Heart Rate Monitor vs MyfitnessPal excerise calories

mtbiker1069

I'm thinking about getting a heart rate monitor. Have any of you who do have a HR Monitor compared what the HR monitor says you burned during a workout to what MyFitnessPal says you burned if you manually enter in into your journal?

If so, what was the difference?

Thanks,
Mark

breahremington

Hi Mark,

I just got one about 2 weeks ago, and I love it. I do feel as though I'm getting a much more accurate read. That being said, it wasn't DRASTICALLY different than what MFP had given me. I would say on average, my HRM gives me 25-50 less calories per work out than MFP would for a lighter exercise, and 50-100 for heavier. That's certainly a difference, but not one that really changes my activity or what I choose to eat for that day. I would still recommend the monitor, though! Especially because it's cool to notice the differences in workouts. For example, I did the same kickboxing DVD a week apart, and lost about 50 less calories the second time around! On the surface that isn't great as obviously I want to burn as many calories as I can, but it went to show that I was progressing- I was able to do the same workout without as much trouble. So that was pretty cool and motivating to me!

foremant86

When I was doing jillian michaels 30 day shred, before i had an HRM, i would log it as circuit training with MFP and it would say i burned around 300 calories.

with an HRM come to find out i was burning maybe 240 if i really pushed myself.

It's definitely worth the investment I think, plus i enjoy seeing my heart rate while i work out because it lets me know if i need to push harder or if I need to slow down.

janicebinva

I see a huge difference, with MFP telling me I'm burning more calories than my BodyMedia armband. I wish MFP would recalibrate their numbers. They're significantly misleading in my case. For instance, for an hour of stepping up and down on my aerobics step, MFP tells me I burn close to 600 calories, while my BodyMedia band says maybe 300 if I'm lucky.

TeaBea

I see a huge difference, with MFP telling me I'm burning more calories than my BodyMedia armband. I wish MFP would recalibrate their numbers. They're significantly misleading in my case. For instance, for an hour of stepping up and down on my aerobics step, MFP tells me I burn close to 600 calories, while my BodyMedia band says maybe 300 if I'm lucky.

MFP could lower their numbers in some categories (it seems)...but it's still just a guess. Calorie burns are dependent upon so many factors.......height, weight, age, gender, exertion level.....and more. Someone with a higher muscle mass % will burn more. MFP can't "guesstimate" your exertion level, that's what the chest strap on an HRM attempts to do....compares your heart rate while working out to your resting heart rate. Strength training is even harder to guesstimate.....HRMs are not designed for it.

fleetzz

My hrm consistenly gives a much lower calorie burn than the runtastic app I use and about 1/2 to 2/3 of what MFP gives me.

mtbiker1069

Thank you all for you input!

MikeInAZ

I wear a Polar FT7 when I work out. For some of my exercises, MFP is almost dead on. But for others it;s way off. I suggest a Polar or Garmin. The cheapy Walmart ones are no good. The best ones unfortunately you have to wear a chest strap, the ones where you just press your finger on it aren't accurate enough. The strap doesn't bother me, you get used to it quickly and don't even notice it's there!

I recommend the Polar FT4, it's cheap, easy and will do it all. FT7 doesn't add much extra. There is also the H7 which is the Bluetooth model, but beware, it's not very ANDROID friendly. So if you don't have an iPhone, don't get the H7 (or any other Bluethooth fitness device).

I like the FT models since they have a watch, you can easily just glance at it while working out. Much easier than pulling out a phone and trying to navigate a touch screen.

GroverBlue78

I am so glad I came across this post. I too am thinking of getting a HRM as I feel MFP and Runtastic don't provide realistic calories burned for some activities. For example I play volleyball two times a week. The intensity varies but on MFP there are two options a hour on one will have me burning 240 and the other over 500. That is a big difference. Do you think an HRM will help with this issue?

daniellabella986

Definitely stick to your heart rate monitor. Mine is always accurate and I have a Polar as well. MFP is close but some of the workouts are too far off - it's better to be on point and just plug it in yourself. Plus it's good to see what zone your heart rate is in so you can burn the most calories during your workout.