We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Heart Rate Monitor
joshuakcaron
Posts: 343 Member
How accurate are heart rate monitors when they tell you how many calories you burned?
0
Replies
-
They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.0
-
joshuakcaron wrote: »How accurate are heart rate monitors when they tell you how many calories you burned?
Depends what activity you're doing and whether you have a reliable understanding of your own VO2Max.
They're designed around steady state aerobic range CV work; running, cycling etc. As soon as you're talking about anything where your HR varies then the level of accuracy varies significantly.
Inconsistently inconsistent pretty much sums it up0 -
They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?0 -
If you're referring to machines like treadmills, ellipticals, exercise bikes, etc, then yes, a HR monitor that has a strap or sensor attached to you and measuring your heart rate will be far more accurate than the machine's calories. Most machines just use a (very) generic calculation based on age, weight, and sex to calculate calorie burn. That's going to be essentially a semi-educated guess at best.joshuakcaron wrote: »
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
Having said that, some machines do have the silver handles you can hold on to that will actually measure HR and should give you a better calorie burn, but you have no idea what kind of algorithm they are using and it will probably vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, and possibly even between models from the same manufacturer. The best, and most consistent, bet is to get a HRM of your own and wear it while doing any steady-state endurance work. As mentioned by @MeanderingMammal above, trying to use a HRM for non-steady-state work like weight lifting will result in sharply less accurate guesstimations. Also, be aware that even at their best HRM calorie numbers are suspect. Just some are more suspect than others.
0 -
Ok
If you're referring to machines like treadmills, ellipticals, exercise bikes, etc, then yes, a HR monitor that has a strap or sensor attached to you and measuring your heart rate will be far more accurate than the machine's calories. Most machines just use a (very) generic calculation based on age, weight, and sex to calculate calorie burn. That's going to be essentially a semi-educated guess at best.joshuakcaron wrote: »
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
Having said that, some machines do have the silver handles you can hold on to that will actually measure HR and should give you a better calorie burn, but you have no idea what kind of algorithm they are using and it will probably vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, and possibly even between models from the same manufacturer. The best, and most consistent, bet is to get a HRM of your own and wear it while doing any steady-state endurance work. As mentioned by @MeanderingMammal above, trying to use a HRM for non-steady-state work like weight lifting will result in sharply less accurate guesstimations. Also, be aware that even at their best HRM calorie numbers are suspect. Just some are more suspect than others.
Okay I just feel like I'm going to get hate from the community if I have any questions when they look at my exercise log. I have received heat in the past for logging half the amount of calories my machine said I burned then had the people from the community rage at me saying the number was too high. Now my HRM says even more calories.0 -
joshuakcaron wrote: »They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
I've used my HRM while on a machine with the silver handles that are also measuring. When I glance at my HRM and the machine, the actual heart rates are exact -- but the final calorie burn they calculate is different by 150-200 calories, with the machine normally capturing higher calories than my HRM. So I'm assuming the formula in the background is different. As I said, when I use my HRM, at least it's consistent for ME -- every workout measured by the same device. I don't eat back all my exercise calories since I really don't know how accurate it is. Does that make sense?
0 -
joshuakcaron wrote: »They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
I've used my HRM while on a machine with the silver handles that are also measuring. When I glance at my HRM and the machine, the actual heart rates are exact -- but the final calorie burn they calculate is different by 150-200 calories, with the machine normally capturing higher calories than my HRM. So I'm assuming the formula in the background is different. As I said, when I use my HRM, at least it's consistent for ME -- every workout measured by the same device. I don't eat back all my exercise calories since I really don't know how accurate it is. Does that make sense?
No I get what you're saying I'm just afraid to get backlash from the community. Anytime I need help instead of getting an answer I get yelled at for my diary. I use a scale and now I bought this heart rate monitor cause I want to be accurate in hopes I won't be yelled at by everyone again.
0 -
LOL, got it. Don't worry about the backlash. I think most people have good intentions when they respond and things just come out wrong when typing on a computer sometimes. As for being accurate, a heart rate monitor is going to get you in the ballpark even if it isn't perfect. I would get one and use it consistently when you exercise.0
-
OkaLOL, got it. Don't worry about the backlash. I think most people have good intentions when they respond and things just come out wrong when typing on a computer sometimes. As for being accurate, a heart rate monitor is going to get you in the ballpark even if it isn't perfect. I would get one and use it consistently when you exercise.
Okay awesome. Mine keeps track of all sorts of things. It even makes changes based on going uphill and going downhill when it calculates your calories.0 -
joshuakcaron wrote: »They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
I've used my HRM while on a machine with the silver handles that are also measuring. When I glance at my HRM and the machine, the actual heart rates are exact -- but the final calorie burn they calculate is different by 150-200 calories, with the machine normally capturing higher calories than my HRM. So I'm assuming the formula in the background is different. As I said, when I use my HRM, at least it's consistent for ME -- every workout measured by the same device. I don't eat back all my exercise calories since I really don't know how accurate it is. Does that make sense?
What type of HRM are you using, if it's a polar you are reading your heart rate from your sensor more than likely, not the machine.joshuakcaron wrote: »joshuakcaron wrote: »They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
I've used my HRM while on a machine with the silver handles that are also measuring. When I glance at my HRM and the machine, the actual heart rates are exact -- but the final calorie burn they calculate is different by 150-200 calories, with the machine normally capturing higher calories than my HRM. So I'm assuming the formula in the background is different. As I said, when I use my HRM, at least it's consistent for ME -- every workout measured by the same device. I don't eat back all my exercise calories since I really don't know how accurate it is. Does that make sense?
No I get what you're saying I'm just afraid to get backlash from the community. Anytime I need help instead of getting an answer I get yelled at for my diary. I use a scale and now I bought this heart rate monitor cause I want to be accurate in hopes I won't be yelled at by everyone again.
With all these experts here, if you're not doing it their way, your doing it wrong, if its not a device they use then it's not any good. you have to look past that.
0 -
ScubaSteve1962 wrote: »joshuakcaron wrote: »They just use a formula, so they aren't perfect. However, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it's consistent for ME. So I can see how Monday's spin class compares to Wednesday's spin class. I like it and it motivates me to work hard.
Should I use it to track my calories burned? Is it more accurate than the machines?
I've used my HRM while on a machine with the silver handles that are also measuring. When I glance at my HRM and the machine, the actual heart rates are exact -- but the final calorie burn they calculate is different by 150-200 calories, with the machine normally capturing higher calories than my HRM. So I'm assuming the formula in the background is different. As I said, when I use my HRM, at least it's consistent for ME -- every workout measured by the same device. I don't eat back all my exercise calories since I really don't know how accurate it is. Does that make sense?
What type of HRM are you using, if it's a polar you are reading your heart rate from your sensor more than likely, not the machine.
Oh, I know what you're saying -- no, it isn't a Polar. My HRM is bluetooth and I read the output on my phone. The machines at my gym have no bluetooth capability, so it's definitely not a conflict there...definitely 2 different readings.0 -
^^ Sorry, botched that and my reply didn't stand out... Here it is again:
Oh, I know what you're saying -- no, it isn't a Polar. My HRM is bluetooth and I read the output on my phone. The machines at my gym have no bluetooth capability, so it's definitely not a conflict there...definitely 2 different readings0 -
joshuakcaron wrote: »Okay I just feel like I'm going to get hate from the community if I have any questions when they look at my exercise log. I have received heat in the past for logging half the amount of calories my machine said I burned then had the people from the community rage at me saying the number was too high. Now my HRM says even more calories.
Lots of people have different views on how to treat the figures, but it's really just a question of understanding the limitations of the tools you're using. What I'd say is that very few really understand how they work.
Broadly calorie expenditure is a function of mass and distance, with a factoring to account for the type of exercise being done. Different tools collect data to use as a proxy to approximate calorie expenditure from it.
HRM based calorie estimations are based on research done using running machines, rowing and cycling ergometers. That's only valid in the range they wee designed around.
Step counters use an approximation of pace length to determine distance, and work out from there. The snag with that is that walking and running pace lengths differ, and an efficient runner will have the same number of steps regardless of speed.
With all that in mind some people eat back all of their calories, some eat back a percentage and some don't eat back exercise calories at all.
Personally I eat back most of mine, largely because I train for performance so need to fuel myself properly. I run and cycle so tend to use my GPS, and corroborate with HR.
For you, I'm assuming that your priority is losing weight, so you exercise to help you generate a calorie deficit. MFP is designed so that you've got a deficit designed in. In theory you don't need to exercise at all to get that, so you should eat back all of the energy that you expend. In practice there are lots of sources of error, hence some people only eating a proportion back. For most that'll mean that you should lose a little faster than you intend, but it's up to you to decide if that's something you want or not. Bear in mind that you're looking for sustainability, so starving yourself isn't the wisest move. In fact you should aim to avoid going below 1400 to 1500 calories for sustainable health.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.7K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions