TL;DR — Your smartwatch measures a sliver of what your body broadcasts. Blood carries 5,000+ proteins, sweat contains 800+ molecular markers, and today’s wearables capture almost none of it. The next decade will bring electrical, optical, chemical, and mechanical sensors together into fused systems that truly understand your physiology — not just your pulse.

Your smartwatch thinks you’re calm because your heart rate is 62. But it doesn’t see your dehydration, your cortisol spike, or the subtle changes in your blood flow that say you’re not.

In the next decade, wearables will stop guessing. They’ll measure — directly. Your blood carries over 5,000 distinct proteins^[1]; your sweat contains 800+ small molecules^[8]. Today’s smartwatches sample almost none of that richness.

We’re Only Measuring the Surface

When people think of wearables, they think of heart rate, steps, and maybe sleep. That’s the visible tip of a vast physiological iceberg.

Think of it this way: current wrist-based PPG is like estimating everything about a city’s economy by counting cars on one highway. You’ll catch broad trends — rush hour, holidays — but you’ll miss the factories, the supply chains, the labor market. That’s the gap between what we measure and what’s actually there.

Beneath that lies a network of measurable signals — electrical, optical, chemical, mechanical — all quietly reflecting your body’s internal state.

The irony is that our physiology is incredibly rich in measurable data, yet most consumer wearables sample only a handful of channels, often indirectly or with heavy filtering.

The State of Today’s Devices

Modern wearables — Apple Watch, Whoop, Oura, Garmin — rely primarily on optical PPG (photoplethysmography), measuring light reflected from blood volume changes^[2]. They derive HRV, SpO₂, and respiration rates algorithmically. Temperature and motion sensors fill the rest, but these signals are coarse, indirect, and filtered for comfort over fidelity.

Credit where it’s due: extracting a reliable SpO₂ reading from a wrist PPG through motion, sweat, and skin-tone variation is genuinely impressive engineering. The Apple Heart Study enrolled over 400,000 participants and demonstrated that a consumer watch could flag atrial fibrillation with meaningful clinical accuracy^[3]. But these advances refine existing signals — they don’t open new ones.

We’re still in the Fitbit era of physiology. We’ve refined algorithms, not sensing itself.

The Body as a Signal Source

Each domain of the body — electrical, optical, chemical, thermal, mechanical — emits distinct, measurable signals. The science is already here. What’s missing is integration, miniaturization, and reliability.

The diagram below maps these five signal domains — think of them as parallel radio stations your body is always broadcasting on.

⚡ Electrical Domain

Electrical properties of tissues and fluids reveal an enormous amount of information:

• ECG: Heart activity — mature, reliable, well-understood.
• Bioimpedance (BioZ): Tissue composition, hydration, respiration^[4]. Samsung Galaxy Watch already uses BIA for body composition estimates.
• EDA: Electrodermal activity, linked to stress and sympathetic arousal^[5].
• EMG: Muscle activity — used in prosthetics and training tech.

The Analog Devices MAX86178 chip can measure multi-channel BioZ and PPG simultaneously — a capability rarely used in consumer wearables.

💡 Optical Domain

Optical methods have expanded well beyond green LEDs:

• PPG: Blood pulse, HR, HRV, SpO₂.
• NIR Spectroscopy: Tissue oxygenation, hydration, hemoglobin estimation^[6].
• Raman / Mid-IR: Non-invasive molecular detection — glucose, metabolites^[7].
• OCT (Optical Coherence Tomography): Microcirculation imaging — still research-stage.

Optical sensing remains the foundation of all commercial wearables — but we’ve barely explored its depth.

🧪 Chemical Domain

Sweat and interstitial fluid are chemical mirrors of the body:

• Sweat Sensors: Electrolytes, lactate, glucose, cortisol. In 2016, Gao et al. demonstrated a fully integrated wearable array measuring four sweat biomarkers simultaneously^[8].
• Microneedle Patches: Access interstitial fluid with minimal discomfort^[9]. Dexcom G7 and FreeStyle Libre 3 already do this for glucose — proving the form factor works.
• Microfluidics: Real-time analysis of trace samples.

The Gatorade Gx Sweat Patch (built on Epicore Biosystems’ technology from the John Rogers group at Northwestern) is one of the first consumer chemical-sensing wearables — it measures sweat rate and sodium loss during exercise.

🌡️ Thermal & Acoustic Domain

Temperature and vibration hold hidden signals:

• Infrared Thermography: Core and skin temperature mapping.
• Thermistors: Localized skin tracking.
• Ultrasound Patches: Estimate cardiac output and arterial stiffness. Wang et al. demonstrated a soft ultrasound patch for continuous blood pressure and cardiac output monitoring^[10].
• Phonocardiography: Acoustic sensing of heart sounds.

Once clinical, now creeping into patch-scale prototypes.

⚙️ Mechanical Domain

The body’s movements are a map of its inner mechanics:

• IMUs: Acceleration, rotation, tremor.
• Strain Sensors: Fabric or film-based respiration and posture tracking^[12].
• Piezoelectric Films: Detect micro-vibrations — the heartbeat’s echo on the skin^[11].

When combined, these sensors turn the body into its own input device.

With the signal landscape mapped, the natural question is: what happens when you stop reading each channel in isolation?

Fusion Is the Future

The real breakthrough won’t come from any single new sensor. It will come from fusing multiple signals together^[13].

