So I performed an experiment with my FT4.....

Tandi_S

....I wore the thing all day Saturday to Sunday 12 to almost 12...it ended up being 23 hours and 40 some minutes. Most of the time I forgot I was wearing it until it started coming down, which speaks well of the strap comfort!

Anyway, my activity level was typical for a Saturday WITHOUT a workout, running after kids, driving around running errands, a little light yard work, having friends over to grill....etc. Normal, not heavy activity or anything. The calorie count was over 2700!

Do I believe this? I doubt that I have been seriously under-eating, but I did eat at 1270 for the first few months on here. I've spent the last 2 months at 1500 and 1600 after reaching a stubborn stall.

If I do the math, TDEE = 2700.....80% TDEE is 2160. I can't believe I should be eating THAT much.

Anyone do a similar experiment?? Any thoughts?

I'm still stalling on 1500 and 1600 calories...losing MAYBE a pound/month...last month it was 0.3 lb. However I did just do the 30DS for a 3.5" loss on my lower body. Last Friday I upped my calories to 1700 to try that level....but then I took Mother's Day weekend off from tracking every last bit.

EuroReady

HRMs are not meant to be used all day. They arent accurate for low intensity, which is why they are for working out specifically and not daily life. I think there are other things for this, like bodybugs and fitbits-- though I know nothing about them.

gemiwing

Use a TDEE calculator (such as the one on Fat2Fit radio's site) or buy a bodymedia fit to track your TDEE. HRM's simply don't work in this situation.

Your TDEE might even be higher depending on your activity level. So yes- you could have some extra cals coming your way

erickirb

HRMs will not be accurate as there is part of the equation in the watch that accounts for oxygen uptake, and while not working out that part of the calculation will be wrong and your cals burned will be over estimated doing non-cardio activity.

militarydreams

HRMs are not meant to be used all day. They arent accurate for low intensity, which is why they are for working out specifically and not daily life. I think there are other things for this, like bodybugs and fitbits-- though I know nothing about them.

This, my calculator asks for a bpm of 121 or above to give you a calories burned estimate.

http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

Tandi_S

That is another thing I was wondering, whether the FT4 was accurate during relatively low heart rate times, 70-80 BPM.

Fat2Fit says this:

Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job):1717
Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk):1968
Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk):2218
Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk):2468
Extremely Active: 2719

I fall somewhere between the lightly active and moderately active. Although I have a desk job, I work out over my lunch hour 5 days/week most weeks and 1 day on the weekends most weekends, so 4x per week at least and 6x at most. It just doesn't seem like losing the weight should be this hard....it wasn't this hard last time, but then again that was pre-child and over 10 years ago. However, that just fuels my drive because I know I can do this again...more FIT than last time.

gemiwing

That is another thing I was wondering, whether the FT4 was accurate during relatively low heart rate times, 70-80 BPM.

Fat2Fit says this:

Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job):1717
Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk):1968
Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk):2218
Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk):2468
Extremely Active: 2719

I fall somewhere between the lightly active and moderately active. Although I have a desk job, I work out over my lunch hour 5 days/week most weeks and 1 day on the weekends most weekends, so 4x per week at least and 6x at most. It just doesn't seem like losing the weight should be this hard....it wasn't this hard last time, but then again that was pre-child and over 10 years ago. However, that just fuels my drive because I know I can do this again...more FIT than last time.

Judging by how often you work out I'd put you in the Moderately Active to start and possibly go up from there. Are these the F2F numbers your TDEE or the amount they told you to eat to lose weight?

Tandi_S

Judging by how often you work out I'd put you in the Moderately Active to start and possibly go up from there. Are these the F2F numbers your TDEE or the amount they told you to eat to lose weight?

These numbers are putting in my age, current weight and goal weight. No data from the 'experiment'.

Based on these numbers, it seems that setting my calories to 1700 and eating back some of my exercise calories might be the way to go....

erickirb

Judging by how often you work out I'd put you in the Moderately Active to start and possibly go up from there. Are these the F2F numbers your TDEE or the amount they told you to eat to lose weight?

These numbers are putting in my age, current weight and goal weight. No data from the 'experiment'.

Based on these numbers, it seems that setting my calories to 1700 and eating back some of my exercise calories might be the way to go....

Your experiment should not be considered as HRMs and not designed to be accurate with what you tried to get it to do.

Tandi_S

The fat2fit numbers are using my age, cw and gw only.

Awkward30

HRMs are not meant to be used all day. They arent accurate for low intensity, which is why they are for working out specifically and not daily life. I think there are other things for this, like bodybugs and fitbits-- though I know nothing about them.

Sadly, this. I did your experiment, and it told me I had burned like 3000+ calories on a normal day. Since I bought my bodybugg (which I love, but if you get one, get body media fit), I've only gotten over 3000 calories once, and that was when I went on a like 12 mile hike with some friends who were getting ready for the Appalachian... I'm normally closer to 2000 and have to work to get to 2500, which is my goal. Also interesting is that mfp is actually pretty accurate for me. When I'm sick at home all day, I burn almost exactly what mfp predicts for a sedentary day, and on more active days , the exercise overestimations from machines or mfp logging tend to cancel with the increased daily non-exercise activity.

Awkward30

The fat2fit numbers are using my age, cw and gw only.

The fat2fit philosophy is that you should eat for the body you want. So it calculates the tdee of your goal weight and tells you to eat that much. To find out your current tdee, you have to put in your current weight as your goal weight.