Latest news with #calories
Daily Mail
15 hours ago
- Health
- Daily Mail
Wonder why you aren't losing weight? Your smartwatch could be lying to you - scientists warn devices don't give accurate calorie counts
They are relied upon by fitness fanatics to record all manner of data from their length of runs to heart rate, pace and even changes in elevation during a jog. But one thing smartwatches shouldn't be relied upon when exercising is counting calories, scientists claim. Academics said the devices are not accurate at working out how many units of energy have been lost during exercise. In fact, researcher Dr Cailbhe Doherty claimed there is a 'high degree of error' in the methods used. This means that watches may tell users they have burnt 1,000 calories - when they have actually only burnt 300. The UK accounted for 4.4 per cent of the global smartwatch market in 2022, according to data from business consultancy Grand View Research, and is projected to lead the European market in terms of revenue in 2030. But, Dr Doherty said the portable wearable computers aren't all bad - and are accurate at measuring heart rates and GPS. The academic, who investigates the accuracy of wearable consumer devices at University College Dublin, was asked on the CrowdScience podcast if smartwatches were accurate at counting calories. Dr Doherty said that while smartwatches could accurately measure heart rate or GPS, they were not as good at recording 'energy expenditure', such as sleep patterns (file picture) In response, the lecturer and assistant professor at the university's School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sport Science, said: 'The evidence would suggest that they're not. 'And that's likely because the way they estimate, the way most smartwatches would estimate calories, is using accelerometry by itself, or accelerometry and photoplethysmography. 'So measuring heart rate and some variation of physical activity through movement. 'Now that's very different to actually measuring someone's inspired and expired gas, which is what you would use to measure calories in the first place. 'Essentially, the signal is so far removed from the original biometric rhythm that there's such a high degree of error that can be introduced that way.' Smartwatches measure your heart rate and step count and use that to come up with a guess of how many calories have been burn. This estimate can depend on different assumptions made by the algorithm of the device. Dr Doherty said a recent systematic review of smartwatches found that the margin of error can be between 30 per cent and 150 per cent. As an example, he agreed that a watch may tell users that the burnt 1,000 calories when they have only burnt 300. The academic continued: 'When it comes to something like heart rate or GPS, yeah, accuracy can be really good. 'But energy expenditure, the number of calories you burn, your sleep, smartwatches aren't as good at that stuff. 'If you think about the number of signals that a smartwatch has to measure to measure sleep, any error in those individual signals, any error in your heart rate, your respiratory rate, the amount you're moving, all of those compound up. 'That's probably why smartwatches aren't as good at measuring your sleep, because the separation from the original signal being sleep and the output, your sleep score, the time you spend sleeping, it's much larger.' Walking 10,000 steps a day has traditionally been seen as the holy grail in order to stay fit and healthy. But a study led by the University of Granada reported in 2023 that the number has 'no scientific basis'. This research instead concludes that 8,000 was 'the optimal number of (daily) steps at which most people obtain the greatest benefits', and suggested that walking faster could provide additional health benefits. According to Grand View Research, the US-based market research and business consultancy, the UK smartwatch market generated a revenue of £1.24bn in 2022 and is expected to reach £2.16bn by 2030, with the market expected to grow annually by 7.2 per cent.
The Sun
18-05-2025
- Health
- The Sun
Unhealthiest high street sandwiches revealed – and the healthy swaps to help you shed pounds
BRITAIN'S most unhealthy high street sandwiches have now been revealed. Brits will be shocked to know that most of their favourite lunchtime meal deals have more saturated fat and sugar than fast food and desserts. 7 Most of them also have more calories than McDonald's cheeseburgers and a bar of DairyMilk chocolate. Leading the list of unhealthy sandwiches, Pret's Posh Cheddar & Pickle Baguette sandwich contains a whopping 643 calories. That is more calories than two McDonald's cheeseburgers combined, which come at 295 calories each. Even a Big Mac has almost 150 fewer calories than Pret's flagship lunchtime meal. Meanewhile, Waitrose 's No1 The Perfect Ploughman's Cornish Cheddar Sandwich comes 13.1g of saturated fat - making it one of the unhealthiest items on the list. This is again more than two McDonald's Cheeseburgers combined, which come with just 5.4g of fat each, according to a DailyMail analysis. Next comes M&S's Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese Ploughman's sandwich with 11.3g of saturated fat. To give some context, a Big Mac burger has just 8.8g of fat. Both these sandwiches contain more than half of the NHS 's daily saturated fat limit for women, which is 20g. When it came to unhealthy sugar content, Sainsbury's Brie Bacon & Chilli Chutney Sandwich topped the charts with 19.7g sugar. SARNIE WARS I spent £80 on every Tesco meal deal sandwich to find my favourite... there were 2 winners but it's divided opinion To put that into perspective, one would need to have two KitKat chocolate bars with 10.3g of sugar in each to beat the Sainsbury's sandwich. M&S's All Day Breakfast Sandwich - a popular choice of meal on the go - has almost 10.1g of sugar. That's slightly less than a Krispy Kreme Original Glazed Doughnut that comes with 12g of sugar. NHS recommends that adults only consume a maximum of 30g of sugar each day to lead a healthy life. Most of the sandwiches sold on Britain's high streets are also far saltier than fast food. For instance, Pret's Ham & Grevé Baguette contained 3.85g of salt, making it saltier than four large portions of McDonald's fries (0.82g of salt each). And surprisingly, even M&S's Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese Ploughman contained 1.78g - slightly more than two large McDonald's fries. Adults are advised to consume less than 6g of salt per day, according to the NHS. But as most of the supermarket sandwiches are unhealthy options for lunch, Brits can choose to swap them for healthier meals. For example, a Cheese Ploughman's sandwich from Boots comes at just 429 calories, making it the healthiest option so far. And if you feel fancy, you can also try Itsu's King Prawn Rice Box salad, which comes at just 407 calories. It's a filling option thanks to wholegrain brown rice, veggies, prawns and seeds. Meanwhile, a Tuna Melt Panini from Starbucks packs in an impressive 28g of protein and has just 443 calories. But if you are really conscious about your health and want to keep things below 400 calories, then Greggs' Pesto and Mozzarella Pasta can be your saviour. This tasty option from Greggs is just 375 calories, even though its packed with cheese.
Daily Mail
17-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Revealed: The unhealthiest sandwiches on the high street that are packed with more calories than TWO McDonald's Cheeseburgers
Sandwiches sold on the British high street and in supermarket meal deals can be more calorific than burgers and sweeter than chocolate bars, analysis reveals. MailOnline found a host of the nation's lunchtime favourites had more calories, saturated fat, sugar and salt than fast food and desserts. Pret 's Posh Cheddar & Pickle Baguette sandwich contained 643 calories, more than two McDonald's cheeseburgers (295 calories each) or a Big Mac (494 calories). Many sandwiches offered by British supermarkets also had fast food burgers beat when it came to saturated fat content. Waitrose 's No.1 The Perfect Ploughman's Cornish Cheddar Sandwich was one of those with the most saturated fat content at 13.1g per pack. This is more fat than two McDonald's Cheeseburgers, which have 5.4g of saturated fat a piece. M&S's Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese Ploughman's was another high fat offering, and with 11.3g of saturated fat, had more than a Big Mac (8.8g). Both sandwiches contained over half the NHS's daily statured fat limits for women (20g) and nearly half that for men (30g) in just a single pack. Sainsbury's Brie Bacon & Chili Chutney Sandwich topped the charts when it came to sugar content with 19.7g of the sweet stuff. This is almost the equivalent of having two Kit Kat chocolate bars (10.3g each). Another surprisingly sugary offering was M&S's All Day Breakfast Sandwich. This sandwich contained 10.1g of sugar, only slightly less than a Krispy Kreme Original Glazed Donut (12g). For context, the NHS recommends adults only consume a maximum of 30g of sugar per day. Multiple British sandwiches for sale on the high street were also found to be far saltier than fast food items. Pret's Ham & Grevé Baguette contained 3.85g of salt, making it saltier than four large portions of McDonald's fries (0.82g of salt each). But even some vegetarian options were surprisingly high in salt. M&S's Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese Ploughman contained 1.78g, slightly more than two large McDonald's fries. Adults are recommended to only have no more than 6g of salt per day, and children are advised to have even less. Having excess salt in your system leads to water retention in the blood raising your blood pressure. This can, subsequently, raise the risk of a potentially fatal heart attack or stroke. Heart disease and strokes are one of Britain's biggest killers, killing about 160,000 a year, with the American death toll about five times higher. The NHS also warns that too much fat in your diet, especially saturated fats, can raise your cholesterol, which in turn increases the risk of heart disease. Eating too much sugar, which is packed with energy, can contribute to potentially harmful weight gain increasing the risk of serious issues like heart disease, some cancers as well as type 2 diabetes.
