How to test HRM for how accurate calorie burn is

124»

Replies

  • djaxon1
    djaxon1 Posts: 82 Member
    So . . . seems calorie estimate accuracy isn't such a big issue . especially where you adjust intake based on results.
    A lot of posts on here do seem concerned with let's say the "clinical accuracy" of their wearable tech.
    Of course , I always check the "inaccurate" calorie estimate after a workout !
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,627 Member
    djaxon1 wrote: »
    So . . . seems calorie estimate accuracy isn't such a big issue . especially where you adjust intake based on results.
    A lot of posts on here do seem concerned with let's say the "clinical accuracy" of their wearable tech.
    Of course , I always check the "inaccurate" calorie estimate after a workout !

    It can be a big deal, but it's situational. Using a gross calorie estimate (includes BMR) for a multi-hour low burn activity when you really want net, believing the occasional machine (or exercise video) that gives massive over-estimates, maybe believing HRM estimate for long sessions of interval, 'HIIT', weight circuits - could be a problem.

    Depends on the numbers. If my sedentary TDEE or NEAT was 1500, and I regularly recorded 1000 calories for something that was really 500, that starts to be an issue.

    Adjusting intake based on results can help, but big errors could risk underfueling or subpar nutrition via the magnitude of the adjustment.

    IMO, relative accuracy is worth pursuing, but need to keep the relative magnitude of numbers in mind, not stress or obsess over manageable amounts of uncertainty.

    Hence the value of threads like this one, where people with sound knowledge (heybales, not me) help us try to understand better.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Oh Ann, your knowledge on the matter is excellent and shows in that synopsis.

    I always use the example of you could be 100% inflated calorie burn for your hard calisthenics program, but if it's only 15 min 3 x weekly and you are active otherwise, big whoop.

    But I'm very sedentary, and I do some longer harder workouts, and seeing differences of 400 total calories per session x 4 weekly becomes meaningful, but there are variances to the week so it changes too. As you say, would be about impossible to adjust based on weight results, of which I only have about 2 valid weigh-ins available per week.
    Weight results for me would be delayed and would confirm something is off, but not useable for how much to adjust.

    All the info I've ever presented on calories and HRM's and formula's has been after researching it for use in my case because I needed it and willing to dig, I'll share it - but I also see (better) now how necessary (or not) it's needed for others. Like many others, health and fitness has become a hobby too.

    This thread I think is actually of use now for what appears to be many getting 15-20K steps in, about 8-10 mile in my case of walking, in normal days, and their activity tracker is doing HR-based calorie burn in a bad range, and they don't do much of other workouts yet. And wondering about not losing anymore.
    Now in many of their cases it seems normal lifestyle, so adjusting the eating based on weight results is great. But many women still need that month of change and rolling avg before you have an actionable figure. As you say, might as well hone in on accuracy if you can, it get's easier like using a food scale.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,627 Member
    Thank you for the kind words, heybales. (I just don't want to post implying I'm a credentialed expert, or even anything like a hobby-level deep specialist.)

    This is off-topic, for which I apologize, but I feel like a foundation problem is that many people disliked and were bad at "story problems" in K-12 math classes. Those skills (plus a bit of the much-deprecated algebra 😉) are really helpful in successful calorie counting, IMO. The whole process is just one big, complicated story problem.

    The skills of estimation (including some info about relative magnitude of estimating errors) was elementary or middle school curriculum, IIRC.

    I'm lucky, even though also math challenged: Even from childhood, I was relatively decent at story problems, working out how to solve the problem. What I'm awful at is arithmetic, always forget to carry the one, and times tables still are a shifting landscape. Common availability of calculators started about when I graduated from high school, and has been a lifesaver, for me. 😆

    Thank you for so routinely sharing your knowledge here - I've learned a lot from your posts.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories