Calorie discrepancy HRM and websites

AmyNVegas

I have been using the calories from different websites according to height, weight, etc to enter my exercise each day then I borrowed a HRM from a teacher at work and it was a lot lower than the websites said. For instance this morning I did 15 min on the bike then 10 min working with bands and floor exercises. The HRM said I had burned 125 calories but all the websites tell me the bike alone is over 300 calories at my weight. The HRM was programmed with my weight and height and age. So I should definitely use the HRM calories and not the website's right? I think the websites all assume that the average 381 pound woman is out of shape and dying with any little bit of exercise but it actually takes me a good 3-5 min to get my HR up to fat burning range 150 - at a good pace on the bike. I am pretty active even though I am fat. The teacher who lent it to me is a runner and she said my resting HR is better than hers as is my recovery time. that gave me a boost! Maybe I am not as hopeless as I thought. LOL! So I used the 125 calories today instead of the calories the websites said. Can someone with more experience with this let me know if that is right? Thanks!!!
Amy:bigsmile:


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Food Diary

AmyNVegas

I have been using the calories from different websites according to height, weight, etc to enter my exercise each day then I borrowed a HRM from a teacher at work and it was a lot lower than the websites said. For instance this morning I did 15 min on the bike then 10 min working with bands and floor exercises. The HRM said I had burned 125 calories but all the websites tell me the bike alone is over 300 calories at my weight. The HRM was programmed with my weight and height and age. So I should definitely use the HRM calories and not the website's right? I think the websites all assume that the average 381 pound woman is out of shape and dying with any little bit of exercise but it actually takes me a good 3-5 min to get my HR up to fat burning range 150 - at a good pace on the bike. I am pretty active even though I am fat. The teacher who lent it to me is a runner and she said my resting HR is better than hers as is my recovery time. that gave me a boost! Maybe I am not as hopeless as I thought. LOL! So I used the 125 calories today instead of the calories the websites said. Can someone with more experience with this let me know if that is right? Thanks!!!
Amy:bigsmile:


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Food Diary

mrsyac2

Yeah the HRM is more accurate than the websites and or machines- you can always underestimate what the websites or machines say- I didn't know about HRMs until MFP then I finally buckled down and got a polar f4 90.00 at target best investment for me so far- I put it on every time i workout and i love watching the calories burned #- also it gives me a push to work harder if i want to burn a certain amount.

AmyNVegas

I actually prefer the lower calorie amount because I already have 2340 calories with my basic ones so the 30 min a day on the bike was adding an additional 600+ and I was never able to reach it. I am comfortable now with the 250 added even if it is still hard to reach them I always get too high in protein or fat or something when I try to eat them. Thanks for the help!
Amy


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Food Diary

AmyNVegas

Anyone else find this when they use a HRM- that the calories are higher on the websites than the HRM?
Thanks!

Amy:bigsmile:

Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Food Diary

miasuperstar

yes, my HRM is always lower than everything else-the machines, websites, calculators etc. At first it was very disappointing but now I know that I'm getting more accurate results and it is indeed fun watching those calories BURN.