FAQ - Syncing, logging food & exercise, calorie adjustments, activity levels, accuracy
Replies
-
Marianna93637 wrote: »Thank you!
I have a Charge HR.
Question about Zumba and calories. Fitbit says I'm only burning 390-413 calories in 1 hour of Zumba (I've only had it for 2 days, so I know it's adjusting, or so I heard).
But I find it strange that I would burn the same doing Zumba as I am burning by walking. I was told by some people that zumba is not going to be calculated accurately (it will be underestimated) as would yoga, Pilates, etc because although it counts the steps it doesn't really count the jumping around, arm movement, twists and turns, etc. I thought it's supposed to look at heart rate and arm movement and steps?
So I'm very confused. I would think a Zumba class would burn at least 500 calories, it definitely feels like it.
Also, another question: I've read here that you push a button to record a workout? You mean to push the one button that's on the band and then push it at the end? I push this button all the time to see my heart rate and calories burnt, so I don't get it. Forgive me if I sound ignorant, I just want to figure out what's the best way to calculate my workouts.
I take at least 3 Zumba classes / week, planning on increasing it to 4-5, so it's a huge part of my calorie burn and I'd like to make sure it is accurately accounted for.
I just figured a few things out, ( like where to find things) but now I have some strange facts:
Monday night Zumba: 424 calories. 5482 steps, 57 minutes - ok this is good
Tuesday night Zumba: 390 calories, 0 steps!!! 55 active minutes.
Same instructor, same everything. Why didn't it count any steps??
Somehow I have 2 15 minute walks from Tuesday, but I only did one.
Walk 1: 95 calories burned, o steps!! 15 active minutes average heart rate 95
walk 2: 91 calories burned, 1591 steps, 14 active minutes, average heart rate 114.
Even if the walk is doubled, why are the stats so different? And why is it duplicated?
If it's new on you, and still adjusting, then you aren't burning the same doing the workout as a walk - it's merely estimating you are based on what it thinks your fitness level is. Is your average HR the same doing a class and a walk?
If walk is lower, then actually your walk would be less calories.
Those comments about those workouts not being accurate is based on step-based devices and whoever not knowing what they were talking about - not HR-based devices.
Yoga and Pilates could still be off though - because your HR could be high not because it's a hard workout, but rather just the nature of it. Like the Bikram hot yoga - HR is high because of heat/humidity, not because of effort.
Never go by feel either, nor sweating level - that's really useless. You could do something really intense, and then merely sit down and feel really tired for a good long 5 minutes. But you aren't burning tons of calories sitting there - you merely feel tired.
Elevated HR to supply more oxygen to working muscles must be matched with elevated breathing rate to give that increased oxygen.
As you proved out - steps, or lack of, doesn't prevent HR-based calorie burn from being used. And 400-430 / hr probably isn't that far off depending on how fit you are.
Zumba is one of those types of exercise that it's hard to make it more intense once you match the speed of the beat - you can only move so fast to the music.
But what is the avgHR and maxHR for the Zumba, you noted it for the walking, which seems right, kind of low.
But if the Fitbit isn't reading correctly, or missing a bunch of heart beats - then it's estimate based on low HR could be correct. Except the HR isn't correctly seen.
As to why steps are missed, look at your daily graph per 5 min increments and see if there are really no steps during that time.
And I'd suggest moving this out to general topics instead of buried in the FAQ which isn't really noticed by majority nor the place for general issues.0 -
Heybales, your information and willingness to help here is amazing, thank you!
I noticed that you made some important points a few times. First, pressing the activity button essentially acts like a marker to create a record over recorded data for a time range. Second, calorie burn estimates for different types of workouts are best made based on different sensors, such as steps vs HR.
In the case of my new Surge (as you probably know), there is essentially more than one activity button. I select the exercise I'm about to do, then start it. Some activities (walking, running, cycling) are GPS based and others are not, but there are at least several of each. So I have to think that selecting the type of activity does more than just decide of the GPS tracking should be on.
What I am wondering is, does FitBit make adjustments to which data contributes to it's calorie burn estimate, or otherwise change how that estimate is derived, based upon the exercise type I select?
If so, is it reasonable to conclude that there is less need to manually create records with corrected calorie estimates?
