Ignorance = Bliss? (HRM Question)

Mirlyn
Mirlyn Posts: 256
edited September 21 in Fitness and Exercise
Probably been discussed before but I just bought myself a Polar FT4 today. To try it out I went on my elliptical. I expected a slight difference between the amount of calories burned via my elliptical readout and my HRM readout but holy geez it's a HUGE difference!

I'm a big girl, 222lbs at 5'4". I'm in better muscular shape than some women at my size but I'm still a big girl. In 50 minutes on my elliptical, the readout on the machine says 858 calories burned (around 17 calories/minute,) my HRM reading? 522 calories! OUCH! MFP's generic elliptical setup says 756. My heartrate on the elliptical stayed between 165 and 175bpm according to the HRM.

That's a humongous difference and I am glad to have an accurate reading now but I am saddened that my walks that I normally do (not on the elliptical) are going to be drastically lower than I previously believed. Sad sad sad.

I guess I'm not really asking for advice, just ranting/venting/whining. I'll get over it but I had to get it off my chest, it bugged me through my entire workout!

Thanks for listening!

Replies

  • tammytoeller1
    tammytoeller1 Posts: 12
    oh tell me about it, I just got a gowear fit this past week, called the bodybugg for 24 hr fitness and biggest loser, I do a body combat class for an hour and was excepting 700-800 calories burned as the class is a huge workout. Man was I a little bummed only was 480 jeez guess I just have to work out more =)
  • maryann73
    maryann73 Posts: 763 Member
    It IS a bummer, but at least now you will be better with your calories so you will lose more maybe! :drinker: (just trying to find a bright side!)
  • elzettel
    elzettel Posts: 256
    I feel your pain. I had the same issue when I got my Polar FT7 a few weeks ago. The bonus is since I started using it I'm no longer losing less than a pound each week! So, I guess it has an upside although I'm still disgusted with the readout on my elliptical :sad:
  • cmw72
    cmw72 Posts: 390 Member
    I was surprised as well when I started wearing my HRM. I've noticed that MFP's estimations for some items are way over, while some are considerably lower.
  • shellee9tj
    shellee9tj Posts: 221 Member
    I actually had quite the opposite result!! I had been under-estimating my cals, my HRM is giving me at least 100+ more cals burned than my treadmill or the general database for other activities. I have the Polar FT7 with the chest strap. Hmmm, wonder why it is so different??
  • red01angel
    red01angel Posts: 806 Member
    I actually had quite the opposite result!! I had been under-estimating my cals, my HRM is giving me at least 100+ more cals burned than my treadmill or the general database for other activities. I have the Polar FT7 with the chest strap. Hmmm, wonder why it is so different??

    Same here...makes me wonder if mine reads accurately...
  • Robin1117
    Robin1117 Posts: 1,768 Member
    so interesting. thanks for sharing. I have been wondering about this too, as I use the elliptical every day and look forward to those extra calories! I have been wondering whether I should get an HRM, based on other discussions I have seen on MFP, but then decided just to lower my elliptical reading from the machine by 30% and see what happens. Looks like your difference is about 39%...good to know a benchmark. Anyway, this week I went from plateau to losing 2 lbs, so it looks like it's something I needed to do.

    Best to be informed if possible, you'll lose more weight but I agree with you, sometimes ignorance is bliss!
  • Mirlyn
    Mirlyn Posts: 256
    I actually had quite the opposite result!! I had been under-estimating my cals, my HRM is giving me at least 100+ more cals burned than my treadmill or the general database for other activities. I have the Polar FT7 with the chest strap. Hmmm, wonder why it is so different??

    Maybe MFP and machines overestimate on us 200+'ers? Perhaps they assume our workout is alot more heart intensive than it actually is because not all of us are out of breath just walking up the steps? Lol that's my guess. It's a bummer but at least everything will be accurate for me now!
  • Melanie1967
    Melanie1967 Posts: 238 Member
    I guess that's why I don't eat all of my exercise calories. I have always thought that MFP's calories burned was a little high. I don't have a HRM yet, maybe I should invest in one. But for now, what I have been doing is working for me, and what works for some, won't work for others. Keep up the great work!
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    If you see a big "boost" in calories expended when starting to use an HRM, the first thing to check is the HR max setting vs your average HR. If your HR max is higher than the age-predicted default number in the HRM, the HRM will OVERestimate your calories. If your average exercise HR is like 85% to 95% of max, then this is certainly the case.

    HRMs, esp Polar, tend to underestimate caloric expenditure at lower intensities. OTOH, elliptical trainers (except for later model Life Fitness 95 series cross trainers) are notorious for greatly overestimating calories.

