My heart rate monitor experiment...

ChristyP0303

I decided to wear my heart rate monitor (Polar FT4 with chest strap) for a full 24 hours to see how many calories I actually burn per day. It ended this morning at 3200 calories. I did NOT do any exercise during this time period. So this is normal daily activity. MFP calculates my normal daily activity as 2160. I have it set to sedentary since I have a desk job. I have been working out 6 days a week for the last 13 months. Including a mixture of cardio, weights and personal training 2X per week. I am currently 230 pounds and 5'3. I was not expecting such a big difference between the heart rate monitor and what MFP calculates. Any thoughts?

smileyface45

I also have the Polor HRM and love it.... Everybody is differant,and I feel that MFP is not accurat as far as HR... How can they be? They have noway of knowing what your HR is... Stick with your HRM

steph1278

I have heard that hrms aren't accurate for tracking daily activity, just exercise.

ChristyP0303

I have been stuck in a 5 month plateau. Its driving me nuts! I'm wondering if this could possibly be the reason...

ChristyP0303

I have heard that hrms aren't accurate for tracking daily activity, just exercise.

Ok, thanks! I'll do some research on that.

myfitnessnmhoy

My understanding is that heart rate monitors are really poor at estimating calorie burn when you are at rest, because things other than feeding hard-working muscles can raise your heart rate. HRMs are excellent at estimating caloric burn when there's a caloric-burn-related reason for your rise in heart rate, but not so good when it's because someone cut you off in traffic, or you're anxiously awaiting lunch, or the hot (guy/gal) from Accounting walks by.

myfitnessnmhoy

I have been stuck in a 5 month plateau. Its driving me nuts! I'm wondering if this could possibly be the reason...

Have you gone back through the setup/goal planner since you lost 80 pounds? (AMAZING, by the way, nice work!).

I've only lost 14, and I went back through the setup and it took 30 calories a day away from me. It could be that you have reached equilibrium because there's less of you to lug around now, and your daily routine is burning FEWER calories than it once did...

LishieFruit89

I think FitBit (and maybe the bodybug - don't quote me here) is an item you can use to track it all day.
I've read that the HRM isn't for continuous all-day wear.

ellens292

Not sure about your hrm but you are obviously going to right direction. You've lost so much weight and with your work outs things will start to hum again for you. Keep up the good work. Ellen

MrsLVF

I decided to wear my heart rate monitor (Polar FT4 with chest strap) for a full 24 hours to see how many calories I actually burn per day. It ended this morning at 3200 calories. I did NOT do any exercise during this time period. So this is normal daily activity. MFP calculates my normal daily activity as 2160. I have it set to sedentary since I have a desk job. I have been working out 6 days a week for the last 13 months. Including a mixture of cardio, weights and personal training 2X per week. I am currently 230 pounds and 5'3. I was not expecting such a big difference between the heart rate monitor and what MFP calculates. Any thoughts?

The real question is was it close to your TDEE?

juicemoogan

If you have been working out 6 days a week you are NOT sedentary.
You are moderately active. i would reevaluate your calorie goals based on that.

and an HRM is not meant to be worn all day that will not give you an accurate calorie burn.

There are other devices that are meant to be worn all day like a body media fit... etc..

A polar is not meant to do that.

Starsighter78

I have a BodyMedia Fit (like the BodyBugg) and am using it for the same purpose. I was wearing it 24/7 about a year ago, and then stopped. I put it back on today and am going to see if the calculated TDEE is the same or close to what my BMF shows.

tinana_RN

I have heard that hrms aren't accurate for tracking daily activity, just exercise.

This- exactly.

amgriffin69

what I do is wear my HR monitor just to get the average heart rate only during my period of exercise and then go to this website...
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx to calculate the calories burned. seems to be the most accurate that I have found so far.

Martucha123

HRM only estimates vell while you are doing steady cardio
for interval training it's less acurate
and for lifting weights and resting basically usless...

erickirb

I have heard that hrms aren't accurate for tracking daily activity, just exercise.

Ok, thanks! I'll do some research on that.

This is correct. The calculation in the HRM assumes a certain oxygen uptake based on the preserved intensity (based on avg HR vs. Max HR) and since you are not working our the oxygen uptake portion of the HRM's equation will be way off, and should not be used to calculate caloires burned while doing anything other than cardio (HRM's are also unreliable during strength training as you HR is elevated due to different physiological reasons)

vampyre2478

Ok, a bit off topic but I have been wondering about hrms. I have a Suunto M2 with dual belt and a Polar F55 and a TR1 coded hrm, the thing is, my Suunto is so conservative in calculating calorie burn while my Polar feels like it's overcalculating (45 min HIIT treadmill run including warm ups and cool downs: Suunto 400 cals, Polar 550 plus cals) So now I'm confused on which one to actually rely on.

Starsighter78

Ok, a bit off topic but I have been wondering about hrms. I have a Suunto M2 with dual belt and a Polar F55 and a TR1 coded hrm, the thing is, my Suunto is so conservative in calculating calorie burn while my Polar feels like it's overcalculating (45 min HIIT treadmill run including warm ups and cool downs: Suunto 400 cals, Polar 550 plus cals) So now I'm confused on which one to actually rely on.

Maybe average the two?

neverstray

I have heard that hrms aren't accurate for tracking daily activity, just exercise.

Ok, thanks! I'll do some research on that.

This is correct. The calculation in the HRM assumes a certain oxygen uptake based on the preserved intensity (based on avg HR vs. Max HR) and since you are not working our the oxygen uptake portion of the HRM's equation will be way off, and should not be used to calculate caloires burned while doing anything other than cardio (HRM's are also unreliable during strength training as you HR is elevated due to different physiological reasons)

I keep hearing this but don't understand why. Is there a reliable way to measure strength training? I want to know more accurately what I burn when I do my strength training.

arisher

If you're at a plateau with the amount of exercise you're doing you might want to look at the type of food you're eating. Eat more protein, veggies, and fruit. Also I really think it matters what time of the day you eat, I try to eat breakfast within the hour I get up and include protein. Then I don't eat after 7pm and usually no carbs after 5pm.

I used to eat dinner at 7 or 7:30, then I married into a family that eats dinner between 4-5pm. At first I thought this was weird but now I can't imagine eating any later.

Best of luck:):)

rmac18

I use my HRM daily to try and estimate calorie burn while exercising and while I don't have any proof of this, it seems to me that it is pretty high on the calorie burn when the heart rate is lower. For me, I only use it when my heart rate is over 110 and it seems to work fine. I've tried to use it for estimating work around the house like mowing the lawn but it seems to report much higher calories burned than I think it really is and what I see posted online, typically heart rate in these activities is in the 80s or low 90s. Once I get over 110 it seems much more accurate. I wish I had a way to test this and I'd love to find a HRM that I could wear all day and trust to be accurate. I'll be curious to see if someone chimes in with a more scientific explanation.