Bodymedia Fit vs Fitbit accuracy

heybales

Are there any other wrist only HRMs that do a continuous HR monitoring. From what I have seen the reason the chest strap is more accurate is because it provides a continuous monitoring of HR where wrist ones are accurate for the actual reading, but since it is not continuous it is not very useful for calorie calculations. If they have come up with a way to to continuous HR monitoring from a wrist monitor, then they would be getting around that problem. Frankly I found the site rather sparse on information, and I am guessing a high price. At this point getting a Fitbit and using my HRM for my exercise burns and inputing that at the Fitbit site looks like a way to get a fairly accurate reading.

I agree, not even screen shots of what the pages will look like.

I think some of the wrist ones try to get something continuous, just spotty reading, so potential for inaccurate. But I stopped paying attention to them years ago.

Plus, with HRM, you can do smarter training workouts, outside even getting calorie estimates.

tlehrmann1019

This has been very informitive. I've been looking at getting the FitBit for about 2 months now and just reciently learned about the BMF. From what I can tell from the posts is that both have their advantages and disadvantages and that it comes down to personal prefrence.

I am just wondering which one would be a good buy for me since my exercises vary since I'm in the military and we switch from cardio to strength on a daily basis. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

CMmrsfloyd

edit: Oops, should have read up a couple of posts, already being discussed. LOL I was just coming in here to talk about that new My Basis Band thing that's coming out - looks like it's going to be $199 for the band and no subscription fees. (ETA: Yep, just checked in the forums, basic data viewing will be free, with a possible fee for certain add-on features or extended data access.) Since there are going to be no sub fees, I'm hoping MFP will work with them to sync up like FitBit does. I'm not really interested in a FitBit, I like the idea of BMF better, but if this new thing will sync up I might be more interested in the Basis Band....

Also there is a forum for questions and suggestions:
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis

Someone has already suggested to them that they partner with MFP - maybe some of us should hit the forum and lend our support to that idea. ;-)
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis/topics/partner_with_popular_health_tracking_sites_like_myfitnesspal_who _already_have_a_large_user_base
(I had to put a 'space' between the 'o' in 'who' and the next '_' in order for the whole url to show, copy and remove that space to make the link work)

heybales

edit: Oops, should have read up a couple of posts, already being discussed. LOL I was just coming in here to talk about that new My Basis Band thing that's coming out - looks like it's going to be $199 for the band and no subscription fees. (ETA: Yep, just checked in the forums, basic data viewing will be free, with a possible fee for certain add-on features or extended data access.) Since there are going to be no sub fees, I'm hoping MFP will work with them to sync up like FitBit does. I'm not really interested in a FitBit, I like the idea of BMF better, but if this new thing will sync up I might be more interested in the Basis Band....

Also there is a forum for questions and suggestions:
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis

Someone has already suggested to them that they partner with MFP - maybe some of us should hit the forum and lend our support to that idea. ;-)
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis/topics/partner_with_popular_health_tracking_sites_like_myfitnesspal_who _already_have_a_large_user_base
(I had to put a 'space' between the 'o' in 'who' and the next '_' in order for the whole url to show, copy and remove that space to make the link work)

That's cool - good competitive plan. And if they partner with MFP, they don't have to make their food logging part so strong, just use MFP.

ericks37

I've been interested in the Basis Science band as well... though there is the continuing question when there will actually be a product. They were also recently sued by Body Media for patent violations. An all in one device would be nice.

Have looked into the Body Media device(s), but between the high initial cost and the subscription fee have not made the jump. When I saw on MFP they had integration with Fitbit, I did buy a Fitbit Ultra. So far I really like the device and seems pretty accurate for measuring general activity. At first I had a hard time believing some of the calorie burn numbers that were showing up on MFP, but so far my weight loss results have matched up pretty well. Probably like most pedometers, a HR monitor is required to capture accurate data for activities that the FB does not pick up well - cycling, weight lifting, activities involving a lot of upper body movement. It definitely under reports calories for cycling, at least compared to HR data.

CMmrsfloyd

edit: Oops, should have read up a couple of posts, already being discussed. LOL I was just coming in here to talk about that new My Basis Band thing that's coming out - looks like it's going to be $199 for the band and no subscription fees. (ETA: Yep, just checked in the forums, basic data viewing will be free, with a possible fee for certain add-on features or extended data access.) Since there are going to be no sub fees, I'm hoping MFP will work with them to sync up like FitBit does. I'm not really interested in a FitBit, I like the idea of BMF better, but if this new thing will sync up I might be more interested in the Basis Band....

