Help: upgrading Polar HRM to either FitBit or BodyBugg

Swimgoddess

I'm considering upgrading from my Polar F7 HRM to an all-day device, like FitBit or BodyBugg.  Because MFP assumes a woman my age & height is 26% body-fat if you figure their estimates backwards via Katch-McArdle, MFP caloric estimates have not worked for me in quite some time, and there seems to be a forever moving fine-line threshold between my maintenance and starvation mode. It used to be really easy for me to adjust to lose weight: at 26% BF I could lose at 1550 net, I'd hit a plateau, discovered I was down to 20% BF, "ate more to lose" adjusting to 1700 net, lost weight again, plateaued, repinched (I always do 7pt skinfolds with the same personal trainer at least 6 weeks apart or every 8lbs lost) at 19%, increased net to 1900, lost weight again, plateaued, repinched at 18.5%, increased net to 2100, lost again, plateaued, started gaining... Then it's been all hell from there for the past year I'm up 20lbs but holding at about 21% BF and slowly dropping again. The next step if money were no object would be a New Leaf test to get a true BMR, but that's only going to give me a snapshot, when what I really need is ongoing analysis.

I'm a control freak, so the more comprehensive, the better.  I do like that the FitBit is a bit less obvious when worn though, but I like how BodyBugg tracks more things (sweat, body temp?), I like that FitBit is functional tracking sleep. I'm hoping either of these is going to help me once again pinpoint that perfect "sweet spot" for losing weight again. As you can see, I'm not particularly good at it, the following are my average net intakes and weight by week:

Wk 00: 1906 160.0
Wk 01: 1/2???, 162.4 (poor logging 1/2 week)
7pt w/Randy @ 160lbs: 22.2% 124.5lbs lean, 35.5lbs fat
Wk 02: 1703 159lbs
Wk 03: 2352 161.4
Wk 04: 1753 159.8
Wk 05: 1720 160.8
Wk 06: 2500 161.8
Wk 07: 1957 162
Wk 08: 2025 162 (injured rhomboid)
Wk 09: 1574 160
Wk 10: 1853 159.8
Wk 11: 1476 ???
Wk 12: 1805 161
Wk 13: 1851 162.4
Wk 14: 2378 164
Wk 15: 1193 161.8 (stomach flu)
Wk 16: 2189 161.4
Wk 17: 2008 162.8
Wk 18: 1773 164.8
Wk 19: 1589 163.8
Wk 20: 1826 161.8
Wk 21: 1952 163.6
Wk 22: 2215 165.2
Wk 23: 1893 166.8
Wk 24: 1725 163.8
Wk 25: 7/30/12 1907 166.5
Wk 26: 8/6/12 2162 167.5
Wk 27: 8/13/12 2116 166
Wk 28: 8/20/12 1588 165
Wk 29: 8/27/12 2077 166.8
Wk 30: 9/3/12 1794 165.8
Wk 31: 9/10/12 2064 166.8
7pt with Randy 21.5% @ 165lbs
Wk 32: 9/17/12 1535 166.2
Wk 33: 9/24/12 1593 167.5
Wk 34: 10/1/12 2184 169.8
Wk 35: 10/8/12 2188  170.8
Wk 36: 10/15/12 1968 169.0
Wk 37: 10/22/12 2186 170.2

^ See? I'm confused as hell.

sgthaggard

I use (and need) both the Fitbit and the Polar F7. The HRM is great for logging cardio that the Fitbit won't account for correctly (cycling for example) and the Fitbit is great for logging overall activity level throughout the day that doesn't get picked up by the HRM.

One doesn't replace the other, they complement each other.

HeatherRM14

Just be prepared for a shock when going from a HRM to something like a BodyBugg for your calories burned. I do boot camp workouts 3 days/week where I'd burn between 500-700 calories per workout according to my HRM - Polar F6 that I've been using for years. I got a Body MediaFit (similar technology to BodyBugg) and it said I'd burn 300 calories doing the same type of workout. Same thing for classes like Zumba and kickboxing. It was eyeopening to me to see such a drastic difference.