Thanks very much!0 -
Additionally, I'm wondering if FitBit Surge uses the GPS to adjust the stride length. I would think that after a few sessions of walking or running, it could do that, but I can't find any information about whether it does or not. I realize that stride length may be less important when the GPS is able to track distance, but it still seems like a good correction for it to make.0
-
My food that is logged into myfitness is syncing back to the Fitbit. But my exercise and steps from Fitbit aren't syncing to myfitness. Don't even have a line in my diary for the Fitbit calorie adjustment. Very frustrated as well.0
-
-
Day 4.... Still no steps logged, adjusted or displayed on my homepage. Getting very irritated and wondering what the point of using mfp is.0
-
jimarcher1964 wrote: »Heybales, your information and willingness to help here is amazing, thank you!
I noticed that you made some important points a few times. First, pressing the activity button essentially acts like a marker to create a record over recorded data for a time range. Second, calorie burn estimates for different types of workouts are best made based on different sensors, such as steps vs HR.
In the case of my new Surge (as you probably know), there is essentially more than one activity button. I select the exercise I'm about to do, then start it. Some activities (walking, running, cycling) are GPS based and others are not, but there are at least several of each. So I have to think that selecting the type of activity does more than just decide of the GPS tracking should be on.
What I am wondering is, does FitBit make adjustments to which data contributes to it's calorie burn estimate, or otherwise change how that estimate is derived, based upon the exercise type I select?
If so, is it reasonable to conclude that there is less need to manually create records with corrected calorie estimates?
Additionally, I'm wondering if FitBit Surge uses the GPS to adjust the stride length. I would think that after a few sessions of walking or running, it could do that, but I can't find any information about whether it does or not. I realize that stride length may be less important when the GPS is able to track distance, but it still seems like a good correction for it to make.
While it would be smart to allow a step based self-calibration of walking and running stride length (because you'd have to know it was happening and maintain the desired stride until finished) based on GPS distance - not seen any indication that it is.
It still appears to be based on impact and hang time even with Surge.
Your weight and calculated (or manually entered) stride length give calculated impact and hang time expected - and then that actual step is compared and that indicates if that step was longer or shorter than expected and adjusted as such.
It's why you can shuffle stride and then really overreach stride and as long as steps seen are correct - the distance and therefore calorie burn will be different.
And if you start the HRM and it thinks a workout going on - calorie burn will be HR-based anyway.
You can confirm if the default stride length is being auto-adjusted.
Manually enter a walk or run of set distance. Fitbit will take that distance divided by stride length and put in a new step stat to replace what was actually seen.
If you keep the Activity Record to know the start/end times, you can make the Workout Record match exactly, and then compare. Activity Record is snapshot of original stats, Workout Record replaces those with whatever is entered or calculated. No doubling up as some are concerned.
And accurate walking stride length is so important to the other non-exercise 22-23 hrs of your day. Well, minus sleepy time I guess.
Your ability to pick an exercise doesn't change the fact the HR-based calorie burn will be used and not step-based - it merely enable GPS for some events, and pre-labels the Activity Record, compared to other devices with generic label.
But no, it does exactly what you suggest, GPS on or off, hence inside options on those you mentioned. And ability to swap out others that you indicate if inside or out for GPS option to be enabled.
You can test that by picking the wrong workout, like outside biking, and then go for a walk - calorie count will be the same as if you picked a walk.0 -
@renaegry and @AndyLabrador and @Itfcgadget - issues need to be taken to the main forums - this is a sticky for the FAQ and not general discussions.
Because barely anyone checks here.
It muddies up the stated topic purpose.0 -
Thanks @heybales ! I just went out and measured my stride. Assuming FitBit used the common formula of my height * .415 (as a mail) it thought my stride was 27.39 inches. I took 87 steps in 200.5 feet, making my step length 27.655. That small difference equates to 2,600 feet in 10,000 steps.
Also, FitBit seems to use the terms "step" and "stride" interchangeably. Their instructions say to count steps and divide the length walked by the number of steps, but I believe "stride" is actually the distance covered in two steps. Not a big deal.0 -
Yes - they are incorrect in their term usage, but at least not many know the difference.
You'll also get a better measurement the longer you go, if you can keep the pace at normal daily purposeful.
What's nice there is you create an activity record later for the time covered (or use the button if device supports that) - there's your steps - you only need to know the true distance to do the math.
Half a mile not chump change for daily activity level - include exercise could be even worse.0 -
So I am now having syncing issues.
Everything from device to fitbit site is fine, but nothing ii syncing between fitbit and mfp. I have to disconnect then connect again but this time it still isn't working.
Today I appear to have an adjustment, but Wed + Thur + Fri I have nothing on mfp. On the fitbit site Tuesday + Wednesday appear okay but thats where it stops. It looks like it's syncing to fitbit but not to MFP.0 -
So I am now having syncing issues.
Everything from device to fitbit site is fine, but nothing ii syncing between fitbit and mfp. I have to disconnect then connect again but this time it still isn't working.
Today I appear to have an adjustment, but Wed + Thur + Fri I have nothing on mfp. On the fitbit site Tuesday + Wednesday appear okay but thats where it stops. It looks like it's syncing to fitbit but not to MFP.
The FAQ sticky is for discussions about FAQ related items - so rarely do people look here after they've looked once.
So to that end - taking your issue to the general group topics will be more useful - besides probably finding several topics already about the issue you can add your experience to, if not find out why or a solution.0 -
@heybales after reading your posts, the studies you have linked and several other sources, I'm questioning the utility of 24/7 heart rate monitoring. Given most of my day (probably like many people) is sitting at a desk, and that the HR does not correlate to calorie use at that time, and given questions about the accuracy of the HR sensor under activity to begin with, I'm thinking I may send my Surge back. In addition to the HR being less useful than I initially thought, the GPS tracking could sure be better.
I'm leaning toward the Garmin Vivoactive, which lacks integrated HR monitoring but can talk to an external monitor.
But I'm curious, you clearly know this topic well. Do you use an activity tracker with HR measurement?0 -
jimarcher1964 wrote: »@heybales after reading your posts, the studies you have linked and several other sources, I'm questioning the utility of 24/7 heart rate monitoring. Given most of my day (probably like many people) is sitting at a desk, and that the HR does not correlate to calorie use at that time, and given questions about the accuracy of the HR sensor under activity to begin with, I'm thinking I may send my Surge back. In addition to the HR being less useful than I initially thought, the GPS tracking could sure be better.
I'm leaning toward the Garmin Vivoactive, which lacks integrated HR monitoring but can talk to an external monitor.
But I'm curious, you clearly know this topic well. Do you use an activity tracker with HR measurement?
You should have seen all the articles that came out when the first activity tracker announced they would have constant HR monitoring.
I was under NDA for wireless carrier for an app and watch using cell phone connectivity at the time - and the company showing their wares admitted the same thing as those articles were questioning.
What's the true benefit?
They knew it was data trying to find a home for being useful. They figured at some point they'd come up with scads of data from all the users and in aggregate be able to discern some things. They weren't sure what at the time. I have no idea if they did.
And at the time of hearing it, I'd already been familiar with actual controlled research studies that had people wearing HRM's all day to discern some things (like where is the point of going from non-exercise to exercise zone - avg of 90 HR) (where is the elevated HR while sleeping - with undisturbed sleep long enough right before the biggest low of the morning).
It's why I'd never spend the money on one actually.
I want instant response while exercising, since it's intervals sometimes.
Shoot, I've run right at the edge of a HR alarm for the zone I want to be in - and breathing in causes increase of HR by 1 bpm compared to breathing out when it drops. So alarm goes off breathing in, goes off breathing out. I know Fitbit's HRM method could not do that.
Plus the HRM aspects isn't that full featured for what I want - and I enjoy the GPS accuracy of the Garmin.
I think they are trying to find a real use for the HR 24/7.
One aspect is I'm sure for better accuracy of exercise calorie burn is deciding a restingHR, though I'm disturbed they've redefined that meaning. Though there may be one stat for display, one for actual usage in formula.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they backed off the HR reading frequency just to help battery life.
First tracker to do it - the others will likely follow.0 -
Thanks @heybales !
