Have you tried GLP1 medications and found it didn't work for you? We'd like to hear about your experiences, what you tried, why it didn't work and how you're doing now. Click here to tell us your story
Do you use heart rate monitor for exercising? which one?
Replies
-
Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!
Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.
Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.
Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.0 -
babypunkprincess wrote: »I have a cheap sport line from walmart (no chest strap) I was wondering how accurate it was but it seems pretty accurate. On a brisk wall I burn around 100 calories in 10 mins. My calorie burn was roughly 300 for a 30 min walk give or take depending on where I go.
Since I had a baby and push a stroller now I burn an extra 60-80 calories during a 30 min walk.
My problem was the steps from my HRM and fitbit flex where about 1500 steps off.
But when i was eating back half of my exercise calories according to my HRM I was still losing weight before (before my baby) and now that I don't my weight is at a stand still and I'm cranky... so I think my cheap $50 one is fairly accurate.
I went for a high pace 35 min walk+run and it was only 225. Umm i think that i can safely eat my calories, i dunno really since it seems that most people get higher readings i am not sure is it because i am not fit or what, but @sijomial says that for under average fitness people, it tends to overestimate. Not sure0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »I use a Garmin fenix 3 HR, and it monitors heart rate 24/7. Seems to be pretty accurate so far. I also have a fitbit Blaze, but it does not have the advanced features like the Garmin.
I actually looked into thw one you mentioned , it doesn't have chest strap, nice... But i don't think i would be able to afford it, the polar one i got is even an old model
Yes it is expensive, but I love the advanced features, built in GPS w/GLONASS, waterproof up to 100 meters, and the built in HRM is pretty accurate when I compare it to my Polar H7 chest strap monitor.
I like to record my power walks with it, and the 24/7 HRM gives me a more accurate calorie burn. Even if I don't record a workout, if I do an activity that elevates my heart rate the device picks up on that and logs the extra calories burned.
Here is an example of what this device records on my power walks...
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1280424823
1 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »I use a Garmin fenix 3 HR, and it monitors heart rate 24/7. Seems to be pretty accurate so far. I also have a fitbit Blaze, but it does not have the advanced features like the Garmin.
I actually looked into thw one you mentioned , it doesn't have chest strap, nice... But i don't think i would be able to afford it, the polar one i got is even an old model
Yes it is expensive, but I love the advanced features, built in GPS w/GLONASS, waterproof up to 100 meters, and the built in HRM is pretty accurate when I compare it to my Polar H7 chest strap monitor.
I like to record my power walks with it, and the 24/7 HRM gives me a more accurate calorie burn. Even if I don't record a workout, if I do an activity that elevates my heart rate the device picks up on that and logs the extra calories burned.
Here is an example of what this device records on my power walks...
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1280424823
Awesome, will check the link when i go home. Maybe one day i will be able to afford it0 -
No because the one I have takes 5 minutes to put on and verify its working. I don't eat exercise calories anyways1
-
Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!
Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.
Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.
Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.
Because typically unfit people have a higher exercise HR than someone the same age/height/weight who is fit - doesn't mean they are burning more calories but the HRM would interpret it that way.
Imagine a super fit 200lb person walking up stairs next to a really unfit 200lb person. One would find it easy, one hard work, one with a low HR, one with a high HR.
But they would be burning the virtually same amount of calories (mass moved over distance).1 -
I use the scosche rhythm+. It is an armband and I love it. I feel that it's quite accurate.1
-
I use the Polar A360, but since all HRMs are for steady state cardio, if you do anything other than that, reduce your expectations of accuracy.1
-
Garmin Vivofit (chest strap). LOVE it! Was a Polar devotee until my last upgrade and had a bad experience with the seller and then with Polar.
I never had any other hr monitor, i've bought a polar one with chest strap aswell. Was it a problem with the hr monitor itslef or with the company that made you get the Garmin?
The chest strap and watch would constantly lose connection--something which never happened with my other two. After trying everything I could think of for a couple weeks, I contacted the seller to return it. The seller said I had only 30 days to return the product. And the 30 days started when they shipped it. And it took over two weeks to get to me. My bad for missing that little gem, but the product was clearly defective. I felt as though the seller had that policy for a reason. Then I contacted Polar, and got the run around from them. For over two weeks, they attributed my issues to "user error." Chest strap not wet enough. Watch too far away from the strap (where did they think I was wearing it--my ankle?!), etc. I sent it back to Polar and could not get a response for another two weeks.
So, I've lost over six weeks of training data at this point. I said screw it and bought the Garmin after doing some fitness tracker research. As an aside, I used to wear a BodyMedia armband (like on The Biggest Loser) and Jawbone had bought them out and were not going to support the armband any longer.
So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them. But, I am extremely happy with my Garmin. Had it for 16 months now.1 -
Garmin Vivofit (chest strap). LOVE it! Was a Polar devotee until my last upgrade and had a bad experience with the seller and then with Polar.
I never had any other hr monitor, i've bought a polar one with chest strap aswell. Was it a problem with the hr monitor itslef or with the company that made you get the Garmin?
The chest strap and watch would constantly lose connection--something which never happened with my other two. After trying everything I could think of for a couple weeks, I contacted the seller to return it. The seller said I had only 30 days to return the product. And the 30 days started when they shipped it. And it took over two weeks to get to me. My bad for missing that little gem, but the product was clearly defective. I felt as though the seller had that policy for a reason. Then I contacted Polar, and got the run around from them. For over two weeks, they attributed my issues to "user error." Chest strap not wet enough. Watch too far away from the strap (where did they think I was wearing it--my ankle?!), etc. I sent it back to Polar and could not get a response for another two weeks.
So, I've lost over six weeks of training data at this point. I said screw it and bought the Garmin after doing some fitness tracker research. As an aside, I used to wear a BodyMedia armband (like on The Biggest Loser) and Jawbone had bought them out and were not going to support the armband any longer.
So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them. But, I am extremely happy with my Garmin. Had it for 16 months now.0 -
RoseTheWarrior wrote: »I use the Polar A360, but since all HRMs are for steady state cardio, if you do anything other than that, reduce your expectations of accuracy.
Yeah, i only use mine on running sessions, walking.. So on. But i can't help myself from thinking about doing an experiment and keeping the HRM all day. Just to see what i would get.. Wonder if anyone tried something similar with HRM with chest straps0 -
So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them.
0 -
Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!
Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.
Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.
Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.
Because typically unfit people have a higher exercise HR than someone the same age/height/weight who is fit - doesn't mean they are burning more calories but the HRM would interpret it that way.
Imagine a super fit 200lb person walking up stairs next to a really unfit 200lb person. One would find it easy, one hard work, one with a low HR, one with a high HR.
But they would be burning the virtually same amount of calories (mass moved over distance).
That makes sense, thanks for explaining.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 413 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions