Anyone out there lost weight WITHOUT a Polar HRM?

LorinaLynn

I've been doing fine with the estimates provided by MFP, runkeeper.com, and gym machines.

I do use EA Sports Active 2 on the Playstation that has it's own HRM on one of the sensors for when you're playing the "game," but the bulk of my exercise is without one.

I also don't weigh or measure my food.

kandrews24

Lost 43 lbs without one so far. Just use MFP and certain resources on line to estimate calorie burn. This is my favorite site:

http://www.nutristrategy.com/caloriesburned.htm

p.s. I'm mixed on buying one because (i) what I'm doing works, and (ii) seems like folks get confused sometimes with them trying to estimate properly and getting info that does not comport with MFP. Seems like athletes need them though.

dawnw30

No HRM used here. Can't justify the expense...

killagb

Does it just tell you your heart rate? Because I wouldn't know where to begin to count that with calories burned, or is it like the body bugg (which is what I'm saving for) that tells you how many calories you've burned.

Most show calories burned. Not all but most.

tigersword

HRM's are really no more accurate than any calculator you can find online. Calories burned is a very simple formula. Effort * weight. An HRM uses the weight you enter into it (you always remember to update it every day, right?) and uses your heart rate to guess at effort. Your heart rate is not always a good indicator of effort. Did you have a cup of coffee? You just threw off your heart rate, and won't get an accurate number. On Beta Blockers? Your Heart rate will again, be off and will not be accurate for an HRM. HRM's have been pushed as necessary by fitness professionals (most who endorse and get paid for pushing them) but they really aren't.

I love how people talk about how gym machines aren't accurate because of calibration issues. How often do you calibrate your HRM? Do you test your HRM constantly to make sure it's actually reading your heart rate correctly? Are you sure your heart rate isn't being thrown off by anything? Tons of variables.

Oh yeah, lost 40 so far without one.

ppiinnkkmmoonn

i didn't use one at all when i lost my weight. I didn't even know about them till i joined MFP and i doubt it made any difference. Mines is collecting dust as we speak

maddymama

I've lost 36 lbs without one....... even those last pesky 5 lbs that hung on for a bit. (I'm pretty much at my goal weight/range now). I didn't see the need to be so specific about calories burned when I wasn't always so specific about calories eaten (think restaurants have been gaged to be off by 100 calories or more), I cook at home but not always exactly measured to the recipe, etc.
I figure this is my life, and I don't want to be so restricted/tied down to my life, counting everything.... so I ballpark it most of the time, and try to eat healthier when I don't exercise as hard, and eat more when I run or circuit train harder.

bethdris

When I was in WW i lost 60 pounds without one..(sadly, I didn't maintain to well, and gained most of it back). This time around Ive lost 91 pounds and the first 60ish were w/o an HRM....The lower weight I am, the more important it is that I know what I really did burn instead of guesstimating.

KZOsMommy

I've had one for about 9 months and had lost all of my weight without it! I actually haven't lost much since I got it!! :laugh:

I have had the same problem. I got mine about a year ago and have not really lost anything since then :-/.

dannylives

I lost 60 lbs with out one....but now that I have one I wish I would of gotten it sooner lol I love being able to see exactly where I'm at and where I can push harder!

^^ this!

I think most would consider an HRM as a tool to help with accuracy and can't imagine anyone thinking of it as a fad, not sure I understand that comment. A fad is something that comes and goes...... HRM's are Forever!! :laugh: :flowerforyou:

Absolutely you can lose with without buying one:drinker: but as Alypri shared once you get one you realize how much more understanding you have of your situation, your goals and the balance it takes to reach them. It does help with accuracy especially if you're a numbers person, which I am.

Good luck with your Goals Hon:flowerforyou:

Yeah, this is why I was contemplating getting one, I thought it'd be good to know all that stuff. Thanks.

dannylives

A few years ago when I lost weight, I initially lost weight without one, but after I got one, I was able to intensify my workouts. I realized I had been wussing out a lot, and knowing my target heart rate helps me push myself better.

Yeah, this is what I was thinking, thanks.

cmonskinnylovee

I've never used a heart rate monitor in my life, and I've lost 30+ pounds. I always manually check my heart rate... does no one know how to do it anymore? Heart rate monitors are SUCH a waste of money when you can count! haha.

Also there is an equation you can use to find out how many calories you have burnt in one workout using your heart rate, if that's why everyone uses them.

just google "calories burnt equation based on heart rate" and it should be the result from livestrong.com

sleepytexan

Yes people lose weight without HRMs. While many people enjoy having fancy devices, an HRM is completely unnecessary for weight loss; and it is certainly NOT the key to weight loss.

