SO, I GOT MY HRM AND.......

TourThePast

Also, remember that HRMs estimate ALL calories burned during that exercise - but if you weren't exercising at all you'd still be burning BMR calories. Doesn't make much difference for a one hour workout, but if you're measuring long periods, you do need to take your BMR off the totals.

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike, but it took over seven hours. In that time I'd have burned over 400 calories even if I'd been relaxing, so I only logged 1560 calories burned for that hike.

Doesn't make much difference to me as I don't eat most of my exercise calories, but thought it worth pointing out for those who want to be as accurate as possible given that calories estimated by HRMs are not precise to start with.

Christiiiine

Quick question -- is there really a difference between a men's and women's HRM or is it more just the design of them stylistically?

Armygirl67

bump

leilani♥

Also, remember that HRMs estimate ALL calories burned during that exercise - but if you weren't exercising at all you'd still be burning BMR calories. Doesn't make much difference for a one hour workout, but if you're measuring long periods, you do need to take your BMR off the totals.

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike, but it took over seven hours. In that time I'd have burned over 400 calories even if I'd been relaxing, so I only logged 1560 calories burned for that hike.

Doesn't make much difference to me as I don't eat most of my exercise calories, but thought it worth pointing out for those who want to be as accurate as possible given that calories estimated by HRMs are not precise to start with.

how are you burning so low for a 13 mile hike? was it a flat hike or somethin? Cause I easily burn over 1,000 on a 2.8 Mi (1.4 mi each way). hike that reaches 2,705 Summit Peak..

iamahealthychick

I could have cried when I realized how much over the machines were ( and this site was) compared to my Polar FT7 but am grateful for the more accurate picture now. You are only supposed to wear a hrm for exercise, they are not for all day use in general (unless you are exercising all day...remember to take off your bmr cals if you wear it a long time). If you want an all day picture, buy a body bugg or body media fit.

TourThePast

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike

how are you burning so low for a 13 mile hike? was it a flat hike or somethin? Cause I easily burn over 1,000 on a 2.8 Mi (1.4 mi each way). hike that reaches 2,705 Summit Peak..

There wasn't a massive elevation gain, but the main reason is that I am now only 122lb dry - unfortunately that means a huge decrease in calorie burn for any given activity.

Also, because I'd never planned a hike that long, my wonderful boyfriend carried all our gear for most of the hike, leaving me with only a super-light daypack.

dolphin21

OMG I hear all u guys!!!! Its a Slap in my face.......but now I know how much I actually burn!!!! Mfp is way off as the treadmill and my elliptical!!!

solpwr

Quick question -- is there really a difference between a men's and women's HRM or is it more just the design of them stylistically?

Yeah its cosmetic. I believe that all of them make you input your gender. If yours doesn't its not a good enough HRM for what you are looking for.

solpwr

Also, remember that HRMs estimate ALL calories burned during that exercise - but if you weren't exercising at all you'd still be burning BMR calories. Doesn't make much difference for a one hour workout, but if you're measuring long periods, you do need to take your BMR off the totals.

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike, but it took over seven hours. In that time I'd have burned over 400 calories even if I'd been relaxing, so I only logged 1560 calories burned for that hike.

Doesn't make much difference to me as I don't eat most of my exercise calories, but thought it worth pointing out for those who want to be as accurate as possible given that calories estimated by HRMs are not precise to start with.

Yeah, a lot of people do it this way. I don't here's why:

So you subtracted 400 out. But what if you would have worked in the garden? Maybe you should have subtracted out a gardening session. Or housecleaning? Or whatever. It gets problematic.

It is a challenge on huge days like that a 7 hour day. I'll bet you were well under your calorie goal anyway that day, just because you had a big cardio day.

There are plenty of ways to make the subtle adjustments, mostly trial and error, right?

TourThePast

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike, but it took over seven hours. In that time I'd have burned over 400 calories even if I'd been relaxing, so I only logged 1560 calories burned for that hike.

Yeah, a lot of people do it this way. I don't here's why:

So you subtracted 400 out. But what if you would have worked in the garden? Maybe you should have subtracted out a gardening session. Or housecleaning? Or whatever. It gets problematic.

My activity level is set to light, so if I do anything that burns a lot of calories eg digging my garden, I wear my HRM and log the calories, after removing 60 calories per hour for my BMR.

However, the point is not that people *should* subtract their BMR from the readings on their HRMs, but that they should be aware that it's not accounted for, especially if they are "eating back" all their calories.

I'm only 3lb off my goal weight now, so obviously this is working for me, but other people may prefer to do things differently. If their way is working for them, that's great.

rosied915

I just ordered the FT7 and can't wait for it to get here..... or can I? haha Looks like reality isn't going to be too kind to me.

And here's another surprise~ all of a sudden TODAY I was VERY motivated to exercise as hard and as long as I could!!! First I did JMs Banish Fat for 45 minutes and that would have been the end of it but by some miracle (and the fact that the burn ended up being HALF of what I'd been logging) I managed to somehow walk/jog a mile for 25 minutes more.

Hmmmm.....something to think about...... lol

TourThePast

And here's another surprise~ all of a sudden TODAY I was VERY motivated to exercise as hard and as long as I could!!!

Information is power.

Knowing what is happening to your body and taking responsibility for it makes you strong.

This is why having a heart rate monitor, though it makes not one jot of difference to my body, makes a HUGE difference to my headspace.

pinkgigi

Same thing happened to me, my regular cycling route had me at 1000 cals burnt on here, when in reality it was only 300. Good news is that it means I am uber-fit :-). If you are fit you have to go harder and longer for the same burn. I love my HRM, it is a SUUNTO and hot pink.

GG

jpfrimmer

I wondered the same thing, so when I got my Polar HRM I wore it while on the machines at my gym. When I got done my machine said 500 calories. I then lifted weights for about 20 min and at the end of my workout my HRM said 418 calories. Later I was talking to some people at the gym and found out that the calorie counter on the machines are according to men. So if you're a female, they are really overestimated. I guess there are some machines that let you input your gender, but they are really pricey.

helper1112

Hi all,

I got the same wake up call today. I got my ft7 and went and tried it out on the exercise bike and walking and found that what I thought I was burinug according to the site was way to high. I did find for me that the lowest setting for the exercise bike and walking entries are close to what my hrm was telling me I burned, a little high but at least it is close. Now, I feel the need to work harder....

HMonsterX

OP, imagine if you'd been eating your exercise calories...the calories you THOUGHT you were burning, but turned out to be half that. This is partly why I don't eat mine back. Even with my HRM I still don't trust the numbers! I just eat maybe 10-20% of what my HRM says I burned..just to be safe!

leilani♥

For instance yesterday I burned over 2,000 calories on a 13 mile hike

how are you burning so low for a 13 mile hike? was it a flat hike or somethin? Cause I easily burn over 1,000 on a 2.8 Mi (1.4 mi each way). hike that reaches 2,705 Summit Peak..

There wasn't a massive elevation gain, but the main reason is that I am now only 122lb dry - unfortunately that means a huge decrease in calorie burn for any given activity.

Also, because I'd never planned a hike that long, my wonderful boyfriend carried all our gear for most of the hike, leaving me with only a super-light daypack.

Ah that makes perfect sense! Gotcha

Bluestar083

this is totally my fear re exercise calories on MFP!

I eat 1300-1400 calories most days, up to 1600 on weekends as I exercise twice a day, (174cm, 55kg 28 yr old female, relatively active job) and work out 6 days a week. I never exceed my calorie intake (oh ok I lie, I do on my cheat meal day).

Basically I can eat 1200 calories and feel hungry and deprived or eat 1300+ and feel fine.

I agree that MFP overestimates my calories so I found studies that actually measured calories for females in my age group for the exercises I do (body pump, body step, body core, running) and put in the lowest calorie burnt to be on the safe side. I leave the estimation for brisk walking as I only put in the walk to/from work/gym and now the walk to the cafe for my coffee, the flights of stairs i do several times a day etc.
So if I am losing weight (I am-slowly but then i dont have much to lose and they say harder to lose when your already slim) then I will continue to eat back exercise calories (underestimated and only if hungry) but if i platuea I won't.

If people have a big amount of weight to lose a HRM is a great idea.

rosied915

OP, imagine if you'd been eating your exercise calories...the calories you THOUGHT you were burning, but turned out to be half that. This is partly why I don't eat mine back. Even with my HRM I still don't trust the numbers! I just eat maybe 10-20% of what my HRM says I burned..just to be safe!

Wow, you're right about that!!

I must admit though, that in the last 2 weeks I am eating a little more after reading the endless posts here about feeding our engines, etc. Last week I lost the 1.5 pds I had gained the week before (when I was eating "low") and we shall see how this week works out.

Yesterday I earned about 400 exercise cals and there was just no way I could get them all in me! So those that say to go by your hunger have a point too.

servilia

I have a question about this - When I work out on machines at the gym (and there is a heart rate monitor on it) do you find that your HRM is definitely much different from those numbers as well? (you guys are scaring me!)

A HRM that attaches to you will always be more accurate then a generic machine. Most machines don't take into account height, weight, age..etc where a HRM does. Nothing it 100% accurate but a HRM that straps to your chest will give you the closest.

Also just wanted to mention I did the JM Shred and was always around the 200 burn mark and I was using the FT4 ( I think)

Thanks. This definitely helps. Though it does not take my height/age it does take my weight. I feel like it is not AS off as I was thinking. Good to know.

Well... sorry but the elliptical at the gym that was taking into account my weight and age was still off and was showing almost twice as much as my HRM. So unfortunately it can still be way off for you too. In addition to age and weight, my HRM also takes into account my height, gender (a biggie) and fitness level (VO2 max or something like that).