The Future of Physical Enhancement
Linas JuozėnasShare
The Future of Physical Enhancement
What could help us move with greater freedom, train more effectively and remain capable for longer? New science opens worthwhile possibilities. Understanding what has actually been demonstrated helps us decide which possibilities deserve a place in our lives.
This section explores better ways to study movement, wearable sensors, personalised nutrition, artificial intelligence, robotics and biological research. It also asks who benefits, what remains uncertain and how people can retain a meaningful say in the technologies they use.
“Enhancement” is a broad word
For an athlete, improvement may mean performing a familiar task faster or more efficiently. For someone receiving rehabilitation, it may mean regaining an activity. For a person using assistive technology, it may mean reaching, communicating or moving with greater independence. These goals deserve to be understood on their own terms. WHO places functioning, participation and inclusion at the centre of assistive technology.[1]
A medical treatment also has a particular purpose: treating or managing a health condition. Evidence that it helps selected patients does not establish that it benefits healthy people seeking additional strength or endurance. Equally, a device that helps someone move while wearing it has achieved something different from a training programme that improves their ability after the device is removed.
The following distinctions offer a way to read the section. They describe specific claims and uses; an entire field such as robotics or genetics cannot be assigned a single evidence label.
| Status | What it means | What to ask next |
|---|---|---|
| Established for a defined use | Evidence supports a particular application in a specified population or setting. | Does that use match this person, task and goal? |
| Promising human research | Human studies show a useful signal, with questions about repeatability, lasting benefit or wider use. | How large and consistent was the benefit, and what comparison was used? |
| Early experimental research | Work in cells, animals or small exploratory human studies is testing a mechanism or initial feasibility. | What still needs to be established about human benefit and harm? |
| Speculative or unverified claim | A proposed capability lacks suitable evidence for the advertised use. | Is this a research question, a forecast or a claim being sold as a result? |
Progress can be exciting without being ready for general use. It can also be valuable without looking futuristic. WHO guidance continues to support everyday physical activity and muscle strengthening, with opportunities adapted to different abilities.[2] Regular movement remains relevant as technology develops.
Look for a benefit you can describe
Terms such as “smart”, “precision” and “personalised” describe an ambition or an approach. To understand their value, ask what the system changes and how that change was evaluated. A useful innovation should answer a question that matters to its intended users.
What improved?
Was the result a more accurate measurement, a change in a laboratory marker, greater comfort or better performance of a real task? Ask how much it improved and whether the difference matters in daily life or sport.
Who was studied?
Look at the participants, comparison group, setting and length of follow-up. Results from a small group under supervision leave questions about other people and ordinary use. Repeated findings help build confidence.
What does using it require?
Consider the full experience: setup, training, fit, cost, maintenance, data sharing and access to support. A benefit needs to remain useful within the person's circumstances and priorities.
Measurement and decision-making need separate scrutiny. The V3 framework for digital measurement distinguishes checking the sensor, validating the measurement and establishing its meaning for a particular clinical use.[3] Applied to fitness, this suggests asking both “Can it measure this?” and “Will using this information help me make a better decision?”
Imagine a device estimating recovery from overnight data. Agreement with a reference measurement would support that measurement claim. Showing that its training suggestions improve outcomes would require further evaluation. This is an illustration of the distinction, not a verdict on every recovery tool.
Personalisation should remain understandable. A plan can take account of experience, preferences, health, equipment and available time. If an additional test or algorithm is proposed, ask what decision it changes and what evidence supports that change.
Ten areas shaping the conversation
These articles examine the ideas behind emerging tools and methods, their possible applications and the limits of current knowledge. Follow the sequence for a broad overview, or enter through the subject closest to your interests.
Advancements in Exercise Science
Explore how biomechanics, equipment and research methods can help us understand the demands of movement. Better analysis can make previously difficult questions easier to study and help researchers compare different approaches.
For example, OpenCap research demonstrated estimates of movement and forces from smartphone videos combined with computational models.[4] That is a development in measurement; whether a particular training decision improves health or performance remains a further question.
Consider: What can the method tell us, and how might that inform practice?
Explore exercise science →Wearable Technology Innovations
Explore sensors worn on the body, including devices and textiles intended to capture information about movement or physiology. The useful question is how a recorded signal becomes information a person can act on.
Look for validation of the particular measurement and intended use.[3] Comfort, fit and the effort of keeping a device working also belong in the decision. A richer dashboard is most helpful when the extra information answers a clear question.
Consider: Which decision would this measurement help me make?
Explore wearable innovations →Genetic and Cellular Therapies
Learn the differences between studying genes, altering gene activity or DNA, and using cells as treatments. Some advances already have tightly defined medical uses: Casgevy, for example, is authorised in the EU for selected patients with particular inherited blood disorders.[5]
That authorisation does not establish an enhancement treatment for healthy athletes. Reading a person's DNA is also different from changing it. Athletic performance reflects many genetic and environmental influences; a genetic association alone does not establish an ideal training plan.[6]
Consider: Is the claim about a disease treatment, a genetic test or an experimental intervention?
Explore genetic and cellular therapies →Nutrition Science
Consider personalised nutrition through the practical needs of the person: activity, health, food preferences, culture, resources and enjoyment. Emerging tests and biological data raise interesting questions about how much additional tailoring they can usefully provide.
In the European Food4Me trial, personalised advice improved dietary behaviour, but adding the tested biological and genetic information did not improve its effectiveness further.[7] This finding concerns that intervention; it illustrates why each added layer of personalisation needs evaluation.
Consider: What does the extra information add to workable food guidance?
Explore nutrition science →Pharmacological Aids
Examine performance-aid claims by distinguishing medicines, supplements and experimental substances. Relevant questions include the intended benefit, evidence in humans, adverse effects and the context in which a treatment is appropriate.
Sport adds a separate rule system. WADA's 2026 List prohibits specified substances and methods, including gene and cell doping; applicable status should be checked against current rules.[8] Athletes who need a prohibited treatment may require a Therapeutic Use Exemption.[9]
Consider: What is supported medically, and what rules apply to this athlete?
Explore pharmacological and performance aids →Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Explore systems that analyse movement, identify patterns or generate explanations and training suggestions. These tasks differ: evaluating a written answer does not establish the accuracy of an injury forecast or the benefit of a training programme.
WHO's guidance on generative AI highlights inaccurate outputs, biased data and the need for human oversight.[10] Ask whether a system has been evaluated for the people and decisions involved, and how users can question or correct its advice.
Consider: What has this system been tested to do?
Explore AI and machine learning →Robotics and Exoskeletons
Explore robotic assistance for movement, rehabilitation and particular physical tasks. A 2022 study showed that a personalised ankle exoskeleton could reduce the energy needed to walk a given distance under the conditions studied.[11] Such results make it possible to investigate where assistance is useful.
Benefits while wearing a device and lasting changes after training need separate evaluation. Read with attention to the intended user, task, comfort and practical support. The person's preferred way of moving belongs at the centre of the discussion.
Consider: Does this help the person do something they want to do?
Explore robotics and exoskeletons →Virtual and Augmented Reality
Explore immersive environments and digital overlays as ways to present cues, rehearse situations and create interactive movement experiences. An enjoyable activity, a realistic simulation and effective skill practice are related ambitions that need different evaluations.
Ask what the person actually practises and whether any improvement carries over to the intended activity. Space, movement access, supervision where needed and comfort with the display all affect whether an experience fits its user.
Consider: What useful skill or activity does the experience support?
Explore virtual and augmented reality →Space and Extreme Environment Training
Consider how preparation changes when the environment imposes unfamiliar demands. In spaceflight, exercise research helps develop countermeasures against physical deconditioning, including changes affecting muscle and bone.[12] Preserving capability is itself a substantial achievement.
Space, heat, cold and altitude present different problems. The chapter examines those differences and the role of preparation, equipment and specialist support. An astronaut's protocol should be understood within its mission context before drawing lessons for training on Earth.
