Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Stayhealthy.com: Monitoring your wellness on the Web -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: george eberting who wrote (1040)	12/6/2000 9:36:24 AM
From: Ted M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3785

Hi George, To add to what you are saying and hopefully clarify my recent posts here is a summary of the pros and cons of the two devices (I'm guessing here): Healthetech device: Basal metabolism (at rest caloric burn rate) = accurately and easily determined Active metabolism (any activity not at rest) = accurately and not easily determined. Impractical to use. Caloric intake: Not measured by device. Accuracy depends on individual effort. Probably not easy for most. Stay's CTI: Basal metabolism (at rest caloric burn rate) = less accurate and easily determined. Possibly very accurate in majority of cases. Active metabolism (any activity not at rest) = less accurate but easily determined. Probably very accurate in majority of cases. Caloric intake: Not measured by device. Accuracy depends on individual effort. Probably not easy for most. Please correct me (anyone) if anything here is wrong. It seems to me that the body comp analyzer used in conjunction with the CTI would be pretty useful for anyone having a good idea of their caloric intake. I would think that good results could be obtained--especially when used as part of a structured program. ted