    In any case, I would never recommend eating all of your exercise calories -- at least not at the beginning. The counts, even with an HRM that is perfectly set up, are just not that precise. I would never count more than 50% of those calories unless you had learned through experience that a higher % was OK. The risks of not losing by remaining in an energy balance are MUCH higher than the chance of falling into some hypothetical "starvation mode"--esp if you are significantly overweight.
  • arewethereyet
    arewethereyet Posts: 18,702 Member
    I love my HRM! I eat every last calorie.......why? because 1200 is really not enough for me and I use the HRM to make it 1500 a day.

    I figure it this way, I may be overestimating my burn, but I also do not add in each time I now take the stairs for 5 flights, walk from the very back of the parking lot, do an extra lap around the grocery store with 50 pounds of groceries, stop to dance to a song, do pushups and squats at break time.

    Point for me is the gym machines really over estimate most of the time.

    Make sure your HRM is set up correctly to, as Azdack said. Mine was set up for a 6'2 instead of 5'2 inch woman!

    Great job so far OP!!
  • Mirlyn
    Mirlyn Posts: 256
    If you see a big "boost" in calories expended when starting to use an HRM, the first thing to check is the HR max setting vs your average HR. If your HR max is higher than the age-predicted default number in the HRM, the HRM will OVERestimate your calories. If your average exercise HR is like 85% to 95% of max, then this is certainly the case.

    HRMs, esp Polar, tend to underestimate caloric expenditure at lower intensities. OTOH, elliptical trainers (except for later model Life Fitness 95 series cross trainers) are notorious for greatly overestimating calories.

    In any case, I would never recommend eating all of your exercise calories -- at least not at the beginning. The counts, even with an HRM that is perfectly set up, are just not that precise. I would never count more than 50% of those calories unless you had learned through experience that a higher % was OK. The risks of not losing by remaining in an energy balance are MUCH higher than the chance of falling into some hypothetical "starvation mode"--esp if you are significantly overweight.

    Thank you, this was very helpful. I don't usually eat all of my exercise calories anyway, I tend to have 300 left when I go to sleep and I've been losing weight at a decent pace. It was just kind of daunting to see how much harder I'll have to push myself from now on to burn what I want to burn. Pushing myself is a good thing but the lazy part of my brain is trying to hide behind the couch so I can't force it to do any extra :P.
  • scotty_81
    scotty_81 Posts: 59
    My fiancé got a HRM this week and it says that he has burned way less calories than MFP does. He's been eating most of his exercise calories (before he got the HRM) and has been losing weight and so am I.
  • arewethereyet
    arewethereyet Posts: 18,702 Member
    My fiancé got a HRM this week and it says that he has burned way less calories than MFP does. He's been eating most of his exercise calories (before he got the HRM) and has been losing weight and so am I.

    that is a great point! If you are losing while doing what your doing then do it! LOL

    Later on when you only have 10 pounds to lose........you will need those cals to drop it!
  • JoyElizabeth
    JoyElizabeth Posts: 65 Member
    Don't know if it means anything or not, but I have a Garmin Forerunner405 and trained on an elliptical set for my height and weight and both were the same within 5 calories - then when I put it into MFP, it matched up within 50 calories - not sure why you guys get all different readings?
  • Rea_K
    Rea_K Posts: 51
    It always depends on the person. Nobody burns exactly the same calories so you just can't rely on MFP to give accurate calories burnt. When I was heavier, I used to easily burn 900 calories if I ran for an hour. Now I burn less than 600 calories an hour. When I bought my HRM I found that the elliptical on MFP used to say I burned far more than I actually did, and the treadmill On MFP used to say I burned less. I learned to trust my HRM and not question it, as there is no way the MFP calories burned are right for everyone. There are so many things to take into account, including sex, height & weight.

    Now I am lighter I find that MFP over estimates the cals for any cardio that I do, but under estimastes the cals for any strength training that I do. I really recommend buying a HRM as I started losing weight more consistently when I purchased mine.
  • de1amo
    de1amo Posts: 266 Member
    in my gym there are older style fitness life machines and newer ones--the older style are much stingier with calories--30 minutes run about 260 but the newer ones it is about 330 --i just leave about 50pc of my exercise calories at a minimum --does seem to defy the logic of this site but there are lots of discrepancies on here--the intakes are a hit and miss --a cup of tea can be rated as low as 10 and as high as 30 but i rate mine as 38--thats just 1 example of what i can work out,
  • justesje
    justesje Posts: 37 Member
    I have the FT4 too, great idea. it is a huge difference but at least you will have the correct reading and don't think you've earned more calories through workout and overeat. you will love your HRM soon. trust me!
  • de1amo
    de1amo Posts: 266 Member
    ...but if the food cals are wrong where does that leave you-could be eating more than you are led to believe!!
  • Rea_K
    Rea_K Posts: 51
    ...but if the food cals are wrong where does that leave you-could be eating more than you are led to believe!!

