Heart Rate Help

Options
bek416
bek416 Posts: 9 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I just purchased a heart rate watch today - "ECG Accurate" (whatever that means).

I am *quite* out of shape - fitness wise, and about 35 lbs overweight.

I just walked for 48 minutes and my watch calculated my calories at 643 burned. My heart rate was at 75% for the entire time. Is this possible? The watch asks for gender and age - and I figure weight doesn't matter, since everyone gets to their THR zone at different rates, different ways - right? That would mean incline and speed wouldn't matter either, if we are using a formula based on heart rate, no? I may be confused about how to look at this.....

I need a little guidance when it comes to heart rate - but I've read it's the most accurate way to know how many calories your body is expending. Anyone have thoughts for me?

Replies

  • japruzze
    japruzze Posts: 453 Member
    Options
    A HRM with a chest strap is more accurate than the watch version. That being said, see what you get if you do the sme walk again in the same amount of time. if the result is similar, go with it. If its dramatically different. Try again and/or return it fr one with a chest strap. If you are going to use an HRM use it all the time to track calories burned. Otherwise it gets confusing. As if it isn't already, right? Consistency is what I look for.
  • 5050jnernst
    5050jnernst Posts: 14
    Options
    I use the Polar Heart rate monitor, FT4 model. I had to enter all my data, weight, gender, height. The amount of calories you mentioned does sound a little high for walking in the time you mentioned. ECG stands for electrocardiogram. I think you should enter your statistics including your present weight and as you lose update the data. The heart rate monitors with the chest straps are the most accurate.
  • 5050jnernst
    5050jnernst Posts: 14
    Options
    I should have added that entering the weight does matter.
  • bek416
    bek416 Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    A HRM with a chest strap is more accurate than the watch version. That being said, see what you get if you do the sme walk again in the same amount of time. if the result is similar, go with it. If its dramatically different. Try again and/or return it fr one with a chest strap. If you are going to use an HRM use it all the time to track calories burned. Otherwise it gets confusing. As if it isn't already, right? Consistency is what I look for.

    I've actually been reading about chest straps vs watches, and this being ECG accurate "from what I've read" says it's more accurate than chest straps, as they can lose connectivity and lag behind the heart beat. "ECG is the most accurate, medically accepted way to monitor heart rate." From what I've been reading around these boards, many people have a hard time keeping the strap where it needs to be generating inaccurate results. That's why I went with a watch... it's been dead on with a manual count - except the calorie count seems so high........ thanks for your reply! :)

Categories