| ▲ | Terr_ 7 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||
I don't think that's safe to assume at all, for two reasons: 1. CO2 has effects on the human body of its own that aren't simply a lack of oxygen, and vice-versa. [0] 2. The baseline proportions involved aren't close, so even doubling CO2 isn't going to show up easily as a large swing in in oxygen%. For example, the article references a study where the CO2 proportion going from 0.04% -to 0.25% correlates to mental problems. Even if the watch could sample atmosphere directly, is it sensitive enough to detect a shift from 21.00% -> 20.79% oxygen? As it's estimating oxygen in the owner's blood, it might not detect anything different at all... not if the owner's body has already compensated by breathing harder or by "underclocking" their brain to make dumber decisions. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | ErroneousBosh 6 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||
> The article references a study where the CO2 proportion going from 0.04% -to 0.25% causes mental problems. In other words, a difference in 0.21% of the air. I'm finding that pretty difficult to believe, to be quite honest with you. And before you say "aha, carbon dioxide brain fog!" consider that I'm about a mile from the sea with a 40mph onshore breeze. This air is about as oxygenated as it gets. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||