Calories Burn - Heart Rate

Alyx128

I don't have money for a heart rate monitor right now, period, not even a really cheap one. I intend to buy one as soon as I can afford it. That being said I have started measuring my own heart rate. I do this my counting my beats in a 10 second period then multiplying that number by six to get my bpm. I also have a treadmill that has the hand grips that measure pulse, but I don't trust that nearly as much, I just use that to get a general idea. Yesterday I walked on the threadmill for 40 minutes, at 4 mph, no incline. I took a 2 minute break half-way through and measured bpm (130). When I got off I was sweating quite a bit and bpm 122. My treadmill said my bpm was between 130 and 140 for most of the workout. I felt like I worked out pretty hard. I know that is sad because this would be considered a very low intensity for most (especially since I am in the middle overweight and not obese).

I used two different calories burned calculators and they both said that my calories burned in 40 minutes at 122 bpm (being conservative) was 440. That seems insanely high. Could that possibly be correct? It said this was 64% of my max heart rate as well. Does a calories burned calculator need to know your resting heart rate as well to be accurate? If it matters my resting heart rate is 72 bpm which is just about average for my age (I am 25). I am also asthmatic, if that matters.

So tell me is there anything wrong with my method? Is it possible that I burned that many calories? How can I get a more accurate figure? If anyone has a link to a more accurate online calculator please give me the link. Please help!!!

cjjones007

It could be right - it could be a little high...

I get my heart rate up to between 159 and 163 and keep it there for 45 minutes (well I have 5 minutes of up to 181 and down to 140 for water breaks) - I burn roughly 799-850 in 45 minutes... So 440 could very well be accurate for you hon...