sensor) and cool your skin a little bit and cause your temperature to be lower than it actually is. So now, you are messing up both ends of the temperature, one way (the correct way) to wear your AW (firm/tight) causes a higher temperature than it is in reality, and the other way causes your temperature to be lower than it is in reality. Also, realize that when you are outside in the summer that would cause absolute chaos with any temperature reading. Going from in the sun to shade can change temperature as much as 10-20°. Then you have to think about the opposite, which would be winter. It is currently 30° where I live with a windchill of 23°, so standing out in that for just seconds would cause chaos, and obviously show a MUCH lower temperature than in reality.
So what if someone really does have a fever, but because they are wearing their AW watch looser, it shows up as lower? That creates a big problem right there, not only in COVID times, because *most* people would take the watches data as fact, so they might actually have something going on but because they are not technically inclined or do not understand (not many people at all read the terms of service) that these sensors are not perfect, would NOT go to their doctor or ED, and possibly could have something horrible happen medically, or even die. With COVID, the earlier you get treatment the higher the survivability rate.
There is obviously a lot more I could point out, like what happens when you swim with your watch or shower with it? How long would Apple advise you to take it off and let dry before an accurate reading could be taken? Many more examples, but I think you get it.
Is there a way at some point it could be done, and done with it being pretty damn accurate? Yes, however, we are not there yet.
You have to understand, most people are not like us on this forum, "techies" that understand these sensors are not perfect, and understand the technology extraordinarily better than the average person!
Last edited:
You do realize that two degrees is a huge difference. 99 deg (no fever) vs 101 deg (fever).
FWIW, I would love to see a body temp sensor on a device I carry around all day, but it should be accurate or it’s useless. Perhaps, as mentioned, Air Pods Pro or maybe the rumored Apple Glass that sits on your forehead.
wow
How accurate is it when pointed at your wrist?
how accurate is when you point it at your wrist when you’re outside in the cold?
I can’t imagine measuring body heat from an extremity is ever going to a good idea.
Well said! But this is where the research and 'smart' in smart watch come into play. The watch can take into account if the person is at rest or active/exercising, outside temp or measure a person's temp over a course of time to determine 'normal' temp vs fever. Or maybe there can be some sort of calibration at time of sale measuring arm length/mass using lidar, height, weight etc to correlate wrist temp and body temp.
Acura cars innovated a technology called GPS-linked Climate Control 15 yrs ago which I think is ingenious! Cabin temp is regulated by position of the sun and direction you are driving! It's not about slapping another sensor in the watch, but rather thinking outside the box. And this is the age of AI!
But yeah, you brought up a very good point about how false readings would spark paranoia in this age of covid. Makes me wonder if the underlying hardware is already there and never got the green light from legal or marketing dept..
Please enlighten me on your height and weight correlation to core body temperature...how is that information gonna be plugged into an algorithm to get your temperature?
It very much is NOT; it's just an age of people talking about that because they can't solve it, and an age where clueless people call their stuff AI to get other clueless people to think they are cool (and invest in them).
OK, so it's not practical to measure your body temperature from your wrist. The skin and dermis are too close to the outside, and not enough body mass inside. Consequently, the temperature of the dermis just below the skin at the wrist varies too much from the core body temperature, and not in any correlated way, to be a useful indicator of core body temperature.
Other body areas (forehead, mouth, ear cavity, armpit, rectum) have a measurable temperature that is far closer to core body temperature, and more closely related.
The solution is a remote sensor attached or inserted as appropriate, that connects via bluetooth to the Apple Watch.
Of course, it is well-known that your body temperature goes up when you are near somebody you are attracted to, and down when you aren't. This could be used in blind dates to get a good idea of what the other person feels towards you. You swap sensors, and if your reading goes up, they like you and if it goes down, then just pay the bill and go home to watch Seinfeld re-runs.
Don't forget to get your sensor back...
Other body areas (forehead, mouth, ear cavity, armpit, rectum) have a measurable temperature that is far closer to core body temperature, and more closely related.
The solution is a remote sensor attached or inserted as appropriate, that connects via bluetooth to the Apple Watch.
Of course, it is well-known that your body temperature goes up when you are near somebody you are attracted to, and down when you aren't. This could be used in blind dates to get a good idea of what the other person feels towards you. You swap sensors, and if your reading goes up, they like you and if it goes down, then just pay the bill and go home to watch Seinfeld re-runs.
Don't forget to get your sensor back...
Stop making this some weird online sex-thing where people lifestream their activities based on their "temperature sensors" when they meet and… and… and… and… eh… so… ok… Maybe this one's on me. So… yeah… never mind… Carry on.
😇
Actually, being serious for a bit… The basic idea of using sensors while on a date is a very interesting one.
For instance, Tinder (et. al) could add a feature where you activate a "on a date" function; and after the date you could get yours and your dates heart rates matched. So you could see how you matched up based on what you talked about, and sort of naturally get into if there was something that made the other person extra happy, or even uncomfortable.
As it also would match up with whom you're with it would also work as a safety feature; so if something bad happens it's very much traceable.
When I wrote my reply, I was thinking of a Brian Aldis story (from the '60s??) about every person having a mood stone embedded in their forehead. When you looked at, or were near somebody who was 'sympatico', both mood stones would start glowing with the same colour.
Oh, I love that concept.
Some years ago I was playing around with the idea of using BLE/beacons as a mingle device, an open and decentralised approach to automatically doing what LinkedIn and Tinder does.
In the end I just couldn't find a decent business model without it basically being reduced to being yet another almost-clone of the existing services. Too expensive and cumbersome to get to a critical mass of users with a hardware device, and Apple's approach to what can('t) be done in the background ruled out a properly decentralised software-based solution.
I've had a watch with a "body temperature" sensor.
They're totally bogus. Ambient temperatures have a profound impact on the reading on a body extremity like the wrist. Useless for measuring body temperature with any accuracy at all.
I’m not 100% sure that the typical Tinder user is interested in this kind of functionality, but sure, why not.
Fitbit Sense, Fitbit Versa 3, Amazfit GTR 2e and Amazfit GTS 2e all have skin temperature sensors.
Not the same thing though. There is a massive difference between skin temperature sensors and body (core) temperature sensors and the readings don’t relate to each other.