Fitbit Charge HR - Lower and Upper HR zone - what does this mean?

janejellyroll

NorthCascades wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

In my experience, not much else. When I got my Fitbit, I was curious about this and I frequently checked my step count after cooking, typing, playing video games, and similar activities. The only thing I've found that seriously throws off my step count is driving (which I rarely do). Whisking eggs or other food may add a few steps, but the impact in a 24-hour day is truly not significant for me. Fitbit also has dominant hand features that help minimize the impact of accidental steps.

I'm not saying it's accurate in every way (the stair climbing features is wildly inaccurate for me), but I disagree with the point made above.

It sounds like you took the time to get to know your device before you started relying on it. Like you found its strengths and weaknesses so you'd have a better idea of how much trust to put in it and when to doubt.

My Garmin doesn't pick up false steps for driving, but sometimes I'll clear the lazy alert by scratching my cat's ears.

That's the biggest advice I would have for people considering a Fitbit. It's a tool that some people have found to be reliable and other people haven't. So if you want one, you should be willing to spend some time figuring out how it works, how your activities impact it, and (most importantly) checking the estimates against real-life results.

I haven't checked if it records steps when I'm rubbing my dog's belly! I will be checking that out tonight.

GaryRuns

To lose fat you need to burn more calories than you consume by maintaining a 10-15% calorie deficit. You can do that by working out in any zone. The whole "fat-burn" zone is a bit of a myth. You'll burn more calories in higher zones if you do so for the same amount of time, but there's a trade-off because you may be able to work out longer in a lower zone. To complicate matters HRMs aren't particularly good for estimating calories burned unless it's a long steady sport like endurance running or cycling. AND, if that's not enough, there are a half dozen or so different ways to calculate your HR zones. I use the Karvonen formula myself. AND the whole 220-age thing is an estimate. I actually measured mine and it's 3 beats per minute above what the formula gives.

As to suggestions, if you really want a more general HR measurement look at the Scosche Rhythm+. The old standard was chest-strap based rigs, but I hated them. I have four of them in my closet. No matter what I did to care for it I ended up having to replace the stupid strap every 4-6 months. The Scosche doesn't have a dedicated watch though so you'll need to use your phone or something like a Garmin watch to see your HR while you work out.

HermanLily

KMAF00 wrote: »

@HermanLily when you say lower number is this my 136bpm and the higher number would by my 175bpm? (Sorry)

Yes, everything in between would be your goal