Interesting discussion with my wife about this. "Yeah, but everyone's knows <LED HR monitors> aren't accurate." That isn't the point, honey. FitBit claims they are accurate. And beside, the only reason you think everybody knows that is because I, a life-long distance runner who has a closet full of monitors, told you and because you're a PM for a competing product. It is not inconceivable that someone outside that bubble took FitBit at their word.
I'm no more a fan of class action suits than anyone else, but I can see it in this case. Sometimes the only way to effect change is not to just "vote with your wallet", in which case FitBit won't change their claims when l'il oil' you didn't give them $100. They might change when a collection of customers sues them for a few million.
(Disclaimer: never worn a FitBit, all assumptions of accuracy are based on using other LED-based HR monitors, all of which are hit or miss on accuracy in comparison to a chest strap.)
EDIT: went back and read FitBit's response. My summary: "we stand by the accuracy of our monitor's, but we make no claim that they are to be used as scientific or medical devices." Oh, you mean not to be used for, say, a doctor-prescribed fitness regimen? IOW, they want to have it both ways. Sure, the devices are accurate, but they are to be used for entertainment purposes only.
I'm no more a fan of class action suits than anyone else, but I can see it in this case. Sometimes the only way to effect change is not to just "vote with your wallet", in which case FitBit won't change their claims when l'il oil' you didn't give them $100. They might change when a collection of customers sues them for a few million.
(Disclaimer: never worn a FitBit, all assumptions of accuracy are based on using other LED-based HR monitors, all of which are hit or miss on accuracy in comparison to a chest strap.)