Why everyone should use a heart rate monitor!

Nich0le

I have several family members that are also MFP members and I often see these great calories burned numbers entered with their (and my) exercise entries, and while it looks good, if following the MFP plan at all you may be getting too many exercise calories (if you eat them).

I just want to say that I worked hard this morning doing intervals on the treadmill and when entering any combo of exercises, walking at 4 and running at 5, intervals, average speed etc I had a calorie burn of anywhere from 450-700 calories, sounds great but then I checked my heart rate monitor and found that I only burned 263 calories.

Just saying, don't take the machines or MFP as gospel, and if you are having a hard time losing weight here this might be the problem. If you follow MFP and eat all of your exercise calories back you may be getting too many calories added back for the day.

Juliane_

This is why I love my Polar F6. I trust its information.

iwantit

I love my Polar HRM too. My calories burned can vary sooo much day to day and workout to workout. Seeing how many calories I have (or have not) burned pushes me more. Intervals really bump up the calories. And Amazing how much I can burn in a Forrest yoga class with my favorite teacher.

ErinMarie25

Yep. Everyone burns at a different tempo.

c7eat2live

yes! I love my Polar as well. When I do sprints it records MUCH different info than the machine does. SO helpful to get accurate readings.

beckym71

Excellent point! :flowerforyou:
I wasn't losing anything going by general calorie burn guidelines/data.
Borrowed a friend's HRM but went with a BodyBugg and I've found that my BodyBugg is even MORE accurate than a HRM.
the Bugg :bigsmile:
But whatever equipment you use, it is sooo much more accurate than the machine calorie count or database generalities!

CudyBug

This is why I dont eat my exercise calories

Azdak

One question I always have to ask: how do you know the HRM is more accurate? Do you have any idea how they work?

I'm always curious when I routinely see such uncritical acceptance.

elainegsd

It is also nice to get the calorie estimate from the same source each time. I'd think there is considerable variation even between two similar machines at the gym.

Nich0le

Excellent point! :flowerforyou:
I wasn't losing anything going by general calorie burn guidelines/data.
Borrowed a friend's HRM but went with a BodyBugg and I've found that my BodyBugg is even MORE accurate than a HRM.
the Bugg :bigsmile:
But whatever equipment you use, it is sooo much more accurate than the machine calorie count or database generalities!

I'm a bugger too and find the data to be useful not to mention I love when I hit all my targets for the day and that little beep goes off

JDMPWR

Normally the HRM is higher, so when doing my cardio I now take the # my HRM gives me and the # the machine gives me, take the difference divide it in half and add it to the lower of the two #'s

For instance

Machine 500
HRM 700

700-500=200/2=100

500(lowest #) + 100=600

T_R_A_V

I think HRM's should be put in the Geneva Conventions that everybody must have one

hahaha

Nich0le

One question I always have to ask: how do you know the HRM is more accurate? Do you have any idea how they work?

I'm always curious when I routinely see such uncritical acceptance.

Ahhh, I knew the devils advocate would be here eventually, hey azdak! For all I know HRM's will be found to be absolutely useless in 20 years but considering how they work I find it to be a useful gadget for the time being.

And yes, I know how they work, In simple terms....... the strap (used on most monitors) captures the electric signal the heart muscle gives when contracting. The transmitter in the strap then sends an electromagnetic signal containing the heart rate info to a receiver and then you can either see it on the display and most models now have an option to download the info to your computer.

The heart rate monitor is a small version of an electrocardiogram and has been useful in everything from stress tests to training elite atheletes and keeping "older" athlete's from pushing beyond their capacity to help avoid heart attacks in older athletes. I'd say all in all it is a pretty handy tool.

cozzy530

I have a timex HRM and I can tell you it is not that accurate. I will show 800-1200 calories burned during a typical P90X workout and I know that is too high even though I work out hard and am soaked in sweat. I enter half of what my HRM says as I would rather err on the side of caution. I also do not eat the extra calories but I don't sweat going over my 1800 cal if I worked out hard that day. Remember these tools are a guide so eat right, and get some good exercise.

therobinator

One question I always have to ask: how do you know the HRM is more accurate? Do you have any idea how they work?

I'm always curious when I routinely see such uncritical acceptance.

Ahhh, I knew the devils advocate would be here eventually, hey azdak! For all I know HRM's will be found to be absolutely useless in 20 years but considering how they work I find it to be a useful gadget for the time being.

And yes, I know how they work, In simple terms....... the strap (used on most monitors) captures the electric signal the heart muscle gives when contracting. The transmitter in the strap then sends an electromagnetic signal containing the heart rate info to a receiver and then you can either see it on the display and most models now have an option to download the info to your computer.

The heart rate monitor is a small version of an electrocardiogram and has been useful in everything from stress tests to training elite atheletes and keeping "older" athlete's from pushing beyond their capacity to help avoid heart attacks in older athletes. I'd say all in all it is a pretty handy tool.

Right, but how do we know that whatever formula the HRM is using to calculate calories is accurate and correct?

therobinator

Normally the HRM is higher, so when doing my cardio I now take the # my HRM gives me and the # the machine gives me, take the difference divide it in half and add it to the lower of the two #'s

For instance

Machine 500
HRM 700

700-500=200/2=100

500(lowest #) + 100=600

I think you are making your math more complicated than you need do. What you are doing here comes out to the same conclusion as if you just did a simple average. 500 + 700 = 1200 / 2 = 600.

With other numbers for example, your method:

Machine 400
HRM 900

900-400=500/2=250

400(lowest #) + 250=650


Average Method: 900 + 400 = 1300 / 2 = 650

Nich0le

One question I always have to ask: how do you know the HRM is more accurate? Do you have any idea how they work?

I'm always curious when I routinely see such uncritical acceptance.

Ahhh, I knew the devils advocate would be here eventually, hey azdak! For all I know HRM's will be found to be absolutely useless in 20 years but considering how they work I find it to be a useful gadget for the time being.

And yes, I know how they work, In simple terms....... the strap (used on most monitors) captures the electric signal the heart muscle gives when contracting. The transmitter in the strap then sends an electromagnetic signal containing the heart rate info to a receiver and then you can either see it on the display and most models now have an option to download the info to your computer.

The heart rate monitor is a small version of an electrocardiogram and has been useful in everything from stress tests to training elite atheletes and keeping "older" athlete's from pushing beyond their capacity to help avoid heart attacks in older athletes. I'd say all in all it is a pretty handy tool.

Right, but how do we know that whatever formula the HRM is using to calculate calories is accurate and correct?

Well, considering electrocariograms have been in use for almost 100 years and are used for medical data collection with heart attack patients all the way to elite athletes to determine how fast your heart is pumping and we know that based on age and weight your target heart rate zone all give a basic mathematical equation that determines calories burned you can assume that for all intents and purposes that the HRM is going to be a better tool than the machines and general guesses on most websites. Age and weight most definitely play a huge part in how efficient our bodies are at burning calories. There are HRM in a variety of styles and prices and like most things out there the cheapest probably isn't the best bet and the most expensive is probably too much for the average person so if you are considering an HRM I would highly recommend doing some research to find the one that best fits your needs as well as your budget.And one with a strap is going to be more accurate than one without!

When it comes right down to it, my basic post was to state that the MFP calories burned should not be taken as gospel and if you are following the MFP plan and not losing weight you may want to consider that you may be getting more credit for your exercise than is deserved so use more than one tool to determine how many calories you are actually burning in a workout so that you can accurately determine how many exercise calories you could or should be eating.

Nich0le

Also, as far as calories burned from MFP, you can go to three websites and enter the same info on all three and more than likely get three different answers so there is a flaw in the system somewhere.

therobinator

Also, as far as calories burned from MFP, you can go to three websites and enter the same info on all three and more than likely get three different answers so there is a flaw in the system somewhere.

This.

therobinator

based on age and weight your target heart rate zone all give a basic mathematical equation that determines calories burned

What is that equation? I have found calculators online, and even equations, but I don't know what's right or not.

Ely82010

This is why I dont eat my exercise calories

Amen sister!