Does my diary look ok

13»

Replies

  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,254 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    That estimation was MET-based. I find it a little bit hard to believe that slow to moderate pace walking could produce more than 400 net calories an hour, especially for women, although I'm not against the idea that it could. Since the adjustment is for eating back, you would be working with net not gross.

    The issue is that you're building up from "unknown as to accuracy self selected base level" and adding "reasonable MET values for activity" and interpreting the adjustment to be "reasonable MET values for additional exercise activity"

    But, what is actually happening is that you're comparing "unknown as to accuracy self selected base level"=MFP to "big number Mr Fitbit comes up with" i.e. a totally separate TDEE estimate, not just additional exercise added to MFP.

    Mr Fitbit gets to a TDEE on the basis of MET 1.0 x 5 minutes when no movement is detected; plus average MET value assigned to each 5 minute chunk of time based on the "results" gleamed from the accelerometer reading blended with step count and heart rate.

    So the "MFP TDEE value" is compared to "Fitbit" TDEE value and the difference is the adjustment.

    As you noted in some situations this Fitbit value is bang on. And in some situations it appears to be less so.

    Could be outlier status. Could be food intake logging making it appear to be off when it actually isn't. Could be a settings issue. Could be type of activity and ability of fitbit to accurately detect it without getting fooled. Could be high heart rate making Fitbit think that there is a larger burn going on.

    TBH my personal observation is that Fitbit slightly over-estimates activity and slightly under-estimates inactivity, which if you think about it is actually true since most inactivity comes closer to MET 1.3 than 1.0

    In any case as long as the way Fitbit measures is consistent (which it appears to be) you can make adjustments based on your actual trending weight results after 4 to 6 weeks of data collection...
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,254 Member
    rdl81 wrote: »
    This is interesting.....I work at desk 12 hrs day and my "activity" is when I exercise, give that I don't think such a tool would be of benefit to ME. I would like to know how much Kcal certain workouts I do burn I guess a heart rate monitor would be needed for that though and probably not worth the expense

    https://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    That estimation was MET-based. I find it a little bit hard to believe that slow to moderate pace walking could produce more than 400 net calories an hour, especially for women, although I'm not against the idea that it could. Since the adjustment is for eating back, you would be working with net not gross.

    The issue is that you're building up from "unknown as to accuracy self selected base level" and adding "reasonable MET values for activity" and interpreting the adjustment to be "reasonable MET values for additional exercise activity"

    This makes sense. It totally slipped my mind to think of the two apps as separate.

  • rdl81
    rdl81 Posts: 220 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    rdl81 wrote: »
    This is interesting.....I work at desk 12 hrs day and my "activity" is when I exercise, give that I don't think such a tool would be of benefit to ME. I would like to know how much Kcal certain workouts I do burn I guess a heart rate monitor would be needed for that though and probably not worth the expense

    https://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs

    I only exercise in the gym so weights / hiit / boxing so I guess would need a heart rate monitor to monitor Kcal burnt correct?
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    rdl81 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    rdl81 wrote: »
    This is interesting.....I work at desk 12 hrs day and my "activity" is when I exercise, give that I don't think such a tool would be of benefit to ME. I would like to know how much Kcal certain workouts I do burn I guess a heart rate monitor would be needed for that though and probably not worth the expense

    https://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs

    I only exercise in the gym so weights / hiit / boxing so I guess would need a heart rate monitor to monitor Kcal burnt correct?

    HRMs don't work particularly well for any of those exercises, as far as calculating calorie expenditure:

    https://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
  • cazwood
    cazwood Posts: 6 Member
    How do you see the diary?

Categories