Lark is a digital health program that offers weight loss, diabetes prevention, and "mind body" health coaching through an AI-powered app. It is often marketed to individuals by their insurance companies or employers, sometimes without their explicit consent. The program includes 24/7 digital health coaching, a smart scale, food and activity trackers, helpful tips and resources, and other program-specific devices. If eligible, individuals can join Lark at no extra cost with insurance coverage.
Program Components and Features
Lark offers a variety of features aimed at supporting users in their health journeys. These include:
- Digital Health Coaching: Lark provides 24/7 digital health coaching through a smartphone or tablet.
- Smart Scale: Enrollees receive a smart scale to track their weight.
- Lark Health App: The app includes food and activity trackers.
- Educational Resources: Users have access to helpful tips and resources.
- Program-Specific Devices: Depending on the program, additional devices may be included.
- Community Support: Most Lark programs offer live coaching opportunities and a community of other Lark members.
The app is designed for personal health tracking for informational purposes only and is not a medical device intended to diagnose, treat, or cure any disease. The content provided is not medical advice or a substitute for professional medical guidance.
User Experiences and Concerns
User reviews of Lark reveal a mixed bag of experiences. While some users find the program helpful and encouraging, others express concerns about its effectiveness and user-friendliness. Some common themes emerge from these reviews:
Positive Feedback:
- Some users found the AI encouragement helpful and the information useful.
- One user reported losing 25 lbs and gaining new knowledge about activity levels.
- Some users appreciate the free scale and blood pressure monitoring.
- Some users report that the information was USEFUL and strangely AI encouragement HELPFUL.
Negative Feedback:
- AI Coaching Limitations: Many users find the AI "coach" to be an unhelpful bot with pre-programmed, childish responses. They express frustration with the inability to ask questions or provide real feedback.
- It's not really a coach. You can not ask questions. It only supplies the answers that it wants.
- Food Logging Issues: Several users complain about the food logging system, describing it as incomprehensible and inaccurate. They note that the app often provides generic or incorrect feedback on meals.
- Incomprehensible as to logging food as you can essentially put any food in and it will tell you you ate a good meal.
- Technical Problems: Some users have experienced technical issues, such as the app freezing or being unresponsive.
- My app is frozen since last week
- Inaccurate Information: Some users report that the calorie counts are way off and that they receive incorrect information about the nutritional content of their food.
- Lack of Personalization: Some users feel that the program is not tailored to their individual needs and that the coaching is too generic.
- Syncing Problems: The app does not sync with some devices, such as Garmin watches, requiring users to manually enter activity data.
- Limited Data Storage: The app only saves one month's worth of data, which can be frustrating for long-term users.
- Infantilizing Coaching: Some users find the AI coaching to be infantilizing, treating them like they are stupid and lazy.
- The coaching (which is AI nonsense) is infantilizing. You can’t actually respond to it - just select what it tells you.
- Guilt-Inducing Feedback: Some users report that the coach is constantly guilting them about healthy meals, even when they are eating a plant-based diet with plenty of fruits and vegetables.
- this coach is constantly guilting me about incredibly healthy meals. "you got a good amount of fruits and veggies, but you got some carbs".
Concerns About Effectiveness and Scientific Backing
While Lark promotes itself as a clinically proven weight loss and diabetes prevention program, some experts raise concerns about the validity and interpretation of its research.
Read also: Comprehensive Look at Lark Program
- Limited Long-Term Data: A key concern is the lack of long-term data. Studies that don't have at least five years of follow-up are considered less valuable because they may not capture the long-term effects of weight loss attempts, which often include weight cycling.
- Small Sample Sizes: Some studies have small sample sizes, which may not be representative of the broader population. For example, one study started with 3,933 Lark members, but only 414 provided beginning and ending weights at 12 months.
- Modest Weight Loss: The weight loss achieved by participants in Lark's programs may be modest. One study found that participants who completed the program lost, on average, 2% more weight than those who didn't, which translates to about 4 pounds more for a 200-pound person over a year.
- Reliance on Weight as the Primary Outcome: Some critics point out that Lark's studies primarily focus on weight loss as the key outcome, without measuring other important health indicators like blood sugar levels.
- Potential for Weight Cycling: There are concerns that Lark, like other weight loss programs, may inadvertently contribute to weight cycling, which has been independently linked to harm.
- CDC Backing: Another concern is that the CDC's endorsement of Lark may lead people to incorrectly assume that the program is trustworthy and effective.
Analysis of Weight Loss Outcomes in Lark DPP
A study examined the weight loss outcomes of members enrolled in the Lark Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP). The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the AI-powered program in facilitating weight loss and reducing the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D).
Study Design and Participants:
The study included 3,933 Lark members, but only 414 members provided both beginning and ending weights at the 12-month mark. These 414 members were divided into two groups:
- Group 1 (CDC Qualifiers): Completed ≥4 educational lessons over 9 months (n = 191)
- Group 2 (CDC Non-Qualifiers): Did not complete the required CDC lessons but provided weigh-ins at 12 months (n = 223)
Key Findings:
- Weight Loss:
- Group 1 (CDC qualifiers) lost an average of 5.3% of their body weight.
- Group 2 (CDC non-qualifiers) lost an average of 3.3% of their body weight.
- Weight Loss Maintenance:
- Members who experienced a weight loss nadir (lowest weight reached) during the program experienced significantly greater weight loss maintenance at 12 months.
- The average adjusted weight loss maintenance at 12 months was 5.3% for CDC qualifiers.
- Engagement and Weight Loss:
- Engaging with AI coaching and frequent weighing increased the likelihood of achieving ≥5% weight loss.
- Members with higher engagement in coaching exchanges were more likely to achieve ≥5% weight loss.
- Members who weighed in more frequently were also more likely to achieve ≥5% weight loss.
- Demographic Factors:
- Men were 27.3% more likely than women to attain ≥5% weight loss.
- Younger members experienced greater weight loss maintenance at 12 months compared to older members.
Statistical Analysis:
The study used various statistical methods to analyze the data, including:
- Logistic regression to identify factors associated with achieving ≥5% weight loss.
- Analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare weight loss outcomes between different groups.
- T-tests to compare means between groups.
Limitations:
- High Attrition Rate: Only a small percentage of the initial participants (414 out of 3,933) provided complete data at 12 months, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
- Self-Reported Data: The study relied on self-reported data for inclusion criteria and other variables, which may be subject to bias.
- Limited Demographic Information: The study had limited access to demographic information, as members were not required to input these data.
- Lack of Medical Information: The study did not include medical information such as A1c results or diagnosis history.
Interpretation:
The study suggests that the Lark DPP can be an effective method for delivering the DPP in a scalable manner. However, the modest weight loss achieved and the high attrition rate raise concerns about the program's long-term effectiveness and sustainability.
Read also: Weight Loss Guide Andalusia, AL
Read also: Beef jerky: A high-protein option for shedding pounds?