HRM vs MFP vs Calculator

spatticus

Alright, I'm having an issue with figuring out calories burned for my exercise. For reference I am 26 year old female, 133 pounds.

I had a feeling my heart rate monitor has been over estimating my calories burned. So today for example I did a 45 minute TurboFire workout (think kickboxing meets zumba, with 3 HIIT intervals in the mix too). I have a sportline monitor with a chest strap. My HRM said i burned 810 calories in those 45 minutes (yes i have it calibrated correctly with my age and weight ect). It said my average heart rate was 171 with a max heart rate of 186. I plugged my average heart rate into a few heart rate calculators online and they all give me an estimate of 542 calories burned. If i were to log TurboFire as a kickboxing workout in MFP it gives me 457. Which do you think is the most accurate? I realize that these are all just estimates based on different calculations but the difference between 810 and 457 is quite a bit. Thanks!!

kaypee65

Personally, I'd go with the HRM because it has ALL of the data.

The high and average heart rate doesn't tell the whole picture. And MFP is just average guesstimates without any objective data regarding intensity. I believe that the HRM is most accurate with the calorie calculations.

kaypee65

I'm not an exercise physiologist, but I am a data analyst. That's what I base my opinion on.

sfbaumgarten

HRM

omma_to_3

Honestly, normally I'd say HRM, but I've heard other reports of really high readings with sportline. You are quite little. That seems like WAY too high a burn for 45 minutes. I would have guessed 450 to 500 for that amount of time and HR. I would go probably with MFP or the calculator in this case.

Expect_The_Worst

TDEE (Assumes an avg daily expenditure along with your BMR)

Then use 1 calorie as the number of calories you burned for working out.


The reasoning? Ive seen too many people chasing their HRM calculations only to be disappointed or frustrated at their results.

The TDEE folks? Usually happy & satisfied with their progress. Its also easier to modify your TDEE as necessary vs chasing your HRM calories all over the place.

perpchaska

I had the same issue. I am 5'9 210 lbs and have a polar heart rate monitor. I did an hour long zumba class and it said around 900 cals burned. It seems to be more accurate with spinning/aerobics class but zumba it was and is always very high. I just air on the side of caution and put around 600 for zumba and knock off around 50-100 from what the HRM says with my spin as well. I mean, your heart rate is high but not too high throughout the entire class so you are in a good burning zone. i'm not an expert - but i've had success with using a slightly adjusted polar HRM number.

cwolfman13

A HRM isn't going to be that accurate for what you're doing. A HRM is reasonably accurate for calorie burn with a steady state cardio event...with huge spikes in your HR doing what you're doing, your HRM is going to spike calorie burn...but that's not how it works. Your HR doesn't directly correlate to your calorie burn...it is just used in an equation to make some kind of reasonable level of VO2 max that you are working...this also requires a steady state aerobic event.

You did not burn 800 plus calories in 45 minutes...it's pretty damned hard to burn much more than about 10 calories per minute over your basal calories...that's working pretty hard. i would think somewhere between 400 - 500 calories for your workout.

spatticus

Thanks guys! Im learning more and more that a hrm just isnt accurate for the things i do - weight train and hiit! Id love to just use my TDEE but if im not consistant with working out then i feel the numbers wont be accurate either.

omma_to_3

Thanks guys! Im learning more and more that a hrm just isnt accurate for the things i do - weight train and hiit! Id love to just use my TDEE but if im not consistant with working out then i feel the numbers wont be accurate either.

I agree with you. TDEE rewards you before you do the work but MFP rewards you after. I know myself. I need to be rewarded after I do my workout. I have done this very successfully using a Polar HRM and some common sense.

jrcrmr

A HRM isn't going to be that accurate for what you're doing. A HRM is reasonably accurate for calorie burn with a steady state cardio event...with huge spikes in your HR doing what you're doing, your HRM is going to spike calorie burn...but that's not how it works. Your HR doesn't directly correlate to your calorie burn...it is just used in an equation to make some kind of reasonable level of VO2 max that you are working...this also requires a steady state aerobic event.

You did not burn 800 plus calories in 45 minutes...it's pretty damned hard to burn much more than about 10 calories per minute over your basal calories...that's working pretty hard. i would think somewhere between 400 - 500 calories for your workout.

I use a heart rate monitor sometimes and I pretty much agree with this...unless you do something consistent with consistent cardio effort (cycling, running,...even elliptical if you're going hard enough), then it might not be entirely accurate (and maybe calculating the calories burned just by breathing/living along with the ones in your workout)

i would normally shave off a decent percent (20%?) depending on how hard i worked out
for example, I do about 30 minutes of weights with little break between different types of reps (~30 seconds at the most, alternating core, arms, etc)..and in 30 minutes, it says i burned 350 calories (5'11", 155 lbs - male)..there is no way that's possible from weights..so i put about 200 just to make sure i don't overestimate because i'm sure that i eat a few more calories than my diary says once in a while too...i've done this for about 4-5 months and my weight has been very steady (no more than 2 lbs gained/lost..while lowering body fat a bit...but that's a different topic)