If you do want one, you can certainly get away with a less expensive one than a Polar, as you only need determine your AHR and put it in a formula to calculate your calories burned. You don't need to wear an HRM all the time -- if you can establish an AHR for an activity, you can extrapolate from there.

IMy husband bought an HRM that I have borrowed and worn exactly 3 times out of curiosity. I had already lost 13 of the 15 lbs. I needed to lose before I ever tried it. Also, in the past I lost weight from all my pregnancies without having an HRM.

After wearing the HRM 3 times for 1) a spin class, 2) 45 minutes of a 3-hour dance rehearsal, and 3) once while SUPing on the lagoon, I have confirmed that it is completely unnecessary and nothing more than a hassle for me.

I found my calories burned during spin were just a bit higher than what the spin bike said. I found the HRM extremely distracting to wear while dancing--there is too much reaching and stretching--it kept slipping and I had to stop to readjust it. Wearing the HRM while SUPing on the lagoon was fine, because I didn't get wet, however it is always possible to fall in, and then it would be ruined, I could obviously not wear it in the ocean. Also, I wouldn't wear it on a long bike ride . . . seems it would be uncomfortable for such a long period of time, and also there are plenty of websites that already show extrapolations based on a person's weight and their speed.

So . . . while wearing an HRM can help you estimate your calories burned for certain activities, it is by no means a guarantee that you will lose weight. If you have the money to spend and you like gadgets, by all means, get one, but don't be suckered into thinking that you need one.

blessings.

sleepytexan

Does it just tell you your heart rate? Because I wouldn't know where to begin to count that with calories burned, or is it like the body bugg (which is what I'm saving for) that tells you how many calories you've burned.

You don't need your HRM to do calculations for you. All you need is your average heart rate, then plug it into a formula for an estimate (please do not be fooled into thinking that HRMs actually guarantee accuracy--they only estimate based on the same formula).

here is one (of many) you can find on the internet. easy.

http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

blessings.

Pebble321

Of course it's possible! I think it would be a nice toy to have but it's not essential.
I use the calories from MFP or Runkeeper and eat these cals..
I'm sure those numbers aren't perfect but I think all the food and exercise cals we enter are estimates anyway.
I've lost 47 pounds eating my exercise calories based on these estimates so it has worked for me!

solpwr

I would add to @sleepytexan response the following:

If your goal is simply to lose weight, I would skip the HRM. You don't need it as a tool. You can count calories, and your scale is the measurement device to gauge your progress.

But a whole lot of people use MyFitnessPal (not MyDietPal) to improve their fitness. This may (or may not) include losing weight. The best measurement device to gauge your progress towards your fitness goals is not a scale. It is a combination that includes bodyfat analysis, resting HR, comparing average heart rates over time for perceived exertion levels, and other performance parameters relating to fitness. In my case, I religiously use one on known, repeatable workouts (bike rides). So I need to time the workout, but also I need to know weather conditions, what I ate that day, wind speed and direction, my body weight, and my average heart rate.

Over time, this data correlates to my relative fitness. I'm not a competitive athlete. Hold it, I do race competitively for fun. I'm not a professional athlete. But I am an athlete, and I do care about quantifying my fitness.

If you are interested (or become interested) in quantifying your fitness, you need an HRM. Otherwise, don't bother.

@sleepytexan is making the assumption that she can do a spin class, dance, etc. once with an HRM, and she will know what her numbers are and they won't change. But if she gets serious about her fitness, and actually becomes more fit, she would find out that she won't burn the same amount of calories for a given workout at the same perceived exertion level, because her body got more efficient at using fuel. It's just how it happens.

My resting heart rate was once in the high 60's. Now its 45. My fitness has improved. The HRM helped me get there. Lance Armstrong had a resting rate of 32. Professional cyclists don't ride without one.

sleepytexan

I would add to @sleepytexan response the following:

If your goal is simply to lose weight, I would skip the HRM. You don't need it as a tool. You can count calories, and your scale is the measurement device to gauge your progress.

But a whole lot of people use MyFitnessPal (not MyDietPal) to improve their fitness. This may (or may not) include losing weight. The best measurement device to gauge your progress towards your fitness goals is not a scale. It is a combination that includes bodyfat analysis, resting HR, comparing average heart rates over time for perceived exertion levels, and other performance parameters relating to fitness. In my case, I religiously use one on known, repeatable workouts (bike rides). So I need to time the workout, but also I need to know weather conditions, what I ate that day, wind speed and direction, my body weight, and my average heart rate.


Over time, this data correlates to my relative fitness. I'm not a competitive athlete. Hold it, I do race competitively for fun. I'm not a professional athlete. But I am an athlete, and I do care about quantifying my fitness.

