Is what the treadmill saying true?

2»

Replies

  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    The treadmill is NEVER right. Invest in a heart rate monitor.

    How is 3.4 calories off for walking, and 4.8 calories off for jogging, for 1 mile?

    That's way better than a HRM is going to give you.

    Read and learn.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

    I dunno... I ran on the treadmill today. My Polar synced with the treadmill.. HRM says I burned 332 for 35 minutes running at 7.0mph, treadmill said 175 cals..

    I rounded the burn off to 300 for logging purposes but I can't possible see how the HRM is more wrong than the treadmill which only asked for my age and weight. Normally, I'd agree with what you are saying but given that I was at a stall before owning a HRM (and logging based on the low cals the treadmill would say)..

    Just have to go read the study, actually, studies. The treadmill is the most tested machine in the lab. So a good one that is calibrated right (they all aren't, timer can be off, speed of belt can be off, that means pace is off) can be more accurate.

    Since the study formula's are public domain and been around for years, only cheap ones just take the watts spent on moving the belt and translate that to calories (410 watts is 352 calories in 1 hr, easy math) compared to doing the weight and pace thing.

    Polar does not sync with a treadmill, the treadmill has a receiver in it, just like your watch unit, that receives the HR beat, and displays it. That's it.

    I actually think both are low in this case.

    If 7 mph for the whole 35 min from start to finish, 0% incline, 542 calories.

    But, the formula's are most accurate from 4 to 6.3 mph - so you went above that and inaccuracies will start coming in.

    Formula overestimation at 8.5 mph has been found to be 15%.
    So I think you still burned more than HRM would show.

    Sadly women, even with lab tested VO2max and HRmax entered in watch can be 13% off. 33% if default values.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/459580-polar-hrm-calorie-burn-estimate-accuracy-study
  • dixiewhiskey
    dixiewhiskey Posts: 3,333 Member
    You are so knowledgeable, thanks for taking the time to explain.

    The 35 mins consisted of 5 minute walk warm up and 5 minute walking cooldown.. it probably should still be a higher caloric burn regardless. I feel like I worked harder than 300 calories but I'm fine with logging the 300. Better than logging 175 and wondering why I'm at a stall or relying on MFP calculations (and gaining weight from overestimation).

Categories