Are Wearable Brain Devices the Future of Fitness Tracking?
Did you know you can customize Google to filter out unwanted results? Follow these steps to improve your search results, including adding Lifehacker as your preferred source for tech news .
This week, neurotech startup Neurable unveiled its MW75 Neuro headphones with a rather enticing claim that I’m not entirely convinced of.
Simply put on these headphones, and you’ll gain unprecedented access to your brain’s inner workings. Track your concentration. Measure your mental fatigue. Quantify your cognitive performance. This is poised to be the next frontier of the “quantified self-analysis” movement—moving beyond step counts and heart rate to the most intimate source of data: your brainwaves.
If you ask me, headphones that can read your mind seem either too good to be true or too creepy to be true. Neurable has no plans to stop with headphones , and they’re not the only company making a name for themselves in this space. Glasses, helmets, you name it—the next wave of wearables is targeting the brain. Whether you find it enticing or terrifying, the real question is: is this technology even real? Can brain-monitoring headphones actually measure anything, or are people paying $499 for a cleverly crafted placebo wrapped in EEG sensors?
Unsurprisingly, the answers are a bit vague.
What are wearable brain devices in theory?
The concept behind wearable brain devices is this: using electroencephalography (EEG) sensors embedded in the earcups of headphones, devices like the Neurable MW75 Neuro supposedly monitor your brain’s electrical signals, converting them into useful information about your mental state. The headphones promise to alert you when you’re losing concentration, when it’s time to take a break, and even provide a “cognitive snapshot” of your brain’s state over time.
For those obsessed with a healthy lifestyle, this is pure catnip. Fitness trackers gave us insight into our physical condition, and wearable brain devices promise to shed light on the “black box” of our mental activity. Theoretically, it’s possible to optimize not only your training regimen but also your work regimen, preventing burnout before it happens.
The problem, according to experts in technology law and neuroscience, is that we are completely unprepared for this technology to become mainstream—both from a regulatory and scientific perspective. Let’s start with the science.
How Real Is the Science Behind Wearable Brain Devices?
Before delving into the rather obvious privacy nightmare, it’s worth asking a fundamental question: are these devices actually capable of delivering on their promises?
José M. Muñoz , a fellow at the Centre for Neurotechnology and Law in the UK and the International Centre for Neuroscience and Ethics in Spain, offers a clear assessment: “For years, there has been debate about the effectiveness, accuracy, and complexities of neurotechnologies designed for direct consumer use, such as this new device from Neurable,” he explains. “While algorithms for analyzing brain data obtained through EEG are indeed constantly improving, this neurotechnology still lacks precision outside of medical or clinical practice.”
The problems are both technical and practical. The quality of EEG data is extremely sensitive to the placement of the electrodes, sometimes with an accuracy of just a few millimeters. When users place these sensors themselves, without medical supervision, their reliability drops sharply. Moreover, the most accurate EEG studies require many more electrodes than the few built into the headphones.
“Basically, you might wear these headphones and believe they’re improving your mental health, physical performance, or attention,” says Munoz. “But in reality, you’re improving the manufacturer’s algorithms by sharing your brain data in exchange for a very small fee.”
In other words, it’s an age-old tech parable: you’re not the customer the technology serves. You’re the data source that trains it.
Dr. Annu Navani offers a more balanced approach. She acknowledges that wearable brain devices have “significant limitations, including high cost, less clinical validation, and less comfort than wrist-worn trackers.” The metrics they provide are also more difficult to translate into practical guidance—most people intuitively understand what to do with their step count, but what do you do when your “cognitive load index” reaches 73?
Navani believes that wearable brain devices will likely not replace traditional fitness trackers, but rather “complement, not replace, traditional devices, targeting a niche of users interested in cognitive and neurofunctional information.” She notes that traditional wearables continue to provide reliable, validated data on key health indicators that users can easily understand and implement.
Who’s really reading your mind here?
Think about it (and maybe even be glad that no headphones are picking up on your thoughts): your brainwave data is perhaps the most intimate biometric information you possess. We’re talking about a window into your mental and emotional state. So what happens when you voluntarily and unsupervised share this data?
“I hope that wearable brain tracking devices don’t become the future of fitness tracking or any other industry, at least not yet or in the near future,” says Star Cashman , a technology lawyer and founding partner of a law firm specializing in cybercrime. “We still face a complete lack of federal regulation in the US regarding biometric data, data privacy laws, minimal or nonexistent cybersecurity standards for these devices, and a lack of any protective measures for users.”
The implications are clear: “What happens if a ‘brain device’ is hacked?” asks Cushman. The lack of regulation means users have little control or knowledge about how their neural data is stored, used, and potentially sold.
Despite regulation, individual consumers still have their own privacy concerns. Those willing to spend hundreds of dollars on headphones may be precisely those who dislike constant surveillance. “Unless someone is so obsessed with optimizing their fitness journey that they ignore serious risks, I don’t think this will become the norm anytime soon,” notes Cushman. Take Meta’s push into smart glasses, for example. The technology needs to be high-quality and ready to use before consumers spend hundreds of dollars and risk their most personal information.
Bottom line
So, simply put, when I published this article, I asked myself: are wearable brain tracking devices the future of fitness? Almost certainly not in the way their manufacturers hope. The technology is still too immature, the regulatory framework too sparse, and consumer concerns too high for these devices to start appearing like Fitbit’s tomorrow.
I’d say we’re witnessing a familiar pattern in the wellness industry: a genuine technological advance (EEG monitoring actually works under controlled conditions!) is prematurely commercialized and promoted with promises that are completely untrue. The result is an expensive product that may provide some users with interesting data, but is likely more of a placebo than a breakthrough.
For now, wearable brain devices occupy an awkward position: too invasive for casual users, too untested for serious use, and too unregulated to be trusted. They may have a future, but that’s not it—until science catches up with marketing, and the law catches up with both.
While your regular fitness tracker only measures your heart rate and steps, it’ll likely give you more useful information about your health than any headphone that reads your brainwaves.