opinions sought here....

tayner

I will try to be brief.. I have been modifying my lifestyle now for 3+ weeks, lost 12 pounds, and everything seems to be going good. I decided since this I have 135 or so more pounds to lose that a HRM would be a good investment, so I bought a Polar F11 model. It came in the mail yesterday, so this morning on my workout was the first time i used it.

I worked out on the elliptical machine for 40 minutes, and did 15 minutes of toning weights. This is an average workout for me, varying cardio and weight times, intensities, etc, but I wanted to try and do "average" to test out the monitor against my "normal" readings I was getting from the gym machines.

I still used the machine numbers too, for comparison to my HRM numbers, and WHOA! not even close! The elliptical machine said I burned 475 calories, plus im sure a few for the weights, but not alot as I didnt do that much weight training today. These are the kind of numbers I have been putting in MFP for the last 3 weeks...... now, my HRM today said I worked out for a total of 53:50 (including weights) and burned, get this, 1794 calories, 45% of which was fat!

So, i guess my questions are... could this be right? am I REALLY burning that many more calories than I had thought?!? If so, it appears that I have been UNINTENTIONALLY sabotaging myself but not eating enough calories. MFP has my calories set at 1700 for a 2 pound/week loss, and i have been eating probably around 1400 or so average with a few days up to 1600, and not generally eating my exercise calories (because I didnt think they were more than 400-500 a day on average and i wasn't particularly hungry).

I want to lose weight fast, of course, but not so fast that it compromises my long term success, and I don't want to end up in starvation mode simply because I didn't realize I was burning so many calories... and at the same time I dont want to eat a ton more calories if my HRM is lying to me

any opinions or wisdom would be appreciated here :drinker:

oh, and sorry, this didnt end up being so brief, but I wanted to try and give all the info!

tayner

I will try to be brief.. I have been modifying my lifestyle now for 3+ weeks, lost 12 pounds, and everything seems to be going good. I decided since this I have 135 or so more pounds to lose that a HRM would be a good investment, so I bought a Polar F11 model. It came in the mail yesterday, so this morning on my workout was the first time i used it.

I worked out on the elliptical machine for 40 minutes, and did 15 minutes of toning weights. This is an average workout for me, varying cardio and weight times, intensities, etc, but I wanted to try and do "average" to test out the monitor against my "normal" readings I was getting from the gym machines.

I still used the machine numbers too, for comparison to my HRM numbers, and WHOA! not even close! The elliptical machine said I burned 475 calories, plus im sure a few for the weights, but not alot as I didnt do that much weight training today. These are the kind of numbers I have been putting in MFP for the last 3 weeks...... now, my HRM today said I worked out for a total of 53:50 (including weights) and burned, get this, 1794 calories, 45% of which was fat!

So, i guess my questions are... could this be right? am I REALLY burning that many more calories than I had thought?!? If so, it appears that I have been UNINTENTIONALLY sabotaging myself but not eating enough calories. MFP has my calories set at 1700 for a 2 pound/week loss, and i have been eating probably around 1400 or so average with a few days up to 1600, and not generally eating my exercise calories (because I didnt think they were more than 400-500 a day on average and i wasn't particularly hungry).

I want to lose weight fast, of course, but not so fast that it compromises my long term success, and I don't want to end up in starvation mode simply because I didn't realize I was burning so many calories... and at the same time I dont want to eat a ton more calories if my HRM is lying to me

any opinions or wisdom would be appreciated here :drinker:

oh, and sorry, this didnt end up being so brief, but I wanted to try and give all the info!

mamaof2girls

HRM's are generally pretty accurate because you input all of your specific stats. It is going to calculate based on you personally whereas the machines at the gym normally don't. I would go by what the HRM says. Does it have a chest strap? The ones with chest straps are usually even more accurate.:flowerforyou: Great job on the 12 lb loss so far!

tayner

HRM's are generally pretty accurate because you input all of your specific stats. It is going to calculate based on you personally whereas the machines at the gym normally don't. I would go by what the HRM says. Does it have a chest strap? The ones with chest straps are usually even more accurate.:flowerforyou: Great job on the 12 lb loss so far!

yes, it has a chest strap, and I did put in all my accurate info before i used it... so I guess I should go with it, and now i apparently get to eat twice as much on days I exercise.... :noway:

firewalking

I agree with mamaof2.....Trust the HRM....

It took me some time to believe, but I would rather believe something (especially as expensive as the F11 - I'm envious) I am wearing on my body than something that is used by a gizillion people.

janiebeth

IMHO, if you have lost 12 pounds in little over 3 weeks, you are on the right track with what you have been doing previously.

The HRM number sounds really high to me, but it is difficult to tell, as I don't know your stats, and the HRM is usually more accurate than the charts.

I guess I would hesitate to add that many calories back to your meals when you have been doing so well.. Maybe compromise and add some back, but not all.

Waiting for the more experienced to weigh in.

jb

stylistchik

I have a similar question for my HRM I just bought one for about $60 at target to get a general idea of keeping my heart rate at a good pace while running and exercising OUTSIDE the gym. It didn't have me enter my size at all (i'm only 5'2 112lbs) just my age and my sex and now it gives me these outrageous numbers...? where the machines at the gym take my age my weight and my heart rate before I start. Do you think the HRM is being accurate??

SHBoss1673

1700 calories in 45 minutes? That's probably wrong. Check your numbers again in the HRM, make sure you put everything in correctly. While technically I guess that's possible, that's 37 calories a minute, and that's FAR higher then most people burn. If it was about 20 cals per minute, I would be far more likely to agree, although most people burn between 10 and 16 per minute. Actually, now that I think about it, I don't think that is even technically possible. If it is, it's just BARELY within human limits.

tayner

IMHO, if you have lost 12 pounds in little over 3 weeks, you are on the right track with what you have been doing previously.

The HRM number sounds really high to me, but it is difficult to tell, as I don't know your stats, and the HRM is usually more accurate than the charts.

I guess I would hesitate to add that many calories back to your meals when you have been doing so well.. Maybe compromise and add some back, but not all.

Waiting for the more experienced to weigh in.

jb

these thoughts were exactly what was going through my head, which is why i posed the question and do hope those with more experience weigh in too (although all opinions are welcome here). I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks, which is really good, but I am afraid I will put myself in starvation mode if I continually undercut my calories by that much. I seriously do not think I could eat that many more calories a day, I am full and satisfied at around 1400 give or take. I cant imagine eating 3000 a day! I know I got here doing that, but it wasn't 3000 calories of GOOD food... it is much easier to eat 3000 a day of junk, and add no exercise to that equation, and no suprise I am where I am.......

I do, however, want to hear from those "in the know" . I know in the end I have to listen to my body, my scales, and switch it up to keep my body off balance and always working, but an occasional dinner out with my hubby without having to worry so much about calorie restriction (as long as it healthy calories) would be nice.

tayner

it ends up being 1794 in 54 minutes (it included the weights too). I checked my settings, all correct... 5-10, 314# , 38 years old. My HR was kept in the 146-154 range the entire time. Now, i guess i need to subtract the 96 calories that my bmr calculator says i burn at rest from that... so yea, it put me at 1700.

to add, the machine at the gym pretty much put my HR at the same as my HRM the whole time, just the calorie difference was huge.

so.. 1694/54 min = 31.3 cal/hour. ??

I will add that i have been doing this for only 3 weeks, after having virtually no exercise in years... (i have a desk job where I sit for nearly 12 hours a day) so, the activity IS unusual for me...

SHBoss1673

Still 31 calories per minute is far higher then any I have ever heard of before. Even for obese people who have never worked out before. I've never heard of someone burning more than 20 per minute.

You may have a faulty watch. It's either that or a number is off, you should at least call Polar and check with them, I think they will tell you the same thing, 31 calories a minute is so high is's just un believeable to me (I mean, I HOPE it's accurate for you, but I don't think it is).

Starchaser

My opinion is that to attempt to quantify calories burned is inaccurate a waste of time.

The simple fact is that calorie is the amount of energy required to heat one litre of water by one degree centigrade, and to quantify that into exercise is, well, inaccurate at best.

I can testify from experience that I have never, ever counted or attempted to count calories burned in the gym. I still managed to move from 67Kg to 61.5Kg to make fight weight (I compete in Muay Thai).

I have always beleived that effort level is the best way forward: monitor how tough you thought it was and try to do better next time, rather than trying to count calories.

That's my opinion. I feel calorie counting while exercising is inaccurate and un necessary.

Iceprincessk25

Are you sure it's not counting total calories for a couple work outs in a week instead of just one work out??

tayner

Are you sure it's not counting total calories for a couple work outs in a week instead of just one work out??

this was the first time I used it... i guess i need to contact polar.

fjtcjt

I agree with the BOSS. Those numbers are way high, especially for what your heart rate is. You could divide that number by two and it still might be high, but definitely closer to a more realistic amount. You have had great success so far averaging around 4 lbs / week. Why mess with that if you can handle the amount of calories you are currently taking in.

Keep up the good work, 12 lbs in 3 weeks is great!

tayner

You have had great success so far averaging around 4 lbs / week. Why mess with that if you can handle the amount of calories you are currently taking in.

Keep up the good work, 12 lbs in 3 weeks is great!

I certainly am happy with my success so far, and have been very comfortable on what i have been consuming calorie wise... my main issue i guess is, after paying $$ for this HRM I am not okay with it not functioning correctly, or having to manipulate the numbers, etc. If it is wrong, I might as well get my money back and go with what is on the machine, ya know?

I have a call in to Polar USA , we will see what they say.


and thank you to everyone that has posted an opinion. they sort of mimic what i was feeling that it was out of whack.. now i continue with what I WAS doing until i know for sure.