HRM yay or nay??

Tangerine302

Thank you so much! It sounds kind of fun to use as well. Off to look at them!

robin52077

For the people with HRM... do you subtract your BMR from the total number of calories? I saw a thread on this the other day.

Anyone? I've been thinking about getting a HRm, but I want to make sure I will be recording my burned calories correct! Help!

yes, I subtract 1 cal per minute. So if I run for 45 minutes and burn 320 cal, I only log and eat back 275, since I would have burned about 45 laying on the couch, which is what I would have been doing had I not been running!

Polar does NOT take those cals into consideration, the polar people have confirmed this, you DO need to subtract them out if you want it to be close to accurate.

Crystal817

Thanks robin. :smile;

rmbibbs

Hi,

I have had a HRM for about 4 years now.... I really don't like to workout without it. I use it to more accurately account for my calories burned as well as use it to push my workouts (maintain desired heart rate during workout). While it may be somewhat of an investment... I think it is totally worth it. I use the Polar and once it is customized for you... it will definitely give more accuracy then the workout machines... Good luck.

Rocky

Windi38

most definitely a YAY here....

I bought one a few months ago. Was amazed at the difference my actual calorie burn was compared to pre-set numbers on here, other sites, and the machines at the gym. Way lower!

I also love it because it gives my average heart rate, and time spent in each 'zone'. It's really helped me track how I'm changing as I continue to work out.

I started bicycling several times a week over a month ago, and when I started I would ride for about 12 miles, and burn 500+ calories. As I got used to the rides, the same mileage got me less calories. I also felt better so I started doing longer rides to maintain that 500+ calorie burn. I'm now up to 20 miles, and 700 or so calories. Notice that that is 8 more miles and ONLY 200 more calories!! Because I'm getting into shape. And I'm seeing it all on the hrm as I go along.

And I'm using it to track my walks...I find I'm also having to walk harder and longer to burn the same calories as a month ago.

It's pretty awesome!


I have a Polar FT7. LOVE IT!

jrbanta

I told myself if I was still on track and moving forward on this journey by May then I would buy a HRM. I just ordered a Polar FT4! Can't wait until it arrives so I can see how many calories I'm really burning during Zumba, biking, swimming, walking, etc. This thread motivated me to make the purchase today so thanks to everyone's helpful comments on why they like their HRM!:flowerforyou:

PJilly

I wouldn't go so far as to say getting one was a waste, but I rarely ever use mine. I lost the bulk of my weight using MFP's estimates, but I kept reading about how HRMs were so much more accurate, so I gave in and bought one. I wore it for a while, and the calorie burns it gave me were considerably lower, so I think MFP's estimate were more accurate for me. The calorie burn is just an educated guess, whether it's MFP or a heart rate monitor. That said, I think it was worth it to me just to see what my actual heart rate is for certain workout programs, and I'll probably wear it from time to time, but I never have found it to be a good tool for me to estimate calorie burn.

funkyspunky871

I saw something about subtracting BMR a few days ago as well - I hadn't been doing it, but it does make sense. Has anyone been doing this?

No. MFP doesn't use your BMR to set your calorie goal. It uses calories burned from normal daily activity. That's why you specify if your days are normally sedentary, lightly active, active, or very active. There's not a single reason why you would then need to subtract calories.

xxx29

Wow, you're going against the grain, here, but I'm with you. I don't have a HRM, but you make sense that they are both an estimate based upon the average. I've been losing weight at the MFP rate by following the MFP calorie plan. So, tell me why, again, I need to spend $100-200 on a HRM? I'd rather spend it on HEALTHY food I REALLY LIKE.

BrandNewMia

I have a Polar FT7 and I love it, it was worth every penny! My only regret is not getting one with GPS (WAY out of my price range!), but maybe in the future!

For the people with HRM... do you subtract your BMR from the total number of calories? I saw a thread on this the other day.

Yes, I do subtract my BMR from the calories burned during exercise.

Hodgeypodgy

I just got my FT4 today. One question, can you use the chest strap in the pool or is it just the watch that is water resistant?

cupotee

why not? It's only like $30. Instead of going out for dinner, spend the moolah on a HRM

irish077

YES,YES,YES!
Bought Polar F6 Months ago the BEST motivation EVER!!!! It makes me excercise everyday and if I dont I feel totally guilty. No more guessing! You need 1 w/ the chest strap as some1 stated previously! Check Ebay, you can get for a lil cheaper...
Good Luck!