If you are interested (or become interested) in quantifying your fitness, you need an HRM. Otherwise, don't bother.

@sleepytexan is making the assumption that she can do a spin class, dance, etc. once with an HRM, and she will know what her numbers are and they won't change. But if she gets serious about her fitness, and actually becomes more fit, she would find out that she won't burn the same amount of calories for a given workout at the same perceived exertion level, because her body got more efficient at using fuel. It's just how it happens.

My resting heart rate was once in the high 60's. Now its 45. My fitness has improved. The HRM helped me get there. Lance Armstrong had a resting rate of 32. Professional cyclists don't ride without one.

Ha ha this is really funny, bc I am more serious about my fitness than most of the people on this website. I have also been fit AND NEVER OVERWEIGHT for my entire life, however I do not feel a need to quantify my fitness by using an HRM. I choose my workouts bc they are fun and I love them. I am 43 years old with 4 kids and 18% body fat, and I would probably give you a damn good run for your money in any bike race. Not Lance though, he would beat me.

Edit: I can make that assumption about spin, bc I have been teaching it at least 2x/week for 7 years.

Besides, OP asked about weight loss, specifically.

blessings, nonetheless.

tyadrake

I also have lost all 54 lb's without the use of a HRM. I have looked into getting one, went as far as pricing them out on numerous websites, reading reviews, and also reading posts here on MFP. But why try to fix something that is not broke! I am doing just fine with my slow but sure program and am very happy with the results. Good luck in whatever decision you make!

dad106

I lost about 15 pounds without one and just following what the machine told me.. and have lost another 10 using the HRM.

The only reason why I got one, was so that I could have some idea of what I was burning during strength training and personal training sessions(even tho they can be very off during that activity due to increased heart rate from pressure and what not).

solpwr

I would add to @sleepytexan response the following:

If your goal is simply to lose weight, I would skip the HRM. You don't need it as a tool. You can count calories, and your scale is the measurement device to gauge your progress.

But a whole lot of people use MyFitnessPal (not MyDietPal) to improve their fitness. This may (or may not) include losing weight. The best measurement device to gauge your progress towards your fitness goals is not a scale. It is a combination that includes bodyfat analysis, resting HR, comparing average heart rates over time for perceived exertion levels, and other performance parameters relating to fitness. In my case, I religiously use one on known, repeatable workouts (bike rides). So I need to time the workout, but also I need to know weather conditions, what I ate that day, wind speed and direction, my body weight, and my average heart rate.


Over time, this data correlates to my relative fitness. I'm not a competitive athlete. Hold it, I do race competitively for fun. I'm not a professional athlete. But I am an athlete, and I do care about quantifying my fitness.

If you are interested (or become interested) in quantifying your fitness, you need an HRM. Otherwise, don't bother.

@sleepytexan is making the assumption that she can do a spin class, dance, etc. once with an HRM, and she will know what her numbers are and they won't change. But if she gets serious about her fitness, and actually becomes more fit, she would find out that she won't burn the same amount of calories for a given workout at the same perceived exertion level, because her body got more efficient at using fuel. It's just how it happens.

My resting heart rate was once in the high 60's. Now its 45. My fitness has improved. The HRM helped me get there. Lance Armstrong had a resting rate of 32. Professional cyclists don't ride without one.

Ha ha this is really funny, bc I am more serious about my fitness than most of the people on this website. I have also been fit AND NEVER OVERWEIGHT for my entire life, however I do not feel a need to quantify my fitness by using an HRM. I choose my workouts bc they are fun and I love them. I am 43 years old with 4 kids and 18% body fat, and I would probably give you a damn good run for your money in any bike race. Not Lance though, he would beat me.

Edit: I can make that assumption about spin, bc I have been teaching it at least 2x/week for 7 years.

Besides, OP asked about weight loss, specifically.

blessings, nonetheless.

I hope you don't mind that I used you specifically as an example. I meant no disrespect. I am sure you are serious about fitness. You sound serious. My point was more about making improvement in fitness and quantifying that. I also teach a spin class in the off season.

I went through a divorce and lost my edge, but I've come back.

So I do a Thursday Night Race League on my mountain bike periodically, and the Grizzly Downhill. Timing my rides and my races is one thing, but noting my average heart rate for the race helps me know more information. What if I go slower, and my avg HR is higher. Something is wrong. Over time, these numbers correlate.

I commute to work on my bike 20 miles each way during the summer several days per week. In the spring my average speed was 16/16.5 MPH with an avg HR of 137. Now its 19 MPH with an avg HR of 128. Knowing my HR helps give me the whole picture. I wasn't trying to imply that it was completely necessary to be fit. But if you are really trying to quantify your improvement over time, its a great tool to do that.