Apple Watch Versus Polar Heart Rate Monitor

ladybug4233
ladybug4233 Posts: 217 Member
edited December 19 in Health and Weight Loss
Good Morning! So I lost 28 pounds and gained 5 so now my goal is to loose 9. I know I can do it. I got sick, it was the holidays and I quit logging food. Now I am back on it. The keys to my success were logging everything I ate, working out and making sure I got 10,000 steps a day. I need to work on drinking more water too. Last year I used a step tracker to track my steps and a polar heart rate monitor to record my calories. My Husband got me an apple watch for Christmas. So a couple of times I wore both when I worked out. There is a little difference. For example, I did cycling for 1:11. My Polar said 562 calories. My Apple Watch said active 517 and total 607. I did the stairmaster for 40 and my polar said 355 and my Apple Watch said active 323 and total 409. Im kind of at a loss on what to use. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
Candie

Replies

  • MelanieCN77
    MelanieCN77 Posts: 4,047 Member
    That's a very minor difference actually! I don't know whether it'd be comforting to tell you neither are "right" though, they're both just doing their best maths. If you like everything else about the AW, just go with it for a while and see how things go. Suspect you wouldn't be as concerned if AW was telling you that you'd burned more, and not less ;)
  • ladybug4233
    ladybug4233 Posts: 217 Member
    [quote=Suspect you wouldn't be as concerned if AW was telling you that you'd burned more, and not less ;) [/quote]
    HA! You are probably right!
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,621 Member
    Just pick one you want to use consistently from now on, and go with it.

    These kinds of devices don't measure calorie burn, they estimate it, using research data, statistics, algorithms, and measurements of loosely correlated things like arm movements (accelerometer), speed/distance (gps), altitude (altimeter), and heart rate (HRM).

    Consistent estimates matter more than precisely accurate ones . . . and nothing practical and inexpensive will give you actuate estimates across a range of activities anyway. ;)
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    Those numbers are very close. Use the Polar since it's yours and you don't have to borrow it from your husband. :wink:
  • Duck_Puddle
    Duck_Puddle Posts: 3,237 Member
    In the grand scheme of things, those numbers really are the same (less than 10% difference?). Pick whichever one fits your life and otherwise has the features and info you need.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Some questions...

    Do you need to track those steps and get an estimate for them or just know you did them?
    (That might help decide between a tracker and an exercise only HRM.)

    Why do you need to drink more water - are you showing signs of dehydration?
    (If not then there's no benefit to drinking more than you need.)

    You can successfully use either really so just personal choice and maybe what you might feel you would want to continue using after weight loss and into the future might influence that choice.
This discussion has been closed.