I can't say I've seen any weight loss results from switching because I just switched back to using my BodyMedia because I couldn't handle the drastic change in calories burned count when I first got it. But I've decided to give it an honest effort now that I can synch it with MFP.

Swimgoddess

My problem seems to be that I have no freaking clue what my "maintenance" is, so I can't figure where I need to be at to lose weight. I've lost weight at a 1600 net, but I've gained weight there too.

I'm hoping one of the 24-7 wear devices will help me.

sgthaggard

I'm hoping one of the 24-7 wear devices will help me.

It should. Between the two devices, I can pretty much tell you how many total calories I burn on any given day.

mz_asher

If your wanting one for sleep like the fitbit. Go with bodymedia. The bodybugg doesny have the sleep function. I am opposite of you as I want a polar. I currently have the body bugg but I hate all day. You do get use to it but I am thinking about doing the polar along with the fitbit. Hope that helps.

mz_asher

Just be prepared for a shock when going from a HRM to something like a BodyBugg for your calories burned. I do boot camp workouts 3 days/week where I'd burn between 500-700 calories per workout according to my HRM - Polar F6 that I've been using for years. I got a Body MediaFit (similar technology to BodyBugg) and it said I'd burn 300 calories doing the same type of workout. Same thing for classes like Zumba and kickboxing. It was eyeopening to me to see such a drastic difference.

I can't say I've seen any weight loss results from switching because I just switched back to using my BodyMedia because I couldn't handle the drastic change in calories burned count when I first got it. But I've decided to give it an honest effort now that I can synch it with MFP.

So are you saying that the body media is better at logging calories burned than an HRM?

Verity1111

My problem seems to be that I have no freaking clue what my "maintenance" is, so I can't figure where I need to be at to lose weight. I've lost weight at a 1600 net, but I've gained weight there too.

I'm hoping one of the 24-7 wear devices will help me.

That is because your maintenance changes every time you lose or gain some pounds. It may be that 1600 is maintainance whe you get down to, for example, 160 (I dont remember where I seen it thats a long list lol) and then at 150 1600 would make you gain weight instead, etc. It really depends on that and your fitness level or seeing your body fat you could have gained muscle too.

Swimgoddess

Ok... so I sat down for the better part of the past 8 hours and geeked out on Excel to figure out W....in T......F..... was going on with my body. 82 total weeks of logging, of which 52 had average weigh-ins annotated and thus "usable data". I tracked:

average weekly net calories
change in net calories from the previous week (not helpful at all, incidentally)
average weight for the week
change in weight from previous week (the holy grail that I sorted by once done)
average daily sodium intake (weekly figure divided by 7 or days logged)
average weekly % of carbs
average weekly % of fat
average weekly % of protein
calipered body-fat (7pt skinfold, assumed no changes the weeks between "pinches")
Katch-McArdle BMR using last known BF% applied to weekly average weight
difference between Katch-McArdle BMR and net caloric intake (VERY important)
minutes per week of physical activity
total calories burned per week during physical activity
rate of calories burned per minute of physical activity
number of visits to the gym each week (differentiates between when I log "work-outs" and when I log hours spent walking my kids around the zoo, museum. etc., or heavy-duty cleaning, etc.)
whether or not the week was a ToM or PMS week (fertilityfriend app)

No surprise stuff I found out:

1. Average net calories during weeks I lost >2lbs/week = 1710 (# above BMR 104)
2. Average net calories during weeks I lost >0.5lb/week = 1665 (# above BMR 66)
3. Average net calories during weeks I maintained <.5lb change either way = 1836 (# above BMR 236)
4. Average net calories during weeks I gained >0.5lb/week = 2020 (# above BMR 376)
5. Average net calories during weeks I gained >2lbs/week = 1948 (# above BMR 310)
6. My average sodium intake progressively got worse as I compared weeks I really lost, to weeks I lost, to weeks I maintained, to weeks I gained, to weeks I really gained.
7. My average % of fat intake decreased from weeks I gained to weeks I lost
8. The odds of my gaining weight significantly increased if I was experiencing a PMS week

Now for the shockingly weird and disturbing:

1. The more carbs I ate, the more weight I lost. Weeks I lost >2lbs were 46% carbs while weeks I gained >2lbs were 43%
2. The more frequently I visited the gym, the more likely I'd gain weight.
3. The lower-intensity the exercise (calories burned per minute), the better off I was to lose weight

No wonder I'd been steadily gaining weight considering for the past several weeks I had my net calories set for 2020 (eat more to lose to break a plateau, right?)... *doh DOH doh DOH doh*

Looks like I need to set my net back at 1700, start being more carb-friendly, and perhaps not "eat back" ALL my exercise calories (which I've always done). I mean, how else would you explain that I gained whenever I exercised more frequently or intensely?

emmeylou

I just want to point out that stress has a huge impact on weight loss... i realize that you are obviously very data-oriented... but be careful not to obsess over it. You could end up gaining just through that alone. I have learned this myself. I was extremely stressed out for awhile and my weight loss stopped. I got a new job (finally a new source of income) and of course my stress levels went down... and i started dropping again.

I guess I am just saying to please be careful, this is your life, not an excel document... it isn't going to be perfect. Even the nutrition information on a product isnt perfect, absolutely everything is an "estimate".

Swimgoddess

i realize that you are obviously very data-oriented... but be careful not to obsess over it.

I guess I am just saying to please be careful, this is your life, not an excel document... it isn't going to be perfect. Even the nutrition information on a product isnt perfect, absolutely everything is an "estimate".

Actually, I was worrying myself sick and being stressed over what I didn't know. It felt like guessing and psuedoscience. Now that I do, I feel like I can relax. Adjusted my net to 100 over my KM BMR, adjusted my macros best I could to 50%c/20%p/30%f, now I just gotta figure out how I'm going to go about logging/only eating back a portion (what % I still have to figure out) of my calories burned. I feel like now that I've identified a pattern, I can relax.

Christine1110

I would pass on the Bodybugg. I have one and love it...but would love to have it sync with this site

ChristyRunStarr

My problem seems to be that I have no freaking clue what my "maintenance" is,

Have you checked out helloitsdan's road map post? It'll help you figure it out or at the very least put in maintenance through here for your goals and see what that says

I use both my Fitbit and HRM

ChitownFoodie

If you are a control freak like me and want more accurate numbers, I suggest you get a BodyMedia Fit. Anyone that has one can refer you and you get 15% off. I love mine and I love the fact that it syncs with MFP. There's no need for an additional HRM. If you get the LINK model you can check on demand from your smartphone exactly where you are at for the day. When you sync to a computer it'll tell you your projected TDEE for the day, so you can plan ahead. No need for guessing.

Mrsbrandnewmeslimandtrim

bump

Swimgoddess

Have you checked out helloitsdan's road map post? It'll help you figure it out or at the very least put in maintenance through here for your goals and see what that says

I use both my Fitbit and HRM

Interesting read! I bookmarked it. Amazing what I miss by dropping of the boards for a year! However, his 20% off TDEE rule puts me around 1850 net, which, results-wise for me looking back at 82 weeks of data was my actual "maintenance".

But I have to wonder how much of that data was skewed by my "eating back" ALL my exercise calories. Something to look at (like I wonder how my loss/maintenance/gain weeks would look if I just looked at gross averages? The same way I wonder how much my "high-sodium" days occurred on days I was "eating back" 800 workout calories, etc. I mean, of you're eating back your calories, you're BOUND to "go over" on sodium & macros (in grams... the %s remain pretty constant), right?

If you are a control freak like me and want more accurate numbers, I suggest you get a BodyMedia Fit. Anyone that has one can refer you and you get 15% off. I love mine and I love the fact that it syncs with MFP. There's no need for an additional HRM. If you get the LINK model you can check on demand from your smartphone exactly where you are at for the day. When you sync to a computer it'll tell you your projected TDEE for the day, so you can plan ahead. No need for guessing.