    I think it really depends on the food. I'm from the UK so most food on here is incorrect for me. I always make sure that I create the foods myself as I never just go by what MFP says. I have a calorie counting book that I carry around with me if the food I'm eating doesn't have the nutrition info on it. Or I google the food I'm eating and find out the calories online. I mostly use the online website for where I shop-Asda. So I'd say it's always best to double check rather than just going by what MFP says for every food.
  • de1amo
    de1amo Posts: 266 Member
    i am English but live in Turkey and never eat branded food--everything comes from places like the small bakers or local fruit and veg farmer--food is completely different in size- and not overdone with info on the packet-a slice of bread here means nothing to me because my bread is a small round 4inch diameter wholemeal--things should have weights and measures applied to them to give a better idea --and also make it metric as most of the world (including Britain) has become metric!
  • AnnieeR
    AnnieeR Posts: 229
    I think it really depends on the food. I'm from the UK so most food on here is incorrect for me.

    Out of curiosity - what sort of foods are coming up incorrect for you? I'm also in the UK but I find most of the foods and brands I buy are in the database and correct, and I don't question fruit, veg, etc. as I assume they're right (and they can't be far off given that I am losing....)

    On the original topic, my HRM gives me a calorie count about 100 higher than the treadmill and pretty close to MFP. I go by my HRM as it has far more information to use for calculating so I presume it's the most accurate. I do subtract 10% as I agree that nothing is going to give you an exact count....
  • Rea_K
    Rea_K Posts: 51
    I think it really depends on the food. I'm from the UK so most food on here is incorrect for me.

    Out of curiosity - what sort of foods are coming up incorrect for you? I'm also in the UK but I find most of the foods and brands I buy are in the database and correct, and I don't question fruit, veg, etc. as I assume they're right (and they can't be far off given that I am losing....)

    On the original topic, my HRM gives me a calorie count about 100 higher than the treadmill and pretty close to MFP. I go by my HRM as it has far more information to use for calculating so I presume it's the most accurate. I do subtract 10% as I agree that nothing is going to give you an exact count....


    Well I buy absolutely all of my food from Asda, and so I like the calories to be the same as on the labels. Obviously each supermarket can have different nutrition info, and some things are general, so aren't exactly the same, but I'm just fussy with it. Bananas are lower on here than what the labels say on my Asda bananas, and some other fruits and veg are. Also my porridge was incorrect. And potatoes, beans, rice, some snacks also. I can't really list everything but I find myself mostly creating the foods I eat. Sometimes it's just because the fat or sat fat might be incorrect or not there. I'm just very particular and like to ensure it is right, as I don't want to go over on my cals,fat or sat fat. Even if stuff is only around 40 calories out I don't want to accidently eat 100 calories extra by not realising. I love MFP and think it's great. But not everything can be correct all the time, and I can't expect all the foods to be listed according to what my Asda labels say, so I just like to double check everything. I'm quite strict with myself as you can probably tell!! Even if somethings only like 2 calories out I'd have to create it again with the calories according to the label!! That's just me though!
  • de1amo
    de1amo Posts: 266 Member
    i tend to discount 10pc from the machines and add 10pc to the food thus making a discrepancy of 20pc which is pretty hit and miss when the base for me is 1200cals --maybe a 240calorie span

    incidentally where is the best place to get a hrm in the uk for polar and the approx cost--i come home in summer
  • Mirlyn
    Mirlyn Posts: 256
    Don't know if it means anything or not, but I have a Garmin Forerunner405 and trained on an elliptical set for my height and weight and both were the same within 5 calories - then when I put it into MFP, it matched up within 50 calories - not sure why you guys get all different readings?

    My elliptical is also set for my height/weight/age and still shows up super incorrect. Just depends on the person and the machine I guess. MFP had "cleaning, light moderate effort" burn less than what my HRM says so that was a bonus I've found. I'll take it! :)
  • de1amo
    de1amo Posts: 266 Member
    what is moderate effort to an extremely light fit person is different to an overweight unfit person--i do wish in this age of clever computers the gym machines could do the maths on the bpm you give it --it sets you an average heart rate for cardio based on your age and if you maintain it for most of the time it must be able to give you an accurate collation
  • MaryDreamer
    MaryDreamer Posts: 439
    My Polar F4 says I burned MORE calories than the gym elliptical! For 35 mins the machine read 350 cals (10 cals min) and my HRM said 528! (15 cals min) That's a huge difference in my favor! And I was worried it was going to read less!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories