accuracy of the bodybugg.

mike_littlerock

Just wondering if anyone else has experimented with the bodybugg versus other tools such as a HRM.. My polar FT7 HRM tracks my calorie burn higher than the bodybugg and I tend to believe the polar more, as it is monitoring work product more directly (heart rate) versus accelerometers, galvanic skin temp and other metrics used by the bodybugg.

one prime example was when doing pretty intense intervals on a spinning bike, 40 seconds on, 20 off and resistance cranked up for standing climbs.. my HRM knows that I am pushing very hard on those intervals but the bodybugg said i only had 3 minutes of "vigorous activity" that entire day..

I agree that its easy to wear the arm band instead of a chest strap, but I would think that tracking heart rate would be one of the best metrics to track work output. Also, the bodybugg tracks time laying down versus sleep time, but in that case heart rate has been shown as a pretty reliable way to track sleep cycles versus just detecting if you are laying down and are not moving.

just thought i would ask the community and get feedback.

thanks
Mike

Azdak

The strength of the body bugg is its ability to estimate the energy output for activities of daily living. In my experience, it is not that good for monitoring exercise.. HRMs can be somewhat accurate in estimating steady-state aerobic exercise, but they are pretty useless for anything else.

So, one has to choose what area to emphasize when considering one or the other.

mike_littlerock

either that, or have a multitude of sensors strapped to your body.. Humm.. wonder if I could upgrade to full cyborg status and get a dozen or so sensors implanted that communicate via bluetooth to a MacBook Pro strapped to my back.