Rob ter Horsts smartwatch accuracy test results where not confirmed by other independent scientists since 5 years – who still trusts in him?

Last Updated on January 6, 2025 by pg@petergamma.org

Is this really necessary do disproof Rob ter Horst? Has this not already been done by Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org?

090. Review of Accuracy Studies of Consumer Grade Heart Rate Monitors: Methods, Testing Protocols, Reference Devices

As in the example of Molecular Biologist Isidro Ballard who killed himself 30 years ago in the labs of the most famous Molecular Biologist Charles Weissmann in Switzerland, it was enough that Isidro Ballard scientific studies where not confirmed by other scientists to loose the trust in Isidro:

Rob ter Horsts last video before he kills himself?: the Apple Watch 10 in 2025 – a Scientific Review

But unfortunately these tests where mainly doen after Isidro Ballard s tests. But how is it with Rob ter Horst? Where do we find scientific papers who study die accuracy of the Apple Watch 7 – 10? We do not know of such papers. Is this not already enough to not to trust in Rob ter Horsts data? If smartwatch accuracy tests would really be a hot topic for scientists, would we not immediately have the first paper about the Apple watch 7 – 10 accuracy, shortly after these smartwatches came onto the market? But there are as far as we know no papers yet published about the Apple watch 7 – 10 accuracy.

On the contrary, after Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org published his review:

090. Review of Accuracy Studies of Consumer Grade Heart Rate Monitors: Methods, Testing Protocols, Reference Devices

only view new papers about smartwatch accuracy where published. Is this an evidence that these papers are co-ordinated by smartwatch sellers? And isn t all of this not enough to show that there is clearly something wrong with Rob ter Horst smartwatch accuracy tests, and we cannot trust in his results?

What is wrong with Rob ter Horst smartwatch accuracy tests is that although Rob s first YouTube video was published 5 years ago:

His scientific smartwatch data where not confirmed by independent smartwatch accuracy testers such as for instance Milind Desai from the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/staff/6670-milind-desai

So what do we need more to not to trust in Rob ter Horsts results?

Rob claims he has one or two subject tested smartwatch accuracy “independent” from him. But do you still believe in what Rob ter Horst says after what Peter Gamma from www.petergamma.org has written in recent years about this topic, for instance in his review:

090. Review of Accuracy Studies of Consumer Grade Heart Rate Monitors: Methods, Testing Protocols, Reference Devices

These “independent” testers publish their results in the same YouTube video as Rob ter Horst. And who trusts these entangled testers? They are not independent testers of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, or from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich, or from another top university around the world. So Rob ter Horsts “independent” smartwatch accuracy testers cannot convince us.

The Molecular Biologist Isidro Ballard is death since 30 years. And is the quantitative scientist Rob ter Horst not dead as well now as scientist who can convince us of his smartwatch accuracy tests?