Bodymedia Fit vs Fitbit accuracy
Replies
-
I have a BodyMedia (no FitBit to compare), but my output screen looks totally different than the original poster's screen! It's much more 'graphic'.
This is an example of the screen I see with BodyMedia for each day.
Each section is expandable to see additional details:
I think the OP is just trying to show the end results for "calories burned" comparison -- not the different interfaces (probably would be too hard to squeeze both graphical interfaces together to do an effective screen grab).
Anyway, thanks for posting your pix from BodyMedia -- interesting to see (I just received a FitBit).0 -
I think the OP is just trying to show the end results for "calories burned" comparison -- not the different interfaces (probably would be too hard to squeeze both graphical interfaces together to do an effective screen grab).
Anyway, thanks for posting your pix from BodyMedia -- interesting to see (I just received a FitBit).
Glad to share!
I had just seen another poster in this thread commenting that they liked the FitBit interface better than the BodyMedia interface. I just wanted to share the whole picture. :-)0 -
I'm curious about the results too. I have had my BMF for a year now and love it!!0
-
kcoftx: the steps are close enough & I don't really care about them anyway. Just cals
UpEarly: that's because I don't pay subscription fee.0 -
bump0
-
UpEarly: that's because I don't pay subscription fee.
I was wondering if there was a way around that. I have the watch display and was hoping I could just use it after my sub runs out. Not sure though.0 -
Bump!0
-
I'll keep watching, trying to decide which product to get. I didn't realise the BMF would still give data without the subscription. That is good to know.0
-
UpEarly: that's because I don't pay subscription fee.
I was wondering if there was a way around that. I have the watch display and was hoping I could just use it after my sub runs out. Not sure though.
You'll be able to use the display up until the time your bmf or bodybugg's memory gets full up, which is about 2 weeks, I think. Uploading your calories burned to the website clears the memory. Take a reeeeeeeeeeeeally close look at the OP's graph and you'll figure out what you'll need to do when your sub runs out (I'm trying not to be too obvious just in case). 0 -
It will be interesting to see how this pans out. I have considered both of them at one time or another, but never pulled the trigger. I think neither of them do well with cycling which is my sport/activity of choice in the summer, but I have a HRM so I could enter calories manually. I have no idea how well they would do with cross country skiing or skating, my sport/activity of choice in the winter. I like that the fitbit is integrated with this site, and that there are not additional costs unless I want the extended data reporting. I like the extra measuring devices of the Bodymedia which make it more than a pedometer. Again, I will be interested to see how this works out over several days.
Be aware if you wear the BMF and the HRM, you can NOT correct the time/calories burned on BMF site.
FitBit does allow that, manually inputing a known workout/calorie burn.
Because you are correct, some activities, or intensities, neither can know that well as a HRM would know you are really kicking it.0 -
I would love it if there was a device that incorporated both HR input and all the stuff in the BMF to do the calculations. I would be fine wearing both something around my arm and a chest strap, although it would be nice to have the chest strap be less intrusive, the armband as well I guess. Still watching this thread with interest.
Sadly HRM calculations for calories are only accurate for activities in the aerobic zone, not below or anaerobic. So wearing it all day would not be useful since it would only be useful during aerobic exercise.
That usually means 90-150 bpm, perhaps higher if more fit.
Study here.
http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm
That's why a double system is so nice.0 -
UpEarly: that's because I don't pay subscription fee.
I was wondering if there was a way around that. I have the watch display and was hoping I could just use it after my sub runs out. Not sure though.
You'll be able to use the display up until the time your bmf or bodybugg's memory gets full up, which is about 2 weeks, I think. Uploading your calories burned to the website clears the memory. Take a reeeeeeeeeeeeally close look at the OP's graph and you'll figure out what you'll need to do when your sub runs out (I'm trying not to be too obvious just in case).
Thank you! I see it. Do you know if I use that, can I still use my display? Thank you!
... Thanks for comparing the 2 OP. I have been wondering if I made the right purchase.0 -
^^^ no probs. I love experiments!
Steps were pretty close today. Today was a workout day again but with much longer rest breaks and going for 1rm's. At this stage, as I know that the BMF is pretty accurate for me, it seems the fitbit is reading low for weight training no matter what the rest intervals are & the rep scheme.
I think I'll eventually just use the fitbit still & just make a manual adjustment for the strength training (mainly so I don't have to keep answering questions about it :P). I might go and climb a mountain or something on the weekend to see how that compares also.
0 -
That the Fitbit is a glorified pedometer is what I have basically concluded, but I like the size compared the the BMF. Neither work well for cycling which I do a lot of in the summer, but I am guessing with the extra sensors the BMF would give more calories than the Fitbit.
And from 3 months use with heavy cycling - no where near what the HRM estimated either.
Forget the BMF for cycling. I got to taking it off so I could at least manually enter in the better HRM calorie burn during the time it was off.
Actually, forget the BMF for running outside with high HR also. I got the exact same cal/min estimate inside gym on treadmill with fan blowing, and doing hills outside in 95 F temps. Difference in HR was 120 compared to 160 avg. My feet turnover was exactly the same 85 though, so it saw the same swing to the arm. Whoopee!
That told me the temp sensors were about worthless. My level of sweat was very different too, so that told me the galvanic skin sensors was worthless. And the heat dissipating off me was very different, so that told me the flux temp sensor was worthless.
I did several other tests like this, and was very less than impressed. My highest calorie burn per min by 7 x greater than any workout - was chainsawing down a tree. Arm vibrations.
Never had a weight lifting session register as anything more than moderate - shoot, my arm movements in the morning going to work got me vigorous!0 -
That the Fitbit is a glorified pedometer is what I have basically concluded, but I like the size compared the the BMF. Neither work well for cycling which I do a lot of in the summer, but I am guessing with the extra sensors the BMF would give more calories than the Fitbit.
And from 3 months use with heavy cycling - no where near what the HRM estimated either.
Forget the BMF for cycling. I got to taking it off so I could at least manually enter in the better HRM calorie burn during the time it was off.
Actually, forget the BMF for running outside with high HR also. I got the exact same cal/min estimate inside gym on treadmill with fan blowing, and doing hills outside in 95 F temps. Difference in HR was 120 compared to 160 avg. My feet turnover was exactly the same 85 though, so it saw the same swing to the arm. Whoopee!
That told me the temp sensors were about worthless. My level of sweat was very different too, so that told me the galvanic skin sensors was worthless. And the heat dissipating off me was very different, so that told me the flux temp sensor was worthless.
I did several other tests like this, and was very less than impressed. My highest calorie burn per min by 7 x greater than any workout - was chainsawing down a tree. Arm vibrations.
Never had a weight lifting session register as anything more than moderate - shoot, my arm movements in the morning going to work got me vigorous!
Maybe you would know, if you were to use the chest strap with the bmf would that increase it's accuracy? I know you can incorporate the strap from other companies.0 -
Maybe you would know, if you were to use the chest strap with the bmf would that increase it's accuracy? I know you can incorporate the strap from other companies.
You mean use a HRM strap with the BMF as the monitor. It has no programming nor radio for being able to read that.
It would be great since studies have pointed out it's great for daily non-exercise activities, but not true workouts.
That would be one way.
I know they allow you to import Garmin HRM info now, but I was saddened to see that it did NOT get incorporated into any calculations at all. You can just view your HR info during the workout.
Now maybe that is coming, because that's all you need, is some HR info to get better accuracy during exercise.0 -
Maybe you would know, if you were to use the chest strap with the bmf would that increase it's accuracy? I know you can incorporate the strap from other companies.
You mean use a HRM strap with the BMF as the monitor. It has no programming nor radio for being able to read that.
It would be great since studies have pointed out it's great for daily non-exercise activities, but not true workouts.
That would be one way.
I know they allow you to import Garmin HRM info now, but I was saddened to see that it did NOT get incorporated into any calculations at all. You can just view your HR info during the workout.
Now maybe that is coming, because that's all you need, is some HR info to get better accuracy during exercise.
I thought i read on their website you could integrate other hr chest straps to use with it. I think it was garmin, maybe i'm misunderstood. If you could use a chest strap with it, it seems that would really fix any problems with workout intensity.
edit-actually I just checked their site under compare. and it says you can monitor your hr with 3rd party chest straps. doesnt say which kind. maybe it's thru bluetooth? Id like to find out. I ordered one the other day so havn't gotten it yet.0 -
Maybe you would know, if you were to use the chest strap with the bmf would that increase it's accuracy? I know you can incorporate the strap from other companies.
You mean use a HRM strap with the BMF as the monitor. It has no programming nor radio for being able to read that.
It would be great since studies have pointed out it's great for daily non-exercise activities, but not true workouts.
That would be one way.
I know they allow you to import Garmin HRM info now, but I was saddened to see that it did NOT get incorporated into any calculations at all. You can just view your HR info during the workout.
Now maybe that is coming, because that's all you need, is some HR info to get better accuracy during exercise.
I thought i read on their website you could integrate other hr chest straps to use with it. I think it was garmin, maybe i'm misunderstood. If you could use a chest strap with it, it seems that would really fix any problems with workout intensity.
edit-actually I just checked their site under compare. and it says you can monitor your hr with 3rd party chest straps. doesnt say which kind. maybe it's thru bluetooth? Id like to find out. I ordered one the other day so havn't gotten it yet.
You can monitor it in that you can import the data, and yes Garmin. It's not a matter of integration. And I just logged in and uploaded my 2 hr ride from Sat. And BMF was not used for the day.
So all the lovely HRM info I like using SportTracks for, in one convenient spot - if I was using the BMF. But NO calorie burn for the day at all.
So it is NOT using HRM info that you upload to calculate any calorie burn. In fact, even though the Garmin does do a calorie estimate, it doesn't even include that anyway. I'd have to manually add it to the day. And if I had worn the BMF, I wouldn't be allowed to do that.
The unit has no ability to read the HR from the sending unit, BMF is bluetooth, Garmin is ANT.0 -
Thank you! I see it. Do you know if I use that, can I still use my display? Thank you!
... Thanks for comparing the 2 OP. I have been wondering if I made the right purchase.
Yes, you can still use the display with the other software. Well, ok, I don't know that for sure since I haven't tried uploading my bodybugg to it but I don't see any reason why you couldn't. When you sync the display with the bodybugg/bmf those are the only two things communicating with each other.0 -
I would love it if there was a device that incorporated both HR input and all the stuff in the BMF to do the calculations. I would be fine wearing both something around my arm and a chest strap, although it would be nice to have the chest strap be less intrusive, the armband as well I guess. Still watching this thread with interest.
Sadly HRM calculations for calories are only accurate for activities in the aerobic zone, not below or anaerobic. So wearing it all day would not be useful since it would only be useful during aerobic exercise.
That usually means 90-150 bpm, perhaps higher if more fit.
Study here.
http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm
That's why a double system is so nice.
I am fully aware that HRMs are useless for daily activity. Hence the desire to have both integrated. When HR goes up it would factor that in, but for the rest of time use other algorithms. I know, if I really want it, I should develop it myself I guess. Too bad I didn't get into engineering.
0 -
rest day with a beach walk & some pullups and stuff and some cleaning around the house. Pretty close for this sort of stuff.
0 -
Interesting that you're comparing the readings from the two devices.... but wouldn't you rather have something over estimate you burn vs underestimating? Think about the fitbit's lower burns you're getting- if you were taking a deficit off that like the average overweight person ( 750-1000 a day for someone really over weight) you'd be eating too little and damaging your metabolism. I guess my kinda poorly worded point is I'd much rather have a device over estimate my burn and be eating a little too much (easy fix, eat a little less) than be eating too little according to a device that's underestimating my burns, therefore having me eat too little and in the long run harming my metabolism. (harder, longer, weight-gaining fix)
I'm team BMF, of course. Love mine!0 -
Interesting that you're comparing the readings from the two devices.... but wouldn't you rather have something over estimate you burn vs underestimating? Think about the fitbit's lower burns you're getting- if you were taking a deficit off that like the average overweight person ( 750-1000 a day for someone really over weight) you'd be eating too little and damaging your metabolism. I guess my kinda poorly worded point is I'd much rather have a device over estimate my burn and be eating a little too much (easy fix, eat a little less) than be eating too little according to a device that's underestimating my burns, therefore having me eat too little and in the long run harming my metabolism. (harder, longer, weight-gaining fix)
I'm team BMF, of course. Love mine!
I've been using the BMF for about 9 months and have recorded data so I know it's pretty much spot on for me.
And there is no way I am risking damaging my metabolism any time soon! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: But yeah, I get what you mean
And sorry team, no results tomorrow as I forgot to put the fitbit on this morning. Damn it! Oh well, will be doing some mma type stuff later anyway so I can't wear the BMF for that either.0 -
I have a fitbit ultra and love it! I have had mine for about 5 months. I am interested to see how the 2 compare. I think fitbit tends to underestimate the calories burned for some activities. I think the steps are very accurate though.0
-
Interesting that you're comparing the readings from the two devices.... but wouldn't you rather have something over estimate you burn vs underestimating? Think about the fitbit's lower burns you're getting- if you were taking a deficit off that like the average overweight person ( 750-1000 a day for someone really over weight) you'd be eating too little and damaging your metabolism. I guess my kinda poorly worded point is I'd much rather have a device over estimate my burn and be eating a little too much (easy fix, eat a little less) than be eating too little according to a device that's underestimating my burns, therefore having me eat too little and in the long run harming my metabolism. (harder, longer, weight-gaining fix)
I'm team BMF, of course. Love mine!
Interesting point. I wonder how much (if at all) my FitBit is underestimating calories. I've been using it for 5 days now and it seems pretty dead on to me (I've been eating at maintenance for a while so I have a general idea what my calorie burn probably is).
On my rest days (I'm pretty sedentary except for things like walking my dog), my calorie burn is clocking in at 1900. This may be a bit high -- I pretty much assumed that my rest days were around 1800.
On my workout days (strength + 20 min. of HIIT), my calorie burn is reading at a little over 2200. I think my exercise calories are a bit underestimated (because of the strength training), but not by much.
I'm 5'7" and 125 lbs., so the calorie burn seems pretty normal to me given my height, weight, sedentary work life, and workout schedule. I definitely don't think it's underestimating by a sizeable number -- maybe 100 calories, give or take (?)
That said, I have no idea what my results would be with BMF. So, thanks much, chrisdavey, for taking this on!! Really appreciate it!0 -
Bump to keep track... I've had a BMF since Nov and was just commenting today that I may stop wearing since I pretty much know what it's going to show now and I think it's starting to distort my arm muscle permanently. LOL0
-
bump0
-
Has anybody else heard of the new thing is body media though? I'm trying to find the article on it. Its supposed to take the best of all 3 body monitors and combine them.
https://www.mybasis.com/product/#/tech0 -
I have a fitbit ultra that my husband bought me in February. I enjoy the little gadget but I do have a couple of beefs with it. I bike and unless I attach to my shoe ( as suggested) it barely notices I do anything. Even when it's on my shoe I believe it under-estimates my calories. The difference MFP and the fit bit log are anywhere from 100-200 calories difference. This weekend I went hiking up a Mountain and the only fitbit adjustment I got on mfp was 176 calories. Only 16 floors too... Well that mountain was a bit higher! It took more effort than my biking so i know it has to be higher. I live at a high elevation so sometimes I wonder if it effects it at all.
So in general sometimes I really feel ripped of my efforts. I've had no issues with other activities though like running and I think the steps are very accurate. I really like it though anyway. I eat back my exercise calories so I figure being under a little won't be a huge deal. It's handy how it links right to mfp. And ladies that need it hiding you can clip it on the middle part of your bra and it's just as accurate.
Oh and I think it's pretty accurate for strength training. I usually get about 300+ fitbit adjustment on mfp.0 -
bump0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions