Interesting. Is the Samsung watch less effective at heart health tracking, or does Apple just have better partnerships with insurers?
UHC is the U.S.'s largest insurer, and they claim to have validation data that shows this program saves money.
It's more of a perk for the c-suite or law partners than a serious attempt to improve health.
Maybe that's not precise enough for doctors, but "crappy"?
That isn't true. There are level of information. The information I need to decide if I need to see a doctor or not is much lower quality that the information my doctor needs to make a diagnosis.
Health insurance should foot the bill if ultimately the data is good enough to get people to the doctor when the problem is small and easy to treat. If a 100 dollar device for everybody allows them to turn a few $200,000 dollar procedures into $10,000 treatments that will be a big win and they will. (note that the above two may or may not be related)