Heart Rate Monitor vs MFP Question

Rach911

I finally broke down and got a heart rate monitor. It took a litle bit to figure it, but finally did and used it today for the first time. I did the same exercises for the same amount of time that I usually do. Before the HRM, I used the calories burned that MFP figured out, which was 605 calories. After using the HRM today it showed that I only burned 322. That makes a BIG difference of 283 calories. I know that HRM is supposed to be more exact, but is that large of a difference normal?

hush7hush

It is normal, because MFP just uses a basic formula, thought the HRM actually knows how hard you're working!

MidnightRadio

I've noticed that MFP gives me almost double the exercise calories than the actual machine does. I trust the machine much more.

MidnightRadio

I've noticed that MFP gives me almost double the exercise calories than the actual machine does. I trust the machine much more.

akgrl1020

Your HRM knows exactly how hard your heart worked. I did the same thing, when I first got mine. I thought I was pushing myself, but once I actually saw how little I was actually raising my heart rate, I learned I had to push myself harder. They are a great tool!

Davali

I have the opposite problem - I used my HRM at the gym today and it claimed I'd burned over 1000 calories. MFP gives me about half that.

Tiggerrick

I've had mfp both overestimate and underestimate my calories. Like the others stated, mfp uses an average of what most people burn. Your HRM will be specific to you. The difficulty of your workout will dictate the calories you really burn.

achapman01

I just started using the watch HRM by Gaiam. Since the HRM takes into consideration your gender, age, weight,and fitness level, (for example you can enter beginner, intermediate or athlete) I believe the HRM is more accurate than the machines or MFP. Make sure to take your heart rate frequently, say every five minutes or so, if you can, to get an accurate reading. HRM's will use your average heart rate over each exercise session. There is definitely a variation between the machines, MFP and my HRM! The stationary bike calories on MFP are much higher than what my HRM reads. Conversely, on the treadmill, the HRM reads more calories burned than the machine, and about the same as MFP. The elliptical seems to be the most accurate all around. So...my HRM seems to be more accurate. If your HRM lets you enter more factors about you than the machines, it is probably more accurate. To be conservative, you could use the lower number to make sure you do not credit too many calories burned. Good job!

Rach911

Thanks everyone! I appreciate everyone input!! I assumed that the HRM was accurate I think I was just surprised at the difference. Guess I'm gonna have to start pushing myself a little bit more!!

rileysowner

HRM are only accurate in any way if they have a chest strap. If you have to touch it to get a reading, its numbers are highly suspect. Here is a good article about it. 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