The rise of self-tracking has become an everyday activity for many, but is it affecting our well-being? From menstrual cycles to toothbrushing, we’re recording everything. But can a human life be reduced to a dataset?
The Dark Side of Self-Tracking: Is Tracking Everything Actually Good for Us?
Gathering data used to be a fringe pursuit of Silicon Valley nerds. Now we’re all at it, recording everything from menstrual cycles and mobility to toothbrushing and time spent in daylight. But is this just narcissism redesigned for the big tech age? The idea that tracking our lives can improve them sounds seductive, especially when tech companies offer tools that claim to make it easy.
Self-tracking refers to the practice of monitoring and recording one's own behavior, habits, or physiological data using various tools and technologies.
This trend has gained popularity in recent years, driven by the increasing availability of affordable wearables, mobile apps, and online platforms.
According to a study, 66% of adults use some form of self-tracking device or app, with fitness tracking being the most common use case.
Self-tracking can provide valuable insights into one's behavior and habits, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their health and well-being.
However, can a human life be reduced to a dataset? Can a body be tuned up like a machine? Or is this explosion of self-tracking simply a society that has internalized the tech industry maxim that more data is always better?
Data reductionism is a statistical approach that involves simplifying complex data by identifying and removing irrelevant information.
This method helps to reduce noise, eliminate redundant data, and improve data quality.
By applying data reduction techniques, such as aggregation and filtering, analysts can extract meaningful insights from large datasets.
According to a study, 70% of data collected is considered redundant, making data reductionism an essential step in data analysis.
The Rise of Self-Tracking
In recent years, self-tracking has become an everyday activity for many of us. We track our step counts, calories consumed, exercise completed, menstrual cycle or hours slept. We list books we’ve read on Goodreads, our top films on Letterboxd, or share our most-played music via the data presented by Spotify Wrapped.
Today, an average smartphone has a host of self-tracking tools built-in – the iPhone Health function can help you keep track of your mood, mobility and nutrition, but also sexual activity, toothbrushing and time spent in daylight. Then there are the tracking tools: smartwatches on wrists, smart rings on fingers, Zoe glucose monitoring patches on arms, fitness trackers turning every step of that parkrun into thousands of data points.
The Promise of Self-Tracking
The promise is seductive – understand your life better with data, and you can improve it. But can a human life be reduced to a dataset? Can a body be tuned up like a machine? Or is this explosion of self-tracking simply narcissism redesigned for the age of big data?
The Quantified Self Community
The idea of tracking our lives has been around for a while, but it was popularized by two editors for Wired magazine, Gary Wolf and Kevin Kelly. They coined the term ‘quantified self’ and started a community of people who track their lives using various tools.
The Benefits of Self-Tracking
Self-tracking can be beneficial for some people, especially those living with chronic conditions like diabetes or obsessive-compulsive disorder. It can help them manage their symptoms and make informed decisions about their health.
However, there are also potential pitfalls to self-tracking. One therapist I spoke to who works with patients living with eating disorders told me that patients can become fixated on their tracking data, punishing themselves if they haven’t walked enough steps in a day or have eaten more than a certain number of calories.
The Dark Side of Self-Tracking
Self-tracking might even do more harm than good. One scientific study flagged that calorie trackers can feel ‘oppressive and punishy’ to their users. Another potential pitfall is data privacy – users frequently share sensitive data about their health, location and finances with private companies without a clear understanding of where it is stored and how it might be used.
Data privacy refers to the control individuals have over their personal information.
It involves protecting sensitive data from unauthorized access, use, or disclosure.
In today's digital age, data collection is widespread, with companies gathering user data for targeted advertising and other purposes.
According to a survey, 77% of consumers are concerned about online data security.
To protect data privacy, individuals can use strong passwords, enable two-factor authentication, and be cautious when sharing personal information online.
Tracking and wearables companies often have vague wording in their privacy policies that obfuscates where your data might be going – theoretically, it could be used to tailor targeted ads, affect your insurance rates, or for identity theft. These services are vulnerable to hacking, as evidenced by several high-profile breaches in recent years.
The Limitations of Self-Tracking
I tried self-tracking myself for three months and found that it yielded few revelations about myself. I took an average of 6,737 steps a day, but didn’t discover anything wildly new about my habits or behavior. My Oura smart ring correctly predicted I was getting sick a day before I realized it myself, but also revealed that I sleep less than I expected – closer to six hours a night than eight.
Calculating my average daily spending was a horrifying experience that I’m not keen to repeat. The spreadsheet’s ‘Health’ column was full of minor grievances relating to hangovers, skin irritation or back pain. One recurring entry simply says, somewhat mysteriously: ‘Still on the mend.‘
Conclusion
Self-tracking can be beneficial for some people, but it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. We need to be aware of the potential pitfalls and limitations of self-tracking, including data privacy concerns and the risk of becoming fixated on our tracking data.
Ultimately, we need to trust our bodies and make informed decisions about our health without relying too heavily on technology. As Btihaj Ajana, a professor of ethics and digital culture at King’s College London, says: ‘Data in itself is just noise. It’s the analysis that goes into it, the fine-grained study of it, which makes it useful.‘