Also there is a forum for questions and suggestions:
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis

Someone has already suggested to them that they partner with MFP - maybe some of us should hit the forum and lend our support to that idea. ;-)
http://forums.mybasis.com/basis/topics/partner_with_popular_health_tracking_sites_like_myfitnesspal_who _already_have_a_large_user_base
(I had to put a 'space' between the 'o' in 'who' and the next '_' in order for the whole url to show, copy and remove that space to make the link work)

That's cool - good competitive plan. And if they partner with MFP, they don't have to make their food logging part so strong, just use MFP.

Exactly, why waste time building a food logging site when there's a great one already available - just work on the actual product and then work to integrate the product's site with MFP.

Musikelektronik

rest day with a beach walk & some pullups and stuff and some cleaning around the house. Pretty close for this sort of stuff.

Calorie burns are a funny thing. I burn 2,600 just sitting on my tail at work all day and not exercising (this, according to my BMF). That's my typical burn on most days, and sometimes I take as little as 3,500 steps in a day! I never go below the high 2,500 mark.

Maybe it's because I'm overweight?

cclark1203

When you first got the Fitbit did you set it for your stride?

chrisdavey

Calorie burns are a funny thing. I burn 2,600 just sitting on my tail at work all day and not exercising (this, according to my BMF). That's my typical burn on most days, and sometimes I take as little as 3,500 steps in a day! I never go below the high 2,500 mark.

Maybe it's because I'm overweight?

yes, higher weight = higher TDEE.

No I haven't set stride length. how do you do that?



Unsure what the go was with BMF yesterday but that is definitely low. It was reading 1.25cals/min at rest instead of my normal 1.4? I did 2 strength training workouts as well. I'd estimate actual cal burn around 2800.

cclark1203

To set stride length go to the Fitbit website and at the bottom is the product manual. It tells you how to set it, I haven't done it yet but I am ok with what Fitbit gives me. You would want it more accurate for your trial purposes.

From Fitbit Website: For better accuracy on distance calculations, calculate and enter your stride length in your profile settings (see Calculating Stride).

http://www.fitbit.com/manual#section=dash-profile

Smuterella

bumpage

chrisdavey

putting this on hold as I'm not logging food or anything at the moment.

Having said that, it looks like the fitbit would be adequate for my needs and just add 300ish cals for strength training sessions.

huntindawg1962

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!

I have seen similar outputs when I thought the MBF should have been recording higher burn rates. I read somewhere (will try to find it) that in reality, dealing with warm weather, while causing lots of sweat in body cooling operations, really does not burn a lot of calories, rather, it is a body cooling function. Lots of people confuse "boy, am I working up a sweat" with massive fat burning activities. Conversely, being cooled state, like outside in the winter, rather than warm (outside in the summer) causes the body to burn energy in an attempt to stay warm. As I commented earlier, I saw that register when outside with the BMF this past winter. This may have been mentioned in "Body By Science" by Dr. McGuff. That was not the only place though.

I also see reporting on the MBF the burn rate up with weight lifting but as you say, it does not hit the vigorous stage (you can set the level as to what vigorous is by the way) when a strong walk does register. But that makes some sense too when you compare the actual time in the lift exercise (typically less than 2 minutes) to say a 10 minute brisk walk.

JanePublic

Here are my workout stats from yesterday - wearing BOTH a Fitbit and a Bodybugg...

Steps:
Fitbit: 10,171 - Bodybugg: 6,833

Calories Burned:
Fitbit: 1,630 - Bodybugg: 2,001

ilovemylife25

Thanks for posting. I am curious to see the difference as well. I have a BMF but I am part of a group on another site that eeryone is raving about the fitbit. I am hoping I purchased the right one lol

JennieAL

Here are my workout stats from yesterday - wearing BOTH a Fitbit and a Bodybugg...

Steps:
Fitbit: 10,171 - Bodybugg: 6,833

Calories Burned:
Fitbit: 1,630 - Bodybugg: 2,001

Wow, this is quite a difference.

chrisdavey

Here are my workout stats from yesterday - wearing BOTH a Fitbit and a Bodybugg...

Steps:
Fitbit: 10,171 - Bodybugg: 6,833

Calories Burned:
Fitbit: 1,630 - Bodybugg: 2,001

what sort of activity did you do?

LindsayE007

bump

JanePublic

On this occasion the workout involved trail running. I have continued to see egregious reporting differences between the FitBit and the Bodybugg.

The Fitbit is starting to seem more and more like an expensive pedometer. The point of all these products is to provide real-world feed-back. I accept that no product at this juncture is going to be 100percent accurate, but a difference of nearly 45percent reporting between the Fitbit and Bodybugg? I mean, Really?

Figment14300

BUMP