Consider: Which environmental demand is the preparation designed to address?
Explore space and extreme environments →Ethical and Societal Implications
Consider access, fair play, personal choice, data use and the distribution of benefits and burdens. WHO's work on assistive technology highlights that access depends on services, trained people and affordable products as well as invention.[1]
Ask who helps define success. Can users decline monitoring? Can equipment be maintained locally? Could a team or workplace create pressure to adopt a technology? These questions belong in design and evaluation from the beginning.
Consider: Whose needs and choices shape this innovation?
Explore ethical and societal implications →Choose a route through the articles
- To understand everyday training tools: Begin with exercise science, then explore wearables and AI. Keep a specific training question in mind.
- To examine claims about personalised biology: Read nutrition science, genetic and cellular therapies, and performance aids. Keep the purpose and evidence for each approach distinct.
- To explore new ways of moving and practising: Start with robotics and virtual and augmented reality, then consider the specialised demands of space and extreme environments.
- To think about the future we want: Begin with ethical and societal implications, then revisit any technology through the experience of the people expected to use it.
As you read, keep a simple note: the claimed benefit, the people studied and the main unanswered question. Add what would make the approach useful to you or your community. This habit remains valuable when today's products and forecasts have changed.
You can be interested in a field without adopting its tools. A worthwhile next step might be understanding a measurement, asking a coach a clearer question or identifying a barrier that better equipment could address.
Keep medical decisions connected to medical care. This section provides general education. If a claim concerns treating a condition or changing prescribed treatment, discuss it with an appropriate healthcare professional. A research finding or commercial offer does not establish suitability for an individual.
Sources and further reading
Selected official guidance and research support the distinctions and examples in this introduction. Sources were checked in September 2026. The chapter map, questions and reading routes are editorial guidance; this is not a systematic review or a forecast of when emerging technologies will become widely useful. Study findings describe the interventions and populations examined. Medical authorisations and sport rules should be checked again when a decision depends on their current status.
- World Health Organization. Assistive technology. Fact sheet, 2024.Functioning, participation and the services needed for access. Return to text ↑
- World Health Organization. Physical activity. Fact sheet, 2024.Health benefits and activity opportunities across different abilities. Return to text ↑
- Goldsack JC et al. Verification, analytical validation, and clinical validation (V3). npj Digital Medicine, 2020;3:55.A framework for evaluating digital measurements; the fitness example is an editorial application. Return to text ↑
- Uhlrich SD et al. OpenCap: Human movement dynamics from smartphone videos. PLOS Computational Biology, 2023;19:e1011462.Original validation and field research; measurement capability does not establish every possible downstream benefit. Return to text ↑
- European Medicines Agency. Casgevy: European public assessment report. Medicine overview and product information.Disease-specific authorisation and eligibility; consult current product information. Return to text ↑
- US National Library of Medicine. Is athletic performance determined by genetics?. MedlinePlus Genetics.Genetic and environmental contributions to a complex trait. Return to text ↑
- Celis-Morales C et al. Effect of personalized nutrition on health-related behaviour change: evidence from the Food4Me European randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Epidemiology, 2017;46:578–588.Six-month randomised intervention; findings concern the forms of personalisation tested. Return to text ↑
- World Anti-Doping Agency. The Prohibited List. 2026 rules and current list access.Includes gene and cell doping. Rules are updated; confirm status for the relevant date and competition. Return to text ↑
- World Anti-Doping Agency. Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs). Athlete and support-personnel guidance.Medical need and anti-doping requirements must be considered together. Return to text ↑
- World Health Organization. WHO releases AI ethics and governance guidance for large multi-modal models. Guidance announcement, 2024.Generative AI risks and oversight; this does not rate individual fitness products. Return to text ↑
- Slade P et al. Personalizing exoskeleton assistance while walking in the real world. Nature, 2022;610:277–282.Original research on a particular ankle exoskeleton and walking tasks. Return to text ↑
- NASA. Astronaut Exercise. Research overview, 2024.Spaceflight exercise research and countermeasures against deconditioning. Return to text ↑