Noted. The trainer who pinched me yesterday was trying to sell me on it. 24hr Fitness dropped its endorsement of BodyBugg and is going to BodyMedia later this month and the trainer said the syncing with MFP was a huge plus since he's an MFPeep too I guess the only plus that FitBit has for me over BodyBugg/BodyMedia is that it's less obvious when worn. I hate wearing sleeves. I almost always wear tanks/camis and then when it's cold I throw on a zip-up hoodie or button-up sweater and just wear it open :P I also liked FitBit's sleep tracking function, which I heard BodyBugg doesn't really have and not sure about BodyMedia? But like pp said, I'm kinda a track-everything-humanly-possible control-freak and FitBits are apparently far less accurate.

Swimgoddess

Ok, so I just sat down and used my avg. net column and my weekly calories burned column to figure out both my average weekly gross intake and the amount that gross intake is above my BMR in each of my 5 categories

wks w/ >2lbs loss: 1904 gross, +298 KM BMR
wks w/ >0.5lb loss: 1936 gross, +337 KM BMR
wks @ maintenance or <0.5 loss or gain: 2058 gross, +457 KM BMR
wks w/ >0.5lb gain: 2286 gross, +641 KM BMR
wks w/ >2lbs gain: 2277 gross, +640 KM BMR

Referencing the roadmap thread, 1904-1936 gross to lose weight is very close to his 20% off a lightly active TDEE of 1.375.

So if my maintenance is truly 2058, and my KM BMR right now at 170lbs and 21.9% BF is 1674, then my TDEE is... (drumroll please) 1.23 whereas "lightly active" is figured at about 1.375.

Figuring 20% off what I now believe my TDEE at (1.23/currently 2058), or 412 calorie deficit I get 1,646... but that's 28 calories below my KM BMR (too low). I'm already pretty low body-fat. Losing 0.8lbs a week might be unrealistic.

I mean, PLEASE correct me if I'm going about this the wrong way.

It also appears that I should never "eat back" more than 300 workout calories per day (averaged out over the week).

wolfchild59

I have both a Polar HRM and a BodyMedia Fit (like the BodyBugg but tracks sleep and also now syncs with MFP). I wouldn't see one as a replacement for the other in any way. But, in the long term, I see myself ending my subscription with BMF and going back to solely using my HRM.

Also, based on your screen name, I'm going to guess that you like to swim. Remember that you can't wear a Fitbit, BodyBugg, or BodyMedia Fit in the pool. They are water resistant, but not water proof. Meaning you can wear them in the rain or while you're getting sweaty, but you can't submerge them. So in order to track calories while you swim, you'll need to keep the HRM.

And there are other exercises that the BB/BMF don't record well since the arms aren't as actively involved. So for those I take off my BMF then manually enter the calories burned from my HRM into the BMF site.

So if you are a data geek (as I see that you are), I'd recommend picking up the BMF and using it along with your HRM.

HeatherRM14

Just a FYI on the visibility of the BodyMedia Fit....I have been wearing just the monitor tucked into the side band of my bra and the data is comparable to when I wear it on my arm. I have done it both ways for workout and non-workout days and the numbers are almost identical.

Swimgoddess

Just a FYI on the visibility of the BodyMedia Fit....I have been wearing just the monitor tucked into the side band of my bra and the data is comparable to when I wear it on my arm. I have done it both ways for workout and non-workout days and the numbers are almost identical.

This is awesome!!

magerum

The polar product will give you a much better read on exercise, IMO. I don't see the use/need for the all day type trackers personally.

AmandaTWaH

I use my FitBit for daily activity and my HRM for more intense cardio. The fitbit keeps track of calorie burn from your everyday walking but you still want to use a HRM for things like Zumba, kickboxing, and that type of thing. The FitBit can't accurately count that.

Eric53066

I use my FitBit for daily activity and my HRM for more intense cardio. The fitbit keeps track of calorie burn from your everyday walking but you still want to use a HRM for things like Zumba, kickboxing, and that type of thing. The FitBit can't accurately count that.

^^^ This

Your HRM will give you more accurate numbers if you set your age/weight/etc correctly while the FitBit is a pedometer gadget where you could get virtually the same results from one of those free or dirt cheap pedometers if you wanted to log the data manually.

crazyellybean

I own a Garmin HRM and a Bodymedia... I like both, but I love my HRM.

The Bodymedia site is very detailed and numbers oriented. I am currently wearing mine to help me find my maintenance levels as well.. HOWEVER, I've noticed that the calories burned is pretty low considering.

I did find out that Bodymedia syncs with Garmin, so I will be using my Garmin to help me after this first week.


Your welcome to look at my blog to see what data can be pulled from the site.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/crazyellybean/view/bodymedia-day-1-experiment-443096

alkencka

I have both the Fitbit and the BodyMedia, I prefer the FitBit, easier to hide, but more importantly for me at least, I'm not heavy arm swinger, so a lot of my movements are not recorded. I am also left handed, so I tend to carry items with my left hand, which again I don't swing my arm, so my step count is way off. I also find that I'm not a "sweater" on the arms, to my temperature read, does not show how hard I am working out, which again makes my calorie count off. So the best way is to use an HRM, but the BMF web site, does not allow you to "Manually" add a calorie burned number, you have to play with all the activities until you find one that equates to the number you want.

Another item I can't stand, even though you can sync with MFP, the calorie burned information is downloaded to MFP until you physically sync your BodyMedia. So your MFP data will not update any calorie adjustments thru the day.

The Fitbit will update MFP thru the day.

Just my 2 cents.

Swimgoddess

Another item I can't stand, even though you can sync with MFP, the calorie burned information is downloaded to MFP until you physically sync your BodyMedia. So your MFP data will not update any calorie adjustments thru the day.

The Fitbit will update MFP thru the day.

Even with the BodyMedia Link model (not the Core)???

It seems the consensus is that I'll still want to rely on my HRM during workouts (though I want to limit my "eat back" calories to no more than 300 daily). Those that use both: do you wear both during the workout (not necessarily to add them together, but maybe average between?) or just the HRM?

alkencka

Yep.

You can look at the live data and the iPhone will give you information from MFP. But calories burned will not upload to MFP until you physically sync with cord. So if you are going by MFP for how many calories to eat it will not be up to date.

wolfchild59

I use both the BMF and HRM during most exercises. But I use the HRM calories to enter into MFP. I personally don't like the way the BMF syncs and adjusts calories to MFP since there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it. Once I synced it and put an over 500 calorie "exercise" adjustment on my MFP, which I deleted. I unplugged it and realized I'd forgotten to check the battery level, so I plugged it back in. When it synced that time, it then added an almost 700 calorie "exercise" adjustment to my MFP.

The two syncs were within a minute of each other and I hadn't done anything but sit there at my computer. So I've just stuck with what I was doing for the year and half prior to when they would connect to each other. Log my exercise calories from my HRM into MFP and then just use my BMF for my overall daily totals. And I delete any adjustments that BMF does to my MFP calories.

So what I use the two sites syncing for is that now all of my food is automatically transferred to BMF from MFP, so it's easier to run my reports and see daily deficits without the extra food entry work. (plus I'd lagged on that and hadn't entered anything since April so hadn't been able to run any reports, so I was very happy to be able to make it all just sync over and run all the reports)

Swimgoddess

Just picked up my BodyMedia Fit Link at Best Buy

Swimgoddess

and the super-fun comparison wearing both during my workout today: BodyMedia said I burned 490 calories and my HRM said 629 calories, and given my recent realization that eating back all my (HRM) calories was the problem, I'll probably go with BodyMedia's readings from here on out. At least I was only overestimating by 22%. Assuming the descrepancy is consistently that much, that could easily explain how the weight has crept up over the past year!

VanessaGS

Start maintaining your sodium intake. You could be retaining water weight.