Windi38

Wow, you're going against the grain, here, but I'm with you. I don't have a HRM, but you make sense that they are both an estimate based upon the average. I've been losing weight at the MFP rate by following the MFP calorie plan. So, tell me why, again, I need to spend $100-200 on a HRM? I'd rather spend it on HEALTHY food I REALLY LIKE.

"A heart rate monitor consists of two parts - a transmitter attached to a belt worn around the chest, and a receiver worn on the wrist like a watch.

As the heart beats, an electrical signal is transmitted through the heart muscle in order for it to contract. This electrical activity can be detected through the skin. The transmitter part of the heart rate monitor is placed on the skin around the area that the heart is beating, and picks up this signal. The transmitter then sends an electromagnetic signal containing heart rate data to the wrist receiver which displays the heart rate."

That's copied from a another site, but it shows that a heart rate monitor is not just estimating. You have to put in your age, weight, height, and ideally your max heart rate... those things, combined with the electrical signal combine to give quite an accurate account of your calories burned.

another good thing about an hrm is that you can actually see yourself getting fitter via your average heart rate and calorie burn. In just 5 weeks, I have to do half again as much work and distance on my bike to burn the same number of calories. And, the hills that used to make my heart rate spike to 186 I now barely get to 177 on, if I'm pushing hard. Which encourages me to work harder. If I didn't have a hrm, I would never know this, and probably would not be improving so rapidly.

It's a great way to monitor your progress.

Of course, if you are losing weight and feeling good without one, there's no real NEED to get one. ~

PJilly

Wow, you're going against the grain, here, but I'm with you. I don't have a HRM, but you make sense that they are both an estimate based upon the average. I've been losing weight at the MFP rate by following the MFP calorie plan. So, tell me why, again, I need to spend $100-200 on a HRM? I'd rather spend it on HEALTHY food I REALLY LIKE.

"A heart rate monitor consists of two parts - a transmitter attached to a belt worn around the chest, and a receiver worn on the wrist like a watch.

As the heart beats, an electrical signal is transmitted through the heart muscle in order for it to contract. This electrical activity can be detected through the skin. The transmitter part of the heart rate monitor is placed on the skin around the area that the heart is beating, and picks up this signal. The transmitter then sends an electromagnetic signal containing heart rate data to the wrist receiver which displays the heart rate."

That's copied from a another site, but it shows that a heart rate monitor is not just estimating. You have to put in your age, weight, height, and ideally your max heart rate... those things, combined with the electrical signal combine to give quite an accurate account of your calories burned.

It may not be not estimating your heart rate, but it uses your accurate heart rate reading and all the other info you feed it to estimate your calories burned. It's a very educated estimate, but it's still an estimate, or at least that's my understanding.

another good thing about an hrm is that you can actually see yourself getting fitter via your average heart rate and calorie burn. In just 5 weeks, I have to do half again as much work and distance on my bike to burn the same number of calories. And, the hills that used to make my heart rate spike to 186 I now barely get to 177 on, if I'm pushing hard. Which encourages me to work harder. If I didn't have a hrm, I would never know this, and probably would not be improving so rapidly.

It's a great way to monitor your progress.

Of course, if you are losing weight and feeling good without one, there's no real NEED to get one. ~

Those are more great reasons it could be a useful tool. Still, it's a tool that sits in my dresser drawer.

bonjour24

I just got my FT4 today. One question, can you use the chest strap in the pool or is it just the watch that is water resistant?

yep, you can wear them in the pool.

i have a polar (don't know the model) but it's fab. i feel like i use it well and pay attention to it, although because i run i don't often stay within the heart rate limits (mine has 3- light exercise, moderate exercise and hard). it's fab to keep track of how you're doing, and i find it motivational just to make sure i don't have too many gaps in my training days (the watch actually memorises the last 14 exercises, and i get a message on it every sunday how many cals i've burned and how much time i've spent working out over the week).

and if you're larger, the band works well over the top of your boobs (i tried to put mine under, but the strap rode up to underneath my bra and was very uncomfortable.)

pyroxian

For the people with HRM... do you subtract your BMR from the total number of calories? I saw a thread on this the other day.

