Polar hrm or Body Bugg??

countrydarling1
countrydarling1 Posts: 386 Member
edited October 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I have seen both of these being used. Which one is better? Are they basically the same thing or they different! Suggestions & opinion please!!

Replies

  • Awkward30
    Awkward30 Posts: 1,927 Member
    I got a cheaper heart rate monitor because I didn't want a chest strap but if I could redo it I would get a body bugg:

    It takes more than your heart rate into account to give you a (according to them, of course) more accurate reading

    Also, I think the monitor is on your arm instead of wrist and I hate how my wrist watch hurts during pushups and cleans
  • runamym
    runamym Posts: 83 Member
    i can't really speak about a body bugg, but I have a polar hrm and love it! It has a chest strap to give an accurate reading throughout the workout. the Polar hrm is really easy to use - easy to navigate the screens and setup. I don't mind the watch on my wrist. But I do mind having things on my upper arm -- i've worn ipods on my upperarm and that bothers me in kickboxing and jogging (sometimes can rub my arm or chest raw). So it's really what you think would be less bothersome - having something on your wrist or your upperarm.
    Also I liked being able to see in real time (now) what my heart rate was during the workout. and checking on it every now and then to make sure I'm pushing myself. I'm not sure if the bodybugg has a screen to show you immediately what your hr is right now.
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Body Buggs are expensive but they are designed to be worn all day. With them you know exactly how many calories you burn in a 24 hour period and then you base your deficit on that number. That number is way more accurate than the estimate you get from MFP. They measure things like heart rate and skin temperature and I think steps too. But like I said I think they are about $500 and then you have to pay for the service.

    A polar HRM is just designed to be worn during aerobic activity. The only measure heart rate then use some equations to convert that heart rate to calories. These equations are only valid during aerobic activity so the calories you get from them when you aren't working out can't be used pretty much at all.
  • bentobee
    bentobee Posts: 321 Member
    They are both good tools for different things....

    I have BodyMedia Fit - it's great for tracking my burn throughout regular daily activities. But it is not a great device for tracking calorie burn during actual workouts - it underestimates activities like elliptical and bike riding (even when worn on the calf).

    For workouts I wear a Polar HRM and edit in the calorie discrepency into the BodyMedia data.

    My Polar can be worn swimming, the BMF is not waterproof.

    It would be hard for me to pick one over the other. Each device has given me peace of mind in different areas.
  • bentobee
    bentobee Posts: 321 Member
    Body Buggs are expensive but they are designed to be worn all day. With them you know exactly how many calories you burn in a 24 hour period and then you base your deficit on that number. That number is way more accurate than the estimate you get from MFP. They measure things like heart rate and skin temperature and I think steps too. But like I said I think they are about $500 and then you have to pay for the service.

    BodyMedia Fit and BodyBuggs do not measure heartrate at all.

    They cost around $150-200 depending on the model and deal you get on it (ebay and costco are cheap) and the monthly subscription is like $6 if you sign up for a year. If you buy through costco you get a full year for free. No where near $500.
  • _David_
    _David_ Posts: 476 Member
    Polar HRM are the best IMO for monitors, love mine!
  • corpus_validum
    corpus_validum Posts: 292 Member
    You can get the Body Bugg 3 now for $115 with a 12-month subscription:

    http://dealnews.com/Biggest-Loser-bodybugg-3-with-12-month-subscription-for-115-free-shipping/493357.html
  • Ashrenalls
    Ashrenalls Posts: 88 Member
    I think the bodybugg seems like a good idea, but in practice it would get annoying. Having that thing on your arm would get really old, I mean, I have big arms and it would not be comfortable for 16 hours.

    If you have the time and the patience to do the bodybugg system, go for it.

    I have a Polar and love it.

    Good luck!
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    They are actually totally different devices.

    The HRM is to be worn only while you exercise and tracks your elevated heart rate with instant feedback while you work out and shows you a caloric burn for that activity. It only see your heartrate and calculates your burn based on the heart rate levels during that time along with your age, sex and weight.

    The Body Bugg/BodyMedia Fit is meant to be worn all day long, including while you sleep. It monitors steps, calories burned, differences in activity levels, and even your sleep. You plug it into your computer once a day to upload all of the info (some devices have bluetooth and can be paired with smartphones, but I've heard that the connections can be troublesome) and then can see overall daily totals on everything and map charts and graphs for each day that you've worn it, weeks at a time or 28 days at a time.

    I personally use both. I wear my BMF all day and my HRM while I workout. I do have a display for my BMF so I can see where I'm at on stuff through the day if I want, and then maybe go for a walk on my lunch or do a few extra chores around the house if my stats look low on non-workout days. heh

    I find them both invaluable and wish I'd had both from day one of doing this. But I'm grateful for having them now. If I was forced to choose only one then I would probably choose my BMF simply because even though I don't get the immediate feedback on my heart rate while I work out, I can still check my charts online to get the caloric burn for that period of time, along with all of the other info that comes with it.
  • ssdivot
    ssdivot Posts: 193
    I just got a Bodymedia Fit yesterday, so today is my first full day of use. I also have a Polar HRM that I've been using. So far the BMF looks like its numbers are reasonable in regards to my non exercise activity. I'm going to end up with about 3500 calories burned today 950 of which were when I was exercising. So had I not exercised, my burn would have been 2550, which would mean for a 2 lb loss a week I'd need 1550. MFP tells me 1320. But I'd chalk that up to my having chosen "sedentary" on MFP and maybe I'm not as sedentary as I thought.

    During my Turbo Fire workout today my BMF said I burned 600 calories, whereas my HRM said 387. That is quite a difference. I have my HRM set with my age, weight and height but it also asks for Vo2max which I do not know. Turbo Fire has a lot of exaggerated and fast arm movements so I wonder if that could make the burn seem like more to the BMF. On the other hand most people have reported getting closer to that burn for that particular workout, and I had wondered why mine using my HRM was so low by comparison. I do not know which one is closer to being correct. I also went for a 2 mile walk but forgot to wear my HRM. My BMF reported 350 burn which when I checked on online calculators seemed to be reasonable for my weight, given that there were a lot of steep hills.

    I'm just going to keep plugging my food numbers from here into the online BMF activity manager and see if my losses average out to what it says it should based on its numbers. Even if it is not totally accurate for the exercises I think it is valuable to see what my non exercise burn is and know that I'm closer to "lightly active" rather than "sedentary" in my normal life. If it is accurate, then I should be eating more, and have been upping my calories a bit and we'll see what happens! Also it arbitrarily chose 10000 steps as a goal for me. You can change the goal, I just left it like that, not figuring to really use it. Well I must be a bit OCD because, I found myself going for that walk (can't remember the last time I did that) just so I could meet that goal LOL!

    Also very interesting to me is the sleep monitoring. I know I've not been sleeping very well lately, but last nite the longest I slept in one stretch was 1:40 minutes...I woke up 11 times. Poor sleep efficiency rating! I need to figure that out!

    The armband I pretty much forgot I had on, it isn't uncomfortable to me. More of an issue to me is that people are going to keep asking me about it, but I can deal with that. I love the data so far!
  • countrydarling1
    countrydarling1 Posts: 386 Member
    Thank you for all the awesome advice!! Still doesnt make my chose any easier! lol!
This discussion has been closed.