HRM and calories

SueMizZou
SueMizZou Posts: 139 Member
edited December 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I wore a hrm for the first time while exercising today. I had been relying on the calorie count on the procor treadmill that I like the most. The HRM registered 919 calories; the procor 443. The difference is pretty significant. which one is right?

Replies

  • nuttyfamily
    nuttyfamily Posts: 3,394 Member
    How long did you walk for?
  • I_love_frogs
    I_love_frogs Posts: 340 Member
    If you are doing intervals it will be higher.

    I have heard tho, that for women the HRM can be notoriously off... and we should take 15-25% off the total for accuracy. Why that would be I don't know...but I have heard that more than once.
  • SueMizZou
    SueMizZou Posts: 139 Member
    90 min. It's one of those machines that forces you to walk up and down hills
  • ZyheeMoongazer
    ZyheeMoongazer Posts: 343 Member
    over 900 calories for 90 minutes of walking, even up hill sounds rather high. Everyone is different though, if you are heavier you burn more calories. From your picture you don't look too heavy though.

    Are you sure the settings on your HRM are correct?
  • 2hobbit1
    2hobbit1 Posts: 820 Member
    Were you just walking or doing HIIT? Have you tried putting your personal info along with speed, incline and duration into some of the online exercise sites for comparison? What do they give?

    If the HRM is set up correctly for your height, weight, age, sex, body fat% and vo2max and uses a chest strap then I would believe the HRM. As you get more fit and continue to update you HRM with your new stats the burn for the same workout will begin to decrease.
  • nuttyfamily
    nuttyfamily Posts: 3,394 Member
    It does seem high for a walk even with hills.

    Like the above poster said, check the stats entered into the HRM. I also find that I need to make sure to dampen my HR strap otherwise I get skewed results.

    It can vary from person to person how you burn as there are many variables.

    At my weight (140), I burn about 11 calories every minute on average for running and for walking it is around 5 or 6 calories per minute.
  • Jynus
    Jynus Posts: 519 Member
    If you are doing intervals it will be higher.

    I have heard tho, that for women the HRM can be notoriously off... and we should take 15-25% off the total for accuracy. Why that would be I don't know...but I have heard that more than once.
    2 reasons.

    1) All HRM's are based upon the same MET calculation done a few decades ago on a single 50ish year old dude. They took his base figures, and extrapolated all calorie burns from that. The issue is now in an age of metabolic chambers, we are able to measure calorie burns right down to the last calorie. And it's being discovered that calorie burn is a) not static, even with equal exercise and b) overestimated by upwards of 30% depending on the activity.

    2) BMR is included usually in that calorie burn figure given depending on the HRM. An average guy burns like 2cal/min sitting around doing nothing, 3cal/min standing around doing nothing. So thats 120-180cal/hour just from existing. running a very slow jog measured by a HRM will give a figure of 6cal/min burn. But thats including the 2-3cal/min that would have been burned anyway just from being alive. meaning that exercise only burned 3-4cal/min. So while the TOTAL calorie burn given by the HRM may be accurate, the calorie burn FROM EXERCISE is not. (again, some HRM's are configured to give exercise only calorie burns above your BMR, so it depends)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories