so, how hard did I work? Calorie estimates from treadmil and

PoleBoy

So... a treadmill, provided with your weight, knowing it's incline and speed can calculate how many metres your *kitten* was lifted by, and thus calculate the work enquired to do that - except gait gets in the way, and there's probably a fudge in for running efficiency which will be out if you walk.... blah blah blah

The treadmill decided I did 668 calories of work

A HRM takes your heart rate, and calculates how hard you are working, taking into account your age and weight - massive simplifications there. I suspect the HRM is under reporting, possibly because y resting HR is 40 bpm

The HRM (Polar T7) decided I did 424 calories of work.

Which is likely to be more accurate? I would guess the treadmill

Should I add 50% on to all the HRM readings?

kdiamond

Personally I would take the HRM measurements for 2 weeks straight (if doing the same treadmill speed, time, etc) and average the results. I personally believe the HRM would be a lot more accurate...remember HRMs do not accurately calculate resting heartbeats.

Dafrog

if u wore a chest strap i would say go with the HRM.

drog2323

agreed - I would think the HRM is more accurate. I think the cardio machines do their best to "estimate" and probably pretty close, but it's really going off just weight and speed/resistance etc. The HRM should be (I would think) in theory, more precise.

The above comment had good recommendations - try them both and see how the results turn out after a couple weeks.

Either way - even 400+ is a good cal burn!

sarahliftsUP

If the HRM has a chest strap, I would go with that. It considers your gender, weight, height, age and calculates your heart rate which should give a better accuracy of calories burned compared to the machine.

The treadmill would only get your weight but wouldn't know your gender, age, height.. And if it has a heart rate monitor within it, it could possibly be interfered with the people that are working out around you.