This article is a particularly exciting one for me. Up until now I have pretty much exclusively written on the topics of exercise and nutrition (understandably, given this is a fitness blog!). However, I always had the intention of bringing technology into the mix.
The reason? I am a technology marketer by trade. So in my first foray into technology blogging, I am going to review the wearable brand SKULPT.
The main reason I’m starting with a relatively unknown brand is simply because I own one. Secondly, I think it’s important to show that there is a proliferation of wearables out there that go beyond set and rep counters, and provide more sophisticated physiological metrics.
You might be wondering why I opted to buy this fairly obscure wearable in the first place. Given my career, I’ve always been fascinated with all things tech. Wearables combine two of my greatest passions: fitness and tech.
This is definitely a trend that isn’t going away. If anything, it is mushrooming into a new category that goes beyond wristbands into ‘hearables’, chest straps and sensory embedded garments. According to a report from the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) released at the start of the year, wearables are set to be the top fitness trend of 2017.
I stumbled upon SKULPT when doing some online research and it piqued my interest. Here is a product that claims to measure body fat percentages and muscle quality, as opposed to the typical steps, reps and calorie metrics of the better known wearables. I have to admit that despite being a marketer, I am the ultimate consumer, and get sucked into product marketing even though I should know better.
SKULPT AIM was launched three years back and originally amassed traction through a crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo. This original model is the size of a mobile phone and has a screen on the front and electrodes on the back. You spray the electrodes with water and then press it against different body parts to get individual body fat percentages and muscle quality measurements. You can test 24 different areas, or you can do a quick test by taking three different body readings, which gives you a rough breakdown of your overall muscle/fat body composition.
Beyond the real-time measuring capability, SKULPT enables you to track your measurements over time. It is compatible with both iOS and Android operating systems, so data and metrics gathered via the SKULPT can be tracked and monitored.
Since the launch of the SKULPT AIM, a more basic model has been launched without a screen, called the SKULPT CHISEL. This works in exactly the same fashion as the original version, except that metrics are displayed via your iOS or Android mobile phone.
So what are my thoughts on this gadget? Is it just another tech gizmo or does it actually work? Well, the first thing I should say is that I probably haven’t given this device enough consistent usage. My personal problem with it, which won’t be an issue for most of you, is that I have a Windows Phone and unfortunately the SKULPT app is not compatible with this particular operating system. Hence I was only able to track and sync this device through my short-lived work phone or my boyfriend’s phone.
However, I do believe I took the marketing bait on this one. Firstly, unlike body composition scales, you are not able to get an accurate read on an individual body part. If I wanted to get an overall picture of my leg’s fat and muscle profile, I couldn’t just get one metric like I would via a body fat scale. Rather, I would need to take readings for my quads, hamstrings and calves individually and then make a guess-estimate on the leg’s overall composition.
Secondly, the body fat percentages yielded per muscle group not only varied from read to read but also seemed grossly inaccurate. When I did a quick test, it reported that I was at an overall lower body fat percentage than when I did my cut, which is absolutely impossible. I can safely and confidently say that I have put on over 1% of fat since my cut and my latest body composition test at the gym validates as much.
Finally, I am dubious about the muscle quality/strength metrics as whole. First off, I question the science behind this metric since it’s reportedly ascertained via the flow of the currents against the electrodes. Even if this is true, I am not sure what conclusion you can actually draw from it. It evaluates the muscle based on a scale of 0-100% and the higher the metric, the leaner and stronger the muscle. But is this really useful?
I can only really attribute one positive to this product. Whilst it does not give you an accurate read of body fat % or muscle strength, it does give you a realistic indication on where you're storing more fat or which muscles are stronger/weaker. SKULPT did tell me that the muscles in my right leg are stronger and that the leaner of my two legs oddly enough is the left one which are both true. It also stated that my core is one of the leaner parts of my body, which is correct.
Thus, I do think despite its drawbacks, SKULPT can give you a steer/gauge on which muscles are leaner and stronger. You then can apply this knowledge to your workouts and monitor progress over time. This would prove more useful on the muscle quality front as it’s much easier to manipulate and spot treat this than fat - as we all know.
So, my view is that the metrics yielded aren’t terribly accurate or that useful. I wouldn’t part with your hard-earned dollars like I did on this one. To get an accurate read on your muscle and fat percentage, I’d suggest either using tried and tested, old-skool calipers or body fat scales which offer a slimmer margin of error and better consistency.