Heartrate monitor? Most accurate way to track calories?

DznyGrlSD

I know the machines at the gym are horrible for tracking actual calories burned during exercise. Is a heartrate monitor really the best option for getting an accurate calorie burn? I have a feeling I'm burning way LESS calories than the machines at the gym, and even MFP are indicating. I really want to get some weight off and want to track it accurately!

lannlynn

For me personally, a HRM is the way to go. It is always lower than the machines at the gym and MFP. I have great success with mine. I've maintained a 50 pound loss for over 4 years and I'm now trying to shred another 15. I'm just going a little slower this time.

JamesLeeAllen

It's certainly more accurate than without it but in the end it's always just an estimate.

I'm a cyclist and the HR monitor gives a good indication of actual work done because without it, the calculations (on the fitness tracking stuff I use) would simply base it off weight (rider + bike) and the speed at which I'm riding.

Riding into a headwind for example will reduce the speed at which I can ride; which would then make the calculations show a lower calorie burn even though it's likely I was working harder than I would be with no headwind and traveling quicker.

The HR monitor shows how close to my (estimated) maximum HR I'm working at and takes this into account in the calculation, making it much more accurate.

jrcrmr

the HRM is the best way to track calories (for most of us, without going into advanced physics and insane machines that we don't have access to) for moderate to intense cardio workouts

it is not a good way to track calories for weights because of the stop and go and inconsistent cardio training.

So as long as you're doing more than just walking, it is the best and probably most accurate way

KimJohnsonsmile

I have the Polar FT4 and love it. Comparing MFP calculations to what I'm actullay burning is quite a difference. Plus, I like checking cals burned while I'm working out... it's motivating for me to work harder and see that number climb.

CyndyPT2B

I am using the Bodymedia armband which does not measure HR, but uses things like skin and body temperature to give an accurate calorie burn. It's certainly making me more active in general to meet my target calorie burns for the day. I've only had it a week but I can already tell a difference. It has been independently tested to have less than 10% error margin for calories and energy expenditure. :-)

_Zardoz_

A heart rate monitor is still just an estimate. yes likely a little more accurate but in reality they are only useful for steady state cardio as that's all the algorithm is set up for. If you think about it if you go on a rollercoaster your heart rate is raised but you are unlikely to be burning many more calories this shows the limitations.

I use mine mainly for monitoring my running intensity and don't actually use the calorie feature anymore. In fact I don't actually use my HRM that much at all really. You could just use the estimates on the machines or even MFP and do what many people do and just eat a portion of those calories back and reduce increase this amount if appropriate. In my opinion HRMs use for calorie counting is a bit over egged for something that still just estimates in reality

3dogsrunning

On this forum you will get a resounding "yes" to your question.
While a HRM is useful, I also believe it's accuracy is overstated here. Keep in mind the calorie estimation algorithm is based on steady state moderate intensity cardio. There are a number of factors that can affect accuracy.

Here are a couple of really great posts that answer your question.
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

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1044313-this-is-why-hrms-have-limited-use-for-tracking-calories

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/773451-is-my-hrm-giving-me-incorrect-calorie-burn

A few more to add if you are interested
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/exercise-calories-sometimes-the-cardio-machines-are-more-accurate-404739

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/estimating-calories-activity-databases-198041

1_Ton_Lady

bump to read later

lmr0528

I'm on my second Polar HRM and love it. I enjoy watching my heart rate while I run. Though I've found that my calorie burn on my HRM is always a lot higher than what the machine says.

janx218

I have a Polar FT7 which I use regularly when doing cardio. I like that it automatically syncs with most machines at the gym, making it much easier to see a more accurate heartrate while exercising. However, I don't entirely trust its calorie counts. My Polar is often a bit higher than the estimate on the elliptical or treadmill I'm using, so I usually split the difference and log somewhere in the middle.

scrapjen

I do like my HRM for the feedback during a workout as well as the calorie count estimate (although it is still just an estimate). It is interesting to watch which activities raise the heart rate, how had I have to work to do so, how quickly it drops. My HRM calorie estimates are almost always quite a bit lower than the machines and my Fitbit, but always interesting to compare.

I wore it for a pickup game of soccer, and while I struggle to get my heart rate up with my elliptical, bike or even Zumba, just a couple minutes on the soccer field and it was pounding and it stayed up! I do watch it during my Zumba and if I see it dropping I try to put a little more effort and bounce into my moves to get back "in the zone" ...