The Guardian
11-05-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Children eat more after seeing just five minutes of junk food ads, study finds
Children will eat significantly more calories in a day after watching just five minutes of junk food advertising, according to a groundbreaking study. Young people who saw or heard adverts for products high in saturated fat, sugar and salt consumed an average of 130 extra calories, equivalent to two slices of bread, the research found. The study involved 240 seven- to 15-year-olds, from schools in Merseyside. On two separate occasions, they were shown or played five minutes of junk food adverts and then non-food adverts. Subsequently, they were offered snacks such as grapes or chocolate buttons, and later, lunch with a range of savoury, sweet and healthy items. The authors calculated that, after the adverts, the children consumed 58 calories more in snacks and ate 73 more calories for lunch than after exposure to non-food ads. The research, to be presented at the European Congress on Obesity in Málaga, Spain, also found that the impact on calorie intake was the same whether the adverts were for specific foods or were generic adverts for fast food brands. And it was unaffected by the type of advert, such as video with sound, social media posts, podcast adverts, and posters or billboards. Emma Boyland, the lead author of the study and professor of food marketing and child health at the University of Liverpool, said: 'This is the first study to show that brand-only food advertising affects what children eat. 'We also showed that children don't just eat more immediately following food advertising, they actually ate more at the lunch meal as well, a couple of hours after they had seen the advertising. 'The foods that we served them weren't the same foods that were shown in the advertisements and were presented with no branding information. So it wasn't that they were driven to buy the particular food or go and consume fast food, it was just a prompt to consume what was available.' Experts warned that the findings revealed a loophole in the government's proposed ban on junk food TV adverts before 9pm, due to come into effect in October. Katharine Jenner, the director of the Obesity Health Alliance, said the study must send 'a clear message to policymakers: food advertising is driving excess calorie intake in children'. She added: 'From October, new restrictions will limit unhealthy food adverts on TV before 9pm and online at any time – a vital step forward that will protect children from the worst offenders. 'But loopholes remain. Brands will still be able to advertise to young people even without showing specific products, on billboards and at bus stops, and children living with overweight or obesity are especially vulnerable. 'If the government is serious about ending junk food advertising to children, they must close the loopholes that will allow companies to keep bombarding them.' Dr Helen Stewart, the officer for health improvement at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said: 'Childhood obesity is stubbornly high, with children in the most deprived areas facing rates more than twice as high as their peers. Paediatricians recognise that tackling this crisis is impossible without also introducing necessary measures such as regulations on the food industry.' A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'This government has taken bold action to end junk food ads targeted at children on TV and online, which will reduce the number living with obesity by 20,000 and deliver health benefits to the economy worth £2bn. 'We are encouraging the industry to focus on healthier options by allowing companies to advertise healthier alternatives in identified categories.'
