Estimating the activity level

allergictodiets

A quick question: I own two activity trackers ( Fitbit One and Polar V800 ). Both "agree" that I burn about 2500 kcal a day. I commute to work on my bike ( ~ 5hrs / week ), do 3 interval training sessions ( 45 min each ) and 3 yoga sessions per week.
When I put my data in the Scooby Calculator and choose "Moderate activity" it gives me a TDEE of 2166kcal. For "Strenuous exercise" the number is 2411kcal, closer to the trackers' estimations. What would you choose? Biking and interval training raises my pulse above 140 bpm, but I still wouldn't call my exercise "strenuous". Or does my active lifestyle count?
Thanks in advance for your help!

Jennbecca33

Of course, active lifestyle counts a ton. It's the number of hours you exercise plus daily activity - not really the "strenuous" part. Definitely not moderate activity - go with the 5-6 hr level or higher. Fitbit will also underestimate for things that aren't step based activity - among other things, so chances are, your TDEE could be higher than what Fitbit is telling you.

MacCroc

Wow, that's very similar to my activity level! On Scoobys I use 7 hours + activity level, which matches my TDEE of around 2500 (established during the reset). 5-6 hours only gives me 2280 ccal, which is definitely under my TDEE.

allergictodiets

Thanks! I'll try upping my calories slowly - I do not think I have enough courage to do a full reset!

heybales

Don't guess from 5 rough levels when you have a device trying to give you infinite daily levels.
Just use a weekly average though.

But more to that point of correcting the devices for non-step based activity.

The Fitbit should be badly underestimating the bike ride - because calorie calculations for steps walking or running have no bearing with the subset of "steps" seen biking.

If the Polar is doing HR for that, it should be more accurate. If it actually matches Fitbit, then sheer coincidence, don't always count on that.

Intervals will be more accurate on the Fitbit, since HR is falsely elevated on intervals and Polar should be giving an inflated value. Whatever Fitbit sees is better estimate.

Yoga is neither step nor HR based, should be manually logged.

I'd say spend 2 weeks correctly the data in say Fitbit, using Polar's HR estimate for calories biking, leave Fitbit alone for intervals (unless elliptical, which isn't step based either) if the distance for normal walking jogging seems correct, and manually log yoga on Fitbit.

Then use the reports they send you using the corrected TDEE to base your math on.

And then keep an eye on it.

MacCroc

@heybales, which activity tracker would you recommend for correctly tracking bike rides? I am looking into buying one and I cycle a lot, so Fitbit doesn't seem appropriate.

allergictodiets

Thanks @heybales for your tips. Fitbit and Polar agree on the calories if I manually enter the HR-based calorie estimates for bike riding from Polar in Fitbit. They disagree on the step count because Polar "converts" the kilometers on the bike in steps as well.
I have been using Polar for my intervals / yoga as it gives me training profiles for those. What do you mean when you say the HR is "falsely elevated on intervals"?

heybales

That can happen on gentle rides I've noticed, almost getting equal. But rare and still coincidence.

Intervals.
Walk and notice HR needed for that level of intensity. 90-100?
Sprint all out and HR sky rockets, notice the level.
Now walk.

Does HR instantly go back down to the HR level needed for walking?
No, it slowly lowers down.
That whole time it's inflated. That could take 1 - 2 min.
Your average HR will read high because of it, even though the max was only for say 1 second, and the walking was for say 2 minutes.
How many intervals you get in determines how elevated.

That's falsely elevated.

Same thing with lifting weights. The HR goes up not because of high level aerobic exercise, it's actually anaerobic if done right, no oxygen even needed, at least for short bouts. But the HR goes up and comes down slow as you sit or stand there resting.
Obviously that high HR isn't needed for standing or sitting.
Falsely elevated.

Your fitness level and recovery speed dictate how badly elevated.
Bad fitness, may not be able to get it that high, even though it comes down slower, to a lower number that really isn't that low because of being out of shape.
Good fitness, may have a huge range, and may move faster, but you may be doing more intervals per time too, so the elevated average is still inflated.

That's why manually logging using the database entry, which is based on studies, where they measured the actual increase in heat in a metabolic chamber while people lifted, is better estimate.

heybales

MacCroc wrote: »

@heybales, which activity tracker would you recommend for correctly tracking bike rides? I am looking into buying one and I cycle a lot, so Fitbit doesn't seem appropriate.

I've heard of none intended for biking and daily activity.

Have to be something with HR reading then. And it would be nice if something where you can tweak the values if you can get better than calculated by device.
Fitbit HR devices show no values.

Also, the wrist HR devices seem to be from great in all types of exercise to great when resting and progressively getting worse as HR goes up, some never seeing true higher HR readings.
So YMMV, and you wouldn't know without something to compare to and testing your desired exercise with.

Garmin's FR15 is mainly intended for runners as daily activity tracker, but because it works with their HRM strap, and has a speed setting, it would be a basic bike computer and give good calorie burn estimate.

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/06/garmin-forerunner-15-depth-review.html

And then a step up in price, and includes cycling with activity tracker, and other sports, the Vivoactive.

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2015/01/vivoactive-smartwatch-vivofit2.html

Or the Vivofit2 and HRM strap while riding, but no speed display.

allergictodiets

@MacCroc - what is your budget? Polar M400 is an activity tracker with GPS. You would need a HR strap though.

3furballs

I wouldn't recommend the Fitbit charge HR. I had one but took it back as on comparison to manually checking my hr during workouts it was not accurate.

MacCroc

Thanks for advice! I will look into those. Still not sure if I actually need one since I am planning to give up counting calories within a year. And if their accuracy is questionable...

heybales

MacCroc wrote: »

Thanks for advice! I will look into those. Still not sure if I actually need one since I am planning to give up counting calories within a year. And if their accuracy is questionable...

They are good for the other 23 hours of the day. The 1 hr of exercise, and maybe 5% of weekly calories - may need help being more accurate.