Anyone? I've been thinking about getting a HRm, but I want to make sure I will be recording my burned calories correct! Help!

yes, I subtract 1 cal per minute. So if I run for 45 minutes and burn 320 cal, I only log and eat back 275, since I would have burned about 45 laying on the couch, which is what I would have been doing had I not been running!

Polar does NOT take those cals into consideration, the polar people have confirmed this, you DO need to subtract them out if you want it to be close to accurate.

Can you share where Polar has confirmed that? I've contacted customer support directly and been told that they do not discuss the specifics of their calorie estimation algorithm because it's confidential and proprietary... If they've gone on record as saying that I'd love to know where.

Having said that, my personal belief is that they USED TO deduct the RMR calories in earlier generations of their products (my F55 for example) but do not in the current crop (my FT60 for example) - I believe this because doing the same workout at very similar intensity (P90X Cardio X for example) will show a value about 150 calories lower on the F55 than the FT60 - which is very close to my 60 minute RMR (Resting NOT Basal Metabolic Rate).

Since switching to the new generation Polar HRM, I have indeed started deducting what I would have burned sitting on the couch... so put me down in the "does deduct" category, and also count my vote as a "yay" for picking up an HRM - I can't imagine going back to pre-HRM days, but I'm also a bit of a numbers geek.

pyroxian

I have a Polar FT7 and I love it, it was worth every penny! My only regret is not getting one with GPS (WAY out of my price range!), but maybe in the future!

For the people with HRM... do you subtract your BMR from the total number of calories? I saw a thread on this the other day.

Yes, I do subtract my BMR from the calories burned during exercise.

Not to sound like a Polar/Best Buy shill or anything, but Bestbuy.com has had the Polar FT60 with GPS receiver on sale for $180 for the past month, down from $330, basically a free GPS unit with the FT60 at normal price. If I were in the market for a new HRM it's what I'd be buying.

taso42_DELETED

Just sort of playing devil's advocate... people have been able to become extremely fit for thousands of years without the use of HRM's or calorie counting, or any sort of technology whatsoever. When I first started this journey, I never did any cal counting, never had an HRM, and still, I lost the majority of my weight in those low-tech days.

But then somehow I found my way to MFP, and so did you. So I guess some part of you is interested in data tracking, otherwise you probably wouldn't be here. An HRM can help you be a little more accurate with tracking your cardio burns. If this sounds appealing, then go for it.

Warning: may lead to OCD logging behavior....

Crystal817

Warning: may lead to OCD logging behavior....

Exactly what I'm looking for! :laugh:

pyroxian

Warning: may lead to OCD logging behavior....

Buahahahaha. Ain't THAT the truth.

pandafoo

i love my HRM and agree with everyone's reasons in support of it. i can testify it does encourage OCD behavior as i'm now the type to subtract BMR calories from my HRM reading. however, i also think that you can lose weight fine without one - you've already more than halfway to your target weight, so you're making great progress.

plus, what's much much more important than being accurate with exercise calories is being accurate with food calories. i've seen it on here that weight loss is 80% diet, 20% exercise. i would agree with that (and i'd toss in your body's metabolism as another factor).

mfp definitely overestimates my calories burned, but given that i burn 300-400 calories an hour, it's off by ~150 calories. in comparison, it is soooo easy to underestimate how many calories we're eating. 150 calories is equivalent to a 1-2 tbls olive oil, half of an avocado, a handful of almonds, etc. it's effortless to undo any exercise calories with a snack here or there. it's more critical to watch what you eat, in my opinion.

so if you must choose something to be OCD about, i'd strongly recommend a kitchen scale. i would say it's the best weight loss tool i've invested in (with my HRM being #2), and it's a lot less expensive than a HRM.

jrbanta

I just tried out my new Polar FT4 and love it. I did a very brisk 3 mile walk and was able to keep my heart rate in my target zone and do some interval walking. My calories burned were 368 and MFP estimated 381 so not too far off but I'm glad to have it personalized to my height, weight, etc.:bigsmile:

The chest strap was very comfortable and hardly noticeable. Very easy to set up the monitor also. Highly recommend from me!