Actually, it might work for you. It uses an accelerometer, not a gyroscope like most pedometers. It senses changes in the force of gravity as it/you move, instead of needing to sense the impact of your feet.
Do you have or know anyone who has an iPod nano? Those have a built-in accelerometer. You could borrow that and see if it measures for you.
But you'd probably do better with a heart rate monitor. They're more expensive, but they do their calculations based on how fast your heart is beating, so the calorie burn estimate would be more accurate. It won't give you a step count, but it will give you an idea of how hard you've worked. The HUGE drawback is that it measures all heartbeats, including your base rate that you would have if you were perfectly still, so it will give you exaggerated results for slow activity-- for example, if I wore mine while gardening, it would say I had burned hundreds of calories that I really hadn't burned. You should use it for aerobic activity only-- walking, cycling, swimming, etc.
On the other hand, an accelerometer won't give you good results for any exercise where you're not bearing your own weight. It measures how fast and far you're moving, not how much weight you're moving, which is what defines work. It'll work for walking and running, but the calorie info for cycling or swimming would be way off.
Basically, decide whether you're more interested in knowing how much you move-- in which case the accelerometer like in the SparkTracker is good-- or how many calories you burn when you're working out really hard, in which case you'd probably do better with a HRM.
| current weight: 132.0