HRM: Can This Be Right???

badcemom
badcemom Posts: 50
in Fitness and Exercise
Today I received my Polar FT7 and tried it out during my Zumba class. Everyone says MFP overestimates calories burned, so I was excited to get the "real" scoop. I am 40, weigh 224, and did a 50 minute Zumba class of medium intensity. MFP would give me about 750 calories, and this website http://caloriesburnedhq.com/zumba-calories-burned gave me 578 even when I entered in low intensity. My HRM says I burned 358 calories. How can that be??? I don't know if I'm doing something wrong or what, but it's very discouraging.

Replies

  • _Zardoz_
    _Zardoz_ Posts: 3,987 Member
    HRMs are not really set up for zumba. The algorithm used is only accurate for steady state cardio so it is unlikely to be accurate for zumba
  • Chevy_Quest
    Chevy_Quest Posts: 2,012 Member
    ^^^This

    What Fatdoob said.

    Also here is a good link

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1044313-this-is-why-hrms-have-limited-use-for-tracking-calories
  • badcemom
    badcemom Posts: 50
    This is what Polar's description on Amazon says:

    "Accurate Calorie Burn

    Lets you know exactly how many calories you've burned during any activity, even playing with children and swimming."
  • badcemom
    badcemom Posts: 50
    BUT... Maybe I am burning more calories after all?
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    BUT... Maybe I am burning more calories after all?

    I agree with what everyone else said above, however, I would lean towards the more conservative end of the calorie estimates. HRMs are not set up to estimate calories for Zumba, despite what the Amazon ad says. However, the online calculator is pretty generic, can' t account for individual intensity. Plus that number is an extremly high calorie burn for most activities.

    To add to the link Chevy already provided, another one by the same person
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
  • GetSoda
    GetSoda Posts: 1,267 Member
    358 is likely closer to the truth.
  • shining_light
    shining_light Posts: 384 Member
    358 is likely closer to the truth.

    ^This. 358 seems closer. It's still more than I would burn... I have to jog for that same amount of time to burn that many calories...
  • segovm
    segovm Posts: 512 Member
    It's all just estimates. Calories burned will vary from person to person, day to day. I just don't eat back exercise calories since I workout to be fit and if I am losing too much weight I can always eat a little more food.
  • JLoescher01
    JLoescher01 Posts: 48 Member
    I just got the same HRM and mine is showing lower calories burned, too. I am trusting more in the HRM, as opposed to MFP numbers, because I wasn't losing any weight before. I would just go with the HRM numbers for a while and see what happens. You can always either love that you are losing weight more quickly or add some calories to slow it down. Good luck!
  • shmerek
    shmerek Posts: 963 Member
    This is what Polar's description on Amazon says:

    "Accurate Calorie Burn

    Lets you know exactly how many calories you've burned during any activity, even playing with children and swimming."
    And when has an advertisement for a product not embellished the truth? ;)

Categories