Watch out Whoop — Garmin reportedly working on a screenless health band that'll track your sleep
Garmin could soon offer a new alternative for anyone who wants sleep and recovery data without strapping on a bulky smartwatch overnight.
According to a new report, the brand behind some of the best fitness trackers on the market may be preparing to launch a minimalist health band, featuring no screen, a focus on sleep tracking, and key features like heart rate monitoring and smart alarms.
The band would reportedly include Garmin's optical heart rate sensor and support smart alarms that detect lighter sleep phases — similar to features found in many of the current best Garmin watches.
The blog the5krunner, which has a track record of reporting on unreleased Garmin products, claims to be '100% sure' the device exists, citing a 'source document' and a launch window as early as July or August 2025.
The appeal of a screenless device is simple: comfort and discretion. Many users find Garmin's bulkier multisport watches uncomfortable to wear overnight, especially for sleep tracking. A compact wristband could offer similar insights without the larger presence and could be more desirable to wear consistently for some.
It could also attract those who prefer wearing a traditional or luxury watch during the day but still want to track health metrics around the clock.
If released, the Garmin Sleep Band would naturally draw comparisons to the Whoop Strap, which is a screenless health tracker that collects round-the-clock data on sleep, strain, and recovery. However, Whoop requires a paid membership, with the cheapest tier currently costing $199 per year to access core features. You can read our full Whoop 5.0 review to see how it works.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
Garmin's business model, by contrast, typically doesn't lock health data behind a paywall. While some newer features are tied to its recent optional Connect+ subscription, core metrics like heart rate variability (HRV), sleep stages, and Body Battery remain free.
If Garmin continues down that path, a subscription-free sleep band could appeal to those who want advanced health tracking without an ongoing cost.
While the report provides some intriguing details, a lot remains unclear. There's no confirmed pricing, design, or indication of whether the device would support workout tracking independently or require pairing with a Garmin watch.
It's also unclear if this band would use Garmin's latest Elevate v5 sensor, found in high-end devices like the Fenix 8 and Forerunner 970, which would enhance accuracy for sleep and recovery metrics.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Android Authority
a day ago
- Android Authority
I tested the Garmin Vivoactive 6 and Apple Watch SE, and I still prefer Garmin as a gym mate
Kaitlyn Cimino / Android Authority The Apple Watch SE is the blueprint for what most people expect from a smartwatch: a clean design, deep smartphone integration, and enough wellness tracking features to stay reasonably healthy. At a reduced price compared to the brand's flagship lineup, the SE is also accessible. However, with the launch of the Vivoactive 6, Garmin seems to be stepping up to the plate with a potential competitor. After testing both watches side by side, it's clear Garmin isn't trying to beat Apple at its own game. It's playing a different one. And for anyone serious about fitness, it might be a tempting prospect. Do you prefer the Garmin Vivoactive 6 or Apple Watch SE? 0 votes Garmin Vivoactive 6 NaN % Apple Watch SE NaN % At a glance, these watches tell different stories. The Apple Watch SE wears like a piece of jewelry. It's minimalist, rounded, and familiar. Despite its robust tracking suite, I tend to set it with watch faces that emphasize aesthetics more than stats, so the daily impression is less sporty and more covert-tech (or as covert as a smartwatch can be). It's also so ubiquitous that it doesn't say much about my fitness regimen; you're as likely to see an Apple Watch on an exec as you are on a power-walking mom. Where the Apple Watch SE shoots the gap between tech and refinement, the Vivoactive 6 is unapologetically built for sport. In other words, I'm just as comfortable wearing the SE to a dinner party as I am on a treadmill. The Vivoactive 6, by contrast, feels unapologetically purposeful. Its rounded, sport-first build and physical buttons are made for the gym (or the trail), and while I think it's a good-looking watch, it's not quite as upscale as Apple's offerings. It's a fitness tracker first and foremost. Kaitlyn Cimino / Android Authority Yet, despite the fact that the SE fits more scenarios, the Garmin stays on my wrist longer thanks to its fantastic battery life. As is often the case with Garmin watches, longevity is a strong point of the Vivoactive 6. The Apple Watch SE requires a daily top-up, lasting just over 24 hours between charges. The Vivoactive 6 easily lasted me five days per charge. That kind of endurance means I don't have to think about charging it before a hike or a morning workout, and I can take it on overnight adventures without packing a cable. Kaitlyn Cimino / Android Authority Workouts and weekend adventures are, of course, where Garmin shines. The Vivoactive 6 tracks everything from steps and calories to training load, recovery time, heart rate variability (HRV), stress, and sleep, plus Garmin-specific tools like Body Battery and Health Snapshot. It's an incredibly dense platform that turns stats into actionable insights. Garmin still offers a more robust fitness tracking platform for serious training. Apple has made huge strides in sports tracking, but Garmin contextualizes data in a way that feels more athlete-focused. When I train too hard, Garmin responds with recovery advice. When I underperform, it guides me just the same. I love Apple's Rings for basic motivation as much as the next person, but Garmin's tools are built for more dedicated athletes and data junkies. Even on GPS accuracy, Garmin still holds the edge. I ran identical routes with both watches and compared the maps. Garmin's tracks were tighter and more consistent, especially in tree cover and dense areas. You can see on the map above the SE's route dips into the road rather than sticking to the path I actually ran. Around the bend, it even has me on the complete opposite side of the street. To be fair, overall, the SE is very good, but if true precision matters, Garmin is still the benchmark. Garmin also still holds the edge for precise GPS data. Without a doubt, the Apple Watch SE is the better smartwatch. It handles calls, texts, voice commands, app support, and music control with the kind of seamlessness only Apple can pull off. The haptics are crisp, the interface is smooth, and the third-party app support is unmatched. And yet, during workouts, I found myself constantly distracted by it. Deep iPhone integration means a flood of buzzes, banners, group chats, and news alerts breaking my focus. The Vivoactive 6, by contrast, stayed quiet. It delivered only the essentials: a notification here, a calendar alert there. And when I needed to check something, the interface was simple and distraction-free. I wasn't tempted to scroll through the family chat while pausing a workout or changing my music. Sometimes, less really is more, especially when you're mid-run and looking for any excuse to quit early. Kaitlyn Cimino / Android Authority So yes, the Apple Watch SE remains a crowd-pleaser. It's the ultimate entry point into the Apple Watch world and impressively capable for the price. It's long been my preferred option for everyday wear because I love the seamless integration with my iPhone and the robust app support (outside of the gym setting). But Garmin isn't chasing Apple's formula. The Vivoactive 6 doubles down on data-rich fitness, weeklong battery life, and tools that help you train smarter. When I'm in the thick of a training cycle and care more about split times than text replies, that focus makes it a far more useful device.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. Wants Every American To Wear A Health-Tracking Device, And Security Experts Have Serious Concerns
If you don't yet wear a smartwatch or smart ring to monitor your health and fitness, you may soon be encouraged to do so by some of the highest-ranking members of the government. During a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he'd like all Americans to use wearable health products, such as Fitbits, Apple Watches, Oura Rings, WHOOP and glucose monitors, to 'control' their health and 'take responsibility' for it. According to Poltico, Kennedy said people can use wearables to track 'what food is doing to their glucose levels, their heart rates and a number of other metrics as they eat it, and they can begin to make good judgments about their diet, about their physical activity, about the way that they live their lives.' While this remains just a suggestion and not a mandate, it's been announced that the Department of Health and Human Services will launch a campaign to encourage Americans to wear these devices. Wearables can track your heart rate, menstrual cycle, fitness regimen, blood sugar levels, sleep patterns, location and more. They're a great way to understand your health (for example, the Oura Ring lets you know when it thinks you're getting sick) and to stick to a workout regimen (the Apple Watch is both loved and hated for its 'close your rings' reminders). While they can be helpful for the average person, these devices store lots and lots of our data — is it safe for all of this information to be out there? And what happens if this data ends up in the wrong hands — including the government's? Experts weigh in. First, know that no one has said the government will actually collect this health data. Related: It Turns Out That Most People Wipe Their Butts Completely Wrong, But This Doctor Is Here To Teach Us The Right Way There is a major difference between the government having access to health data and the government simply encouraging folks to use wearables for their own health tracking, said Alex Hamerstone, the advisory solutions director for TrustedSec, an ethical hacking company. 'Those are obviously two very different questions, and there's no indication at this point that they're looking to have the government have access to that data,' he noted. The government does, though, already have access to lots of health data. 'If you look at the percent of people who receive health care through Medicare and Medicaid and state programs, and so on and so forth, they already have a lot of very detailed information,' Hamerstone noted. 'I know there are guardrails around it and things like that, but not to get into any kind of political thing, but a lot of those guardrails seem to be falling down,' he noted. You should also understand that no matter who is privy to it, health data is very valuable. You've probably heard the phrase 'data is the new currency,' meaning your personal data has inherent value to companies. It's how they sell you ads and understand your needs. But 'health data is just kind of a different category of data,' said Hamerstone. Having your credit card hacked is temporarily annoying, but you're not liable, and typically, after some phone calls and logistics, your life will go back to normal. 'But if someone gets access to your private health care data, that's much different. It's a different kind of data,' Hamerstone said. 'So, somebody knowing how many steps you take is one thing, but if you start to get into things like glucose levels or very detailed medical information, those things could start to affect other parts of your life,' he added. This could impact insurance rates and insurance options, Hamerstone said. Some experts are worried about the government's ability to protect health data because of past breaches. Related: Older Women Are Revealing Their Biggest "Life Regrets," And Every Young Person Needs To Hear This Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Secure Ideas, a security testing and consulting company, has concerns about the government's ability to protect any data that is gathered through the use of wearables. For instance, in 2018, there was a major security breach involving the Strava fitness app and the U.S. government in which soldiers' locations at military bases were shared via Strava. 'So, the idea that the government is saying we're going to encourage ... wearing of these when the government had a significant security problem due to this, that's one of the concerns that I just don't understand how we forgot that happened,' said Johnson. Overall, Johnson said, there are 'significant security issues with wearable devices.' 'My company and other companies have tested these devices. We've found vulnerabilities. We have found ways that the wearable technology gives an attacker access to your data because of security lapses in the hardware and software. We've seen multiple cases where attackers are able to gain access to things that are unrelated to the health care data because of security problems,' Johnson said. There have also been privacy violations when data brokers get access to this data, whether they gain access illegitimately or legitimately, Johnson said. (And the companies collecting the data from wearables do often sell your data to data brokers, Johnson noted.) You may not care if someone has your heart rate data from your smartwatch, but it's so much more than 'just' that. 'There are always security concerns when it comes to connected technology,' said Dave Chronister, the CEO of Parameter Security. And your wearable device is most likely connected to your smartphone — meaning it has access to lots of your personal data, according to Johnson. 'No device or platform is completely secure,' Chronister noted. 'Attackers often target the backend systems, such as cloud servers, via compromised employee credentials or software vulnerabilities.' 'Devices that rely on Bluetooth or Wi-Fi can also be exploited, and if the device supports messaging or sync features, phishing or spoofing attacks are possible,' noted Chronister. These devices can also get stolen or lost, which also puts your data at risk, Chronister added. Johnson said he's often heard people say things like, 'Oh, it's just my heart rate data, that's not a big deal,' but it's actually so much more than that. 'The issue is, we're not just talking about heartbeat. We're not just talking about your sleep schedule. We're talking about your location. We're talking about most of these apps tie into your contacts so that you can invite friends,' said Johnson. More, it also may include your reproductive health data, glucose levels or heart irregularities, Chronister said. 'These can paint a sensitive, personal portrait of someone's health and behavior,' Chronister added. Health data from wearables isn't protected like your medical records. 'It's important to understand that data from wearables is not protected under HIPAA like your medical records are,' said Chronister. HIPAA protects patient health records from things like doctor's appointments. 'Instead, it is governed by the company's terms of service ... which often include loopholes that allow for data sharing or sale, especially in the event of a merger or acquisition,' Chronister explained. This is true even if the company says they'll never sell your data. 'That promise can be overridden by fine print or future policy changes,' he added. 'Consumers should be aware that once their data is out there, they may lose control over how it is used,' Chronister said. What can you do to protect your security if you use wearables? 'Almost all of these types of devices have some level of privacy controls in them that you're able to select what data you give,' said Johnson. If you decide to get a wearable, make sure you check your privacy settings and adjust them accordingly, he noted. 'And this is very important — regularly go in and validate that the privacy settings are still set the way you want them to be,' Johnson added. This is really the most you can do to protect your data, and it certainly won't totally protect you from data breaches or data brokers. 'Unfortunately, individual users have very limited control. You are largely at the mercy of the device manufacturer and app provider,' Chronister noted. While you can follow privacy precautions, such as by 'turning off unnecessary Bluetooth connections, using strong account passwords, and checking app permissions ... those measures only go so far,' Chronister said. 'The real issue is how companies store, share and protect your data behind the scenes,' Chronister noted. Chronister stressed that 'it's critical to understand the long-term implications of voluntarily handing over personal health data to private companies. This information can be sold to marketers, shared with third parties, or exposed in a breach.' He voiced specific concern about how this data can be combined via different apps and companies over time to build 'incredibly detailed personal health profiles.' So while it may not be a big deal if one company has your sleep data and another has your activity levels, these companies can be acquired, or data can be combined to create a fuller picture of your private health information. 'And AI is really a wild card. Going forward, it will increasingly be able to draw conclusions and make predictions about your current and future health. This raises serious questions about how such insights could affect things like insurance eligibility, premium rates, or even creditworthiness,' Chronister said. When it comes to health data (and data of any sort), 'the risks are inherent even with the government not involved,' Hamerstone said. Once that data exists, it's at risk of being lost or stolen by bad actors, he added. Keep that in mind before you start using wearable health technology, and if you're already a user, it's important to be aware of the risks so you can make informed decisions and do what you can to protect your article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in Goodful: This Woman Is Going Viral For Begging Women Not To Get Married Right Now, And Personally, I Couldn't Agree More Also in Goodful: People Are Sharing Their Biggest "How Doesn't Everyone Know This?" Facts, And I'm Honestly Embarrassed I Never Realized Some Of These Also in Goodful: "I Can't Wait For This To Go Out Of Style": People Are Sharing Popular Modern Trends That Are Actually Pretty Toxic
Buzz Feed
2 days ago
- Buzz Feed
RFK Jr.'s Health Tracker Plan Raises Security Alarms
If you don't yet wear a smartwatch or smart ring to monitor your health and fitness, you may soon be encouraged to do so by some of the highest-ranking members of the government. During a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he'd like all Americans to use wearable health products, such as Fitbits, Apple Watches, Oura Rings, WHOOP and glucose monitors, to 'control' their health and 'take responsibility' for it. According to Poltico, Kennedy said people can use wearables to track 'what food is doing to their glucose levels, their heart rates and a number of other metrics as they eat it, and they can begin to make good judgments about their diet, about their physical activity, about the way that they live their lives.' While this remains just a suggestion and not a mandate, it's been announced that the Department of Health and Human Services will launch a campaign to encourage Americans to wear these devices. Wearables can track your heart rate, menstrual cycle, fitness regimen, blood sugar levels, sleep patterns, location and more. They're a great way to understand your health (for example, the Oura Ring lets you know when it thinks you're getting sick) and to stick to a workout regimen (the Apple Watch is both loved and hated for its 'close your rings' reminders). While they can be helpful for the average person, these devices store lots and lots of our data — is it safe for all of this information to be out there? And what happens if this data ends up in the wrong hands — including the government's? Experts weigh in. There is a major difference between the government having access to health data and the government simply encouraging folks to use wearables for their own health tracking, said Alex Hamerstone, the advisory solutions director for TrustedSec, an ethical hacking company. 'Those are obviously two very different questions, and there's no indication at this point that they're looking to have the government have access to that data,' he noted. The government does, though, already have access to lots of health data. 'If you look at the percent of people who receive health care through Medicare and Medicaid and state programs, and so on and so forth, they already have a lot of very detailed information,' Hamerstone noted. 'I know there are guardrails around it and things like that, but not to get into any kind of political thing, but a lot of those guardrails seem to be falling down,' he noted. You should also understand that no matter who is privy to it, health data is very valuable. You've probably heard the phrase 'data is the new currency,' meaning your personal data has inherent value to companies. It's how they sell you ads and understand your needs. But 'health data is just kind of a different category of data,' said Hamerstone. Having your credit card hacked is temporarily annoying, but you're not liable, and typically, after some phone calls and logistics, your life will go back to normal. 'But if someone gets access to your private health care data, that's much different. It's a different kind of data,' Hamerstone said. 'So, somebody knowing how many steps you take is one thing, but if you start to get into things like glucose levels or very detailed medical information, those things could start to affect other parts of your life,' he added. This could impact insurance rates and insurance options, Hamerstone said. Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Secure Ideas, a security testing and consulting company, has concerns about the government's ability to protect any data that is gathered through the use of wearables. For instance, in 2018, there was a major security breach involving the Strava fitness app and the U.S. government in which soldiers' locations at military bases were shared via Strava. 'So, the idea that the government is saying we're going to encourage ... wearing of these when the government had a significant security problem due to this, that's one of the concerns that I just don't understand how we forgot that happened,' said Johnson. Overall, Johnson said, there are 'significant security issues with wearable devices.' 'My company and other companies have tested these devices. We've found vulnerabilities. We have found ways that the wearable technology gives an attacker access to your data because of security lapses in the hardware and software. We've seen multiple cases where attackers are able to gain access to things that are unrelated to the health care data because of security problems,' Johnson said. There have also been privacy violations when data brokers get access to this data, whether they gain access illegitimately or legitimately, Johnson said. (And the companies collecting the data from wearables do often sell your data to data brokers, Johnson noted.) You may not care if someone has your heart rate data from your smartwatch, but it's so much more than 'just' that. 'There are always security concerns when it comes to connected technology,' said Dave Chronister, the CEO of Parameter Security. And your wearable device is most likely connected to your smartphone — meaning it has access to lots of your personal data, according to Johnson. 'No device or platform is completely secure,' Chronister noted. 'Attackers often target the backend systems, such as cloud servers, via compromised employee credentials or software vulnerabilities.' 'Devices that rely on Bluetooth or Wi-Fi can also be exploited, and if the device supports messaging or sync features, phishing or spoofing attacks are possible,' noted Chronister. These devices can also get stolen or lost, which also puts your data at risk, Chronister added. Johnson said he's often heard people say things like, 'Oh, it's just my heart rate data, that's not a big deal,' but it's actually so much more than that. 'The issue is, we're not just talking about heartbeat. We're not just talking about your sleep schedule. We're talking about your location. We're talking about most of these apps tie into your contacts so that you can invite friends,' said Johnson. More, it also may include your reproductive health data, glucose levels or heart irregularities, Chronister said. 'These can paint a sensitive, personal portrait of someone's health and behavior,' Chronister added. 'It's important to understand that data from wearables is not protected under HIPAA like your medical records are,' said Chronister. HIPAA protects patient health records from things like doctor's appointments. 'Instead, it is governed by the company's terms of service ... which often include loopholes that allow for data sharing or sale, especially in the event of a merger or acquisition,' Chronister explained. This is true even if the company says they'll never sell your data. 'That promise can be overridden by fine print or future policy changes,' he added. 'Consumers should be aware that once their data is out there, they may lose control over how it is used,' Chronister said. What can you do to protect your security if you use wearables? 'Almost all of these types of devices have some level of privacy controls in them that you're able to select what data you give,' said Johnson. If you decide to get a wearable, make sure you check your privacy settings and adjust them accordingly, he noted. 'And this is very important — regularly go in and validate that the privacy settings are still set the way you want them to be,' Johnson added. This is really the most you can do to protect your data, and it certainly won't totally protect you from data breaches or data brokers. 'Unfortunately, individual users have very limited control. You are largely at the mercy of the device manufacturer and app provider,' Chronister noted. While you can follow privacy precautions, such as by 'turning off unnecessary Bluetooth connections, using strong account passwords, and checking app permissions ... those measures only go so far,' Chronister said. 'The real issue is how companies store, share and protect your data behind the scenes,' Chronister noted. Chronister stressed that 'it's critical to understand the long-term implications of voluntarily handing over personal health data to private companies. This information can be sold to marketers, shared with third parties, or exposed in a breach.' He voiced specific concern about how this data can be combined via different apps and companies over time to build 'incredibly detailed personal health profiles.' So while it may not be a big deal if one company has your sleep data and another has your activity levels, these companies can be acquired, or data can be combined to create a fuller picture of your private health information. 'And AI is really a wild card. Going forward, it will increasingly be able to draw conclusions and make predictions about your current and future health. This raises serious questions about how such insights could affect things like insurance eligibility, premium rates, or even creditworthiness,' Chronister said. When it comes to health data (and data of any sort), 'the risks are inherent even with the government not involved,' Hamerstone said. Once that data exists, it's at risk of being lost or stolen by bad actors, he added. Keep that in mind before you start using wearable health technology, and if you're already a user, it's important to be aware of the risks so you can make informed decisions and do what you can to protect your privacy. HuffPost.
