Polar FT60 & Fat Calories

fortunate1204

So I've been using my Polar for only a few days at this point and I do love being able to have an accurate count of calories burned. But, I'm confused about the fat calories....do other Polar users believe its accurate? Almost for every session so far, it has my workout in Zone 3 (although I don't feel like I'm going ALL out) and its saying my fat calories burned are around 20% or less. Should I understand that to mean I'm burning 80% muscle??? Yikes! If anyone has Polar insight, please share. Thanks!

Azdak

The "fat calories" burned is a gimmick (even more so than total calories burned).

Ignore it.

MeanderingMammal

do other Polar users believe its accurate?

No

Should I understand that to mean I'm burning 80% muscle???

No

Your fuel comes from a range of sources, predominantly the readily available.

Vicxie86

I believe this will help

http://www.polar.com/us-en/training_with_polar/training_articles/improve_fitness/exercise_zones

When you exercise, if you are using

60-70% of your maximum hr, you will predominantly burn fat for energy
70-80% burns fat and carb for energy
Above 80% and you will mostly be burning carb for energy

So, for example, you're 38. The most common used calculation for determining maximum heart rate is

220-age = 220-38, which gives you a maximum hr of 182bpm

60% - 70% of maximum hr = 109bpm - 127bpm fat burning zone
70% - 80% = 127bpm - 145bpm fat + carb burning zone(won't be exactly 50/50)
80%+ = 145bpm carb burning zone

So, if your hrm reported that 20% of your calories burned was from fat, that means the remaining 80% was from carb.

MeanderingMammal

I believe this will help

http://www.polar.com/us-en/training_with_polar/training_articles/improve_fitness/exercise_zones

The strict delineation of zones and their functions is a pretty outdated concept, although one that continues to dominate most equipment marketing campaigns.

Azdak

I believe this will help

http://www.polar.com/us-en/training_with_polar/training_articles/improve_fitness/exercise_zones

When you exercise, if you are using

60-70% of your maximum hr, you will predominantly burn fat for energy
70-80% burns fat and carb for energy
Above 80% and you will mostly be burning carb for energy

So, for example, you're 38. The most common used calculation for determining maximum heart rate is

220-age = 220-38, which gives you a maximum hr of 182bpm

60% - 70% of maximum hr = 109bpm - 127bpm fat burning zone
70% - 80% = 127bpm - 145bpm fat + carb burning zone(won't be exactly 50/50)
80%+ = 145bpm carb burning zone

So, if your hrm reported that 20% of your calories burned was from fat, that means the remaining 80% was from carb.

I'll repeat: for all of the fancy arithmetic, the fact remains: it is meaningless. It is a gimmick. It has no basis in fact.

This is an ex-parrot.

fortunate1204

The "fat calories" burned is a gimmick (even more so than total calories burned).

Ignore it.

If the total calories burned is a gimmick, what do you believe is the best way to keep yourself accountable for cals in vs cals "out"?

MeanderingMammal

If the total calories burned is a gimmick, what do you believe is the best way to keep yourself accountable for cals in vs cals "out"?

Any measure of calorie expenditure is an approximation, whether a glorified pedometer like a FitBit, an exercise machine or a Heart Rate Monitor.

The HRM takes measured heart rate and extrapolates a calorie expenditure based on that, what you've told it about age, gender, build and current weight. At least with the FT60 it has an assessment of current fitness, which also plays a part.

The accuracy of the calorie count also depends on the type of exercise being done. For a long steady state session it'll be at its most accurate, for an interval session the algorithm used to extrapolate injects errors.

The main thing to think about is consistency, and an informed view on whether the measure is likely to be accurate or not. I have an FT60 myself and generally trust it for long runs, rides and rows, and treat it with some scepticism for interval training sessions.

Azdak

The "fat calories" burned is a gimmick (even more so than total calories burned).

Ignore it.

If the total calories burned is a gimmick, what do you believe is the best way to keep yourself accountable for cals in vs cals "out"?

Sorry if I was unclear--the total calorie number for the FT60 is as accurate as any HRM can be. (The FT60 has the potential to be more accurate since you can manually enter VO2 max--of course you have to know your VO2 max, which is something for a different thread).

It's the "fat calories" part or the "fat burn %" that is the gimmick.