Electrical + optical + motion data creates context. You can distinguish fatigue from stress, or dehydration from overtraining.

Consider a concrete example: a fused wearable could distinguish a post-coffee HR spike (elevated heart rate + normal EDA + low HRV deviation from your personal baseline) from an anxiety episode (elevated HR + elevated EDA + irregular breathing pattern + context from time-of-day). Same heart rate, completely different stories. Dunn et al. showed that combining wearable signals with personal baselines can predict clinical lab values like inflammatory markers and insulin resistance^[14].

Next-gen wearables will:

• Fuse data locally on-device (edge AI).
• Adapt to personal physiological baselines.
• Deliver causal insights, not correlations.

Your next wearable won’t just tell you what happened — it will understand what’s normal for you.

But if the science exists and the chips are shrinking, what’s actually holding us back?

Why We’re Not There Yet

If the tech exists, why isn’t your Whoop measuring hydration or glucose yet?

Because the field isn’t limited by imagination — it’s limited by physics and practicality.

• Power → Continuous sensing drains batteries faster than design can handle.
• Skin Interface → Sweat, motion, temperature, and variation make calibration hard.
• Regulation → Once a metric claims medical relevance, it enters FDA territory. The FDA’s “General Wellness” guidance^[16] (2019) draws a careful line: “low risk” wellness claims can bypass clearance, but anything diagnostic cannot.
• Privacy → The more intimate the data, the greater the responsibility.
• Product Strategy → Consumer brands optimize for comfort and retention, not raw accuracy.

It’s easier to build a new algorithm than a new signal.

These barriers are real, but they’re being chipped away — one domain at a time. That brings us to the timeline.

The Decade of the Living Interface

We’re on the edge of a transformation. Wearables will evolve from gadgets to biological interfaces — systems that understand, not just record.

A note of realism: non-invasive glucose has been “five years away” for thirty years^[15]. The field has a long history of overpromising. But this time the convergence is different — flexible electronics, edge ML, and microfluidics are maturing simultaneously, and the regulatory path is clearer than it’s ever been.

Your body will soon stream real-time feedback: hydration, recovery, glucose, hormonal rhythm, even emotional load — all passively tracked, interpreted, and adapted to your unique baseline.

The experience will also change:

• Fewer dashboards.
• More meaning.
• Feedback that feels ambient instead of analytical.

Health tech will mature from data collection to body understanding.

The Sensing Horizon

The sensing revolution has already begun — just not evenly distributed.

In the coming decade, the companies that lead in health tech won’t be those with the best apps — but those who understand the physics of life, and design systems that translate it into beautiful, trustworthy interfaces.

References

1. Anderson, N.L. & Anderson, N.G. (2002). The Human Plasma Proteome. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics, 1(11), 845–867. doi:10.1074/mcp.R200007-MCP200
2. Tamura, T. (2019). Current progress of photoplethysmography and SPO2 for health monitoring. Biomedical Engineering Letters, 9, 21–36. doi:10.1007/s13534-019-00097-w
3. Perez, M.V. et al. (2019). Large-Scale Assessment of a Smartwatch to Identify Atrial Fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine, 381, 1909–1917. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1901183
4. Kyle, U.G. et al. (2004). Bioelectrical impedance analysis — part I: review of principles and methods. Clinical Nutrition, 23(5), 1226–1243. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2004.06.004
5. Posada-Quintero, H.F. & Chon, K.H. (2020). Innovations in Electrodermal Activity Data Collection and Signal Processing. Sensors, 20(2), 479. doi:10.3390/s20020479
6. Ferrari, M. & Quaresima, V. (2012). A brief review on the history of human functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). NeuroImage, 63(2), 921–935. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.049
7. Pandey, R. et al. (2017). Noninvasive Monitoring of Blood Glucose with Raman Spectroscopy. Accounts of Chemical Research, 50(2), 264–272. doi:10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00472
8. Gao, W. et al. (2016). Fully integrated wearable sensor arrays for multiplexed in situ perspiration analysis. Nature, 529, 509–514. doi:10.1038/nature16521
9. Teymourian, H. et al. (2021). Lab under the Skin: Microneedle Based Wearable Devices. Advanced Healthcare Materials, 10(17), 2002255. doi:10.1002/adhm.202002255
10. Wang, C. et al. (2021). An epidermal patch for the simultaneous monitoring of haemodynamic and metabolic biomarkers. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 5, 737–748. doi:10.1038/s41551-021-00685-1
11. Dagdeviren, C. et al. (2014). Conformal piezoelectric energy harvesting and storage from motions of the heart, lung, and diaphragm. PNAS, 111(5), 1927–1932. doi:10.1073/pnas.1317233111
12. Amjadi, M. et al. (2016). Stretchable, Skin-Mountable, and Wearable Strain Sensors. Advanced Functional Materials, 26(11), 1678–1698. doi:10.1002/adfm.201504755
13. Gravina, R. et al. (2017). Multi-sensor fusion in body sensor networks. Information Fusion, 35, 68–80. doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2016.09.005
14. Dunn, J. et al. (2021). Wearable sensors enable personalized predictions of clinical laboratory measurements. Nature Medicine, 27(6), 1105–1112. doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01339-0
15. Smith, J.L. (2018). The Pursuit of Noninvasive Glucose: "Hunting the Deceitful Turkey" (6th ed.). ResearchGate
16. U.S. FDA (2019). General Wellness: Policy for Low Risk Devices — Guidance for Industry. FDA.gov