Heart rate monitor calorie burn?

kdbulger

Hi All,

What my best bet is for accurately tracking my calorie burn? I'm just starting out and I suspect that I'm probably burning a lot more calories then activity trackers account for due to my current weight and low fitness level.

Is it worthwhile to use a heart rate monitor's calorie burn function? I don't know why, but I really like the idea of having a HRM to track my fitness progress so it wouldn't be my only reason to get one.

sijomial

HRMs can only give a reasonable estimate some certain kinds of exercise for some people - for many types of exercise then they will grossly exaggerate your calorie burns. Especially if you have a low fitness level and have a higher than average exercise HR.

They can be great cardio training aids but whether they are going to be at all useful for you depends to a great extent on what particular exercise you do and your goals.
Depending on what your exercise is will determine if there are better ways to estimate your output.

ETA - seeing your resting HR come down and seeing your speed of recovery improve can be quite motivational.

kdbulger

sijomial wrote: »

HRMs can only give a reasonable estimate some certain kinds of exercise for some people - for many types of exercise then they will grossly exaggerate your calorie burns. Especially if you have a low fitness level and have a higher than average exercise HR.

They can be great cardio training aids but whether they are going to be at all useful for you depends to a great extent on what particular exercise you do and your goals.
Depending on what your exercise is will determine if there are better ways to estimate your output.

ETA - seeing your resting HR come down and seeing your speed of recovery improve can be quite motivational.

That's exactly what I needed to know - thank you. Is the activity tracker here on MFP my best bet for accuracy?

sijomial

kdbulger wrote: »

sijomial wrote: »

HRMs can only give a reasonable estimate some certain kinds of exercise for some people - for many types of exercise then they will grossly exaggerate your calorie burns. Especially if you have a low fitness level and have a higher than average exercise HR.

They can be great cardio training aids but whether they are going to be at all useful for you depends to a great extent on what particular exercise you do and your goals.
Depending on what your exercise is will determine if there are better ways to estimate your output.

ETA - seeing your resting HR come down and seeing your speed of recovery improve can be quite motivational.

That's exactly what I needed to know - thank you. Is the activity tracker here on MFP my best bet for accuracy?

What exercise specifically?

amandarawr06

I use a Polar ft4 HR monitor. I like having it as a tool towards counting my calorie burn. I also keep in mind that it is not always 100% accurate. But I think its a worthwhile tool to invest in - especially if you plan to do a lot of cardio.

TavistockToad

kdbulger wrote: »

Hi All,

What my best bet is for accurately tracking my calorie burn? I'm just starting out and I suspect that I'm probably burning a lot more calories then activity trackers account for due to my current weight and low fitness level.

Is it worthwhile to use a heart rate monitor's calorie burn function? I don't know why, but I really like the idea of having a HRM to track my fitness progress so it wouldn't be my only reason to get one.

are you losing at a faster rate than expected?

HRMs are good for steady state cardio, but not much else.

Azdak

kdbulger wrote: »

Hi All,

What my best bet is for accurately tracking my calorie burn? I'm just starting out and I suspect that I'm probably burning a lot more calories then activity trackers account for due to my current weight and low fitness level.

Is it worthwhile to use a heart rate monitor's calorie burn function? I don't know why, but I really like the idea of having a HRM to track my fitness progress so it wouldn't be my only reason to get one.

If your fitness level is low, then you are likely burning fewer calories than you think, not more.

Calories burned during cardio is a product of exercise workload times body weight. Someone who is at a lower fitness level can't work as hard, therefore, at any given weight, the calorie burn will be lower. The heart rate might be higher, because they are working at a higher percentage of maximum, but that does not mean that calorie burn is higher.

It is an unfortunate fact that the high use of HRMs, aided and abetted by disingenuous marketing and poorly-trained "fitness experts" has completely distorted the facts behind exercise, heart rate, and calorie burn. This is a clear case where more technology and more data has made people MORE ignorant instead of better informed.

kdbulger

I just wanted to come back to this and state that I got a heart rate monitor (Fitbit), and according to my logging and weight loss observations over the course of 4 months, my HRM is fairly accurate for me.

In fact, I find it more accurate than logging my exercise via MFP's exercise catalogue.

I do a combination of cardio and strength training, and my HRM feeds my daily burn over to MFP which does the math for me.

NorthCascades

Could you give us an idea how accurate, like what the error is as a percentage?