I ordered a Garmin VivoActive to play with and compare to the Surge. The advantages of the VivoActive, as I see it, are:
- Better GPS
- ANT+ capability for footpod, bike speed meter, HR straps
- 3rd party app capability (as a developer I like that)
- Slimmer and lighter profile
- Changeable wrist straps
- Better as a sport watch overall
Advantages of the Surge, as I see it, are:
- Integrated HR
- Barometric altimeter for tracking stair climbing
- Better app / dashboard
- Better as a daily fitness tracker overall
I was pretty well convinced that I would want to return the Surge, until this morning. I suddenly remembered that my elliptical machine has the ability to measure heart rate, so I turned that on. During a brief 36 minute workout, the machine and the Surge stayed within 2 bpm of each other, and usually it was 1 bpm, which surprised me.
Additionally, yesterday evening, I went for a walk in Cambridge, among some buildings and a route that had challenged the Surge's GPS in the past. Yesterday, the GPS track was spot on.
So my concerns about the accuracy of the HR tracking (raw data - not necessarily how useful it is) and accuracy of the GPS are somewhat reduced. *Sigh* Tough choice.
As a calorie consumption tool, using a HR monitor (external or built into the watch) for things like intervals and weight lifting will be problematic. Using HR for figuring energy expenditure during normal day to day activities is not useful. But having it built in is convenient, should I decide to spontaneously go for a walk. Still, it's not all that necessary.
It is handy for calculating resting heart rate...
But as far as accuracy goes, I guess the Surge is better than I thought.
We'll see...
0 -
A little help please. ...I log my food in mfp. 1200 calories a day. I'm 5 ft 127lbs and want to lose 10lb more. According to my fitbit I'm always ' over budget '.... My activity level is active. I am struggling to understand why I am always over budget in the red. What should it be? ? Please can anyone explain it. Thank you
0 -
That fuel gauge is about useless - as it represents that moment in time you view it. And rarely does what you burn match up with what you eat, with your deficit being the difference.
If over budget, it means you had a deficit, but not as big as you wanted.
Hopefully with only 10 lbs to go you made it reasonable by selecting 250 cal deficit, or 1/2 lb weekly.
Make it unreasonable if you'd like to lose muscle mass too.
So really - hide that tile in your settings.
Use Fitbit for activity stuff, MFP for eating stuff.
So merely look at how much MFP says you have left to eat. Forget what Fitbit is trying to tell you.0 -
Do you log exercise if you kept your device on during the exercise?0
-
kherbert32 wrote: »Do you log exercise if you kept your device on during the exercise?
No.
But you can either device start or manually log an Activity Record so the stats for that workout stand out from daily stats - for review later.
Reread the FAQ for Activity Record.0 -
Ok, maybe someone can help me out a bit. I'm really confused as to why my "MapMyRun" says that I had over 24,000 steps yesterday just doing my workout and my "FitBit Flex" says I didn't even hit my 10,000 step goal. Is there something wrong with my FitBit or my MapmyRun app?? I hate to do all that work and it not count or not really doing all that work and thinking I did! Any advice? Thanks ahead of time!0
-
Open a discussion on that issue. This is the FAQ thread, will get lost in here, more people will see your question in the main chat thread area.0
-
Should you enable negative calorie adjusments?0
-
Tomk652015 wrote: »Should you enable negative calorie adjusments?
It is a personal choice. If you do, your calories adjust throughout the day and your cal. burn changes throughout the day. Some just synch late in the day and prefer that. If you want to just eat at a certain level, setup MFP to do that and do not use the negative adjustments setting.0 -
Should MFP's 'calories burned' stay the same through the day or change in line with FitBit's 'calories burned'? I can understand why FitBit's estimation varies throughout the day, because it knows how active I am (or am not), but MFP should give me a static figure based on my height, weight, activity level settings and weight loss goals, and then the difference between the two is my calorie adjustment.
But today when I look at the details of my calorie adjustment, every time I look at it the MFP calories burned estimate is higher than the time before, so my calorie adjustment is barely changing. It's currently estimating my daily calorie burn as well over the level it usually estimates as my maintenance level, which surely it can't do if this figure is based on my settings! Is anyone else seeing this? I can't understand where this MFP figure is coming from, and it's messing up my calorie adjustment, so I don't know how much I should eat today!0 -
My Fitness Pal has picked up my steps from my fitbit zip, however, I wasn't can't work out if I need to manually add the 2 hours of general cleaning. Can anyone help me???0
-
@denorios & @MrsJ1210 - you should probably be asking these questions over in the regular discussion section, as the FAQ thread doesn't get as much attention. It's really meant as a reference, not an active thread.
That being said:
@denorios - it looks to me like you might be getting caught up in a current MFP bug that I have seen others talking about (over in the discussion threads). I haven't experienced the problem personally, and I'm not sure MFP has acknowledged they have a bug yet, but it sure looks like one to me.
@MrsJ1210 - I'd probably not manually log the cleaning unless it was particularly strenuous, but with few steps. For typical everyday stuff, I just trust my Fitbit to estimate it correctly.0 -
Hi, I did all off the steps above to sync my surge (steps) to MFP but I still can not see the steps I took. Its only the steps the other data works. Can someone help me? ( I speak Dutch, so my English is a bit poor sorry for that)0
-
Hi, I did all off the steps above to sync my surge (steps) to MFP but I still can not see the steps I took. Its only the steps the other data works. Can someone help me? ( I speak Dutch, so my English is a bit poor sorry for that)
On your MFP phone app, select "Steps" from the menu, and make sure that "Fitbit Tracker" is the selected device.0 -
Should MFP's 'calories burned' stay the same through the day or change in line with FitBit's 'calories burned'? I can understand why FitBit's estimation varies throughout the day, because it knows how active I am (or am not), but MFP should give me a static figure based on my height, weight, activity level settings and weight loss goals, and then the difference between the two is my calorie adjustment.
But today when I look at the details of my calorie adjustment, every time I look at it the MFP calories burned estimate is higher than the time before, so my calorie adjustment is barely changing. It's currently estimating my daily calorie burn as well over the level it usually estimates as my maintenance level, which surely it can't do if this figure is based on my settings! Is anyone else seeing this? I can't understand where this MFP figure is coming from, and it's messing up my calorie adjustment, so I don't know how much I should eat today!
Yes, it's definitely a bug. I'm having the same issue. MFP hasn't publicly acknowledged it. But I did get an email from tech support yesterday saying they're aware of it and working on a fix.0 -
Should MFP's 'calories burned' stay the same through the day or change in line with FitBit's 'calories burned'? I can understand why FitBit's estimation varies throughout the day, because it knows how active I am (or am not), but MFP should give me a static figure based on my height, weight, activity level settings and weight loss goals, and then the difference between the two is my calorie adjustment.
But today when I look at the details of my calorie adjustment, every time I look at it the MFP calories burned estimate is higher than the time before, so my calorie adjustment is barely changing. It's currently estimating my daily calorie burn as well over the level it usually estimates as my maintenance level, which surely it can't do if this figure is based on my settings! Is anyone else seeing this? I can't understand where this MFP figure is coming from, and it's messing up my calorie adjustment, so I don't know how much I should eat today!
MFP's calories burn is explained in the 2nd half of the FAQ.
The terminology used is somewhat misleading though.
You are correct - should not change.
So rest of the day is based on the math you suggested.
So my example right now - 2:28 pm
9:32 hrs left, or 572 min left in day.
MFP calories burned - 2165 (all day projection - static)
Fitbit calories burned - 2312 (all day projection - dynamic)
Based on 1452 calories burned (Fitbit stat)
Fitbit calorie adjustment - 147 (actually MFP adjustment based on Fitbit, misleading again)
Fitbit burned 2312 - 1452 stat based = 860 MFP projection rest of day.
860 calories / 572 min = 1.503 burn rate.
2165 all day / 1440 min = 1.503 burn rate.
Match.
See if you can figure out what is changing.
Be aware that MFP doesn't adjust the BMR the math is based on until 10 lbs is lost - or you are in your Diet/Fitness profile and Ok out to update the settings.
So get your Mifflin BMR from apps - BMR calc.
MFP calories burned / BMR = activity level factor.
1.25 - Sedentary
1.4 - Lightly Active
1.6 - Active
1.8 - Very Active
I'm curious if you nail a level - or they have you between levels.
Of course if the weight is changing on you, that'll change the BMR and cause between levels - so confirm the weight MFP is using.
1
