Are heart rate monitors bogus?

I think if people post a question like "Why am I not losing weight?" and open their diaries for advice, it's perfectly fine to point out to them that they may be overestimating their calorie burn.

If not, you really have no idea if what they're recording is working for them or not.

I have no idea, I haven't seen that, but I would guess someone who is estimating 1000 calories burned for cleaning house is way overestimating. I have a HRM and if I bust my tail I can get to about 300 calories in 30 minutes, and 600 calories in 60 minutes. That's intense cardio / interval training though. Weights don't raise my HR that much so I don't count them on calories, just watch my HRM to see what I'm doing. I would say your estimation of 450 calories for 45 minutes is probably pretty accurate.

I don't think heart rate monitors are inaccurate...I've been using mine for some time now and checked it's accuracy against heart rate monitors at work (I'm a Nurse Practitioner) and found that indeed it is very accurate.

Looking at the idea of overestimating your calorie burn however I think tends to be a bit of a problem on here. I believe that for the individual who is truly committed to losing weight only those calories burned TRULY working out should be tracked. For example...walking in the mall shopping...sure it burns calories but it's also a normal part of every day life. Unless you are breaking a sweat or breathing hard to shop you probably shouldn't be counting it or you are just going to cheat yourself and eat back far too many calories.

HRM are fairly accurate --- But MFP I have found over estimates by quite a bit the same activity to the point that I have stopped using their values and either enter the value from the equipment, my HRM or an average from calorie burn sites.

I have found that using my HRM has been way more accurate then estimating the calories burned using the MFP categories. When entering my calories burned on MFP I usually make the calories burned match not the minutes of activity. This gives me a better estimate of my available calories for the day.

Ironically, mine works just fine. It's a polar ft40 with a chest strap. The numbers it provides are very consistent, and actually match up very well with the mfp estimates. I've found people who are over logging exercise in mfp, typically aren't being honest with themselves regarding how hard they are working out. The biggest difference to be mindful of is the impact of body weight on calories burned. Also the heart rate monitor doesn't factor in or remove the calories you would have burned at rest during that time that MFP already gives you credit for. I always subtracted those calories back out of the hrm results.

Like everything else with weight loss it is a tool, to help you get a better estimate. Using the hrm or not, logging and doing exercise has tons of benefits, and logging your food really makes you think more about what you're eating. So whether its an overestimate or not, most people will still benefit!

I think it depends on what sort of activity you're trying to track with them....not sure they'd be terribly helpful to me because I mostly strength train and do KB stuff.

MFP estimates are crazy high, so I don't trust those, either. Same goes for the cardio machines at the gym.

I've never really worried about how many calories I burn. I just burn 'em and eat a reasonable amount of food.

...walking in the mall shopping...sure it burns calories but it's also a normal part of every day life. Unless you are breaking a sweat or breathing hard to shop you probably shouldn't be counting it or you are just going to cheat yourself and eat back far too many calories.

However, a BMR is based in your metabolic rate- if you were to just lay in bed and do absolutely NOTHING. The act if getting out of bed has just burned up a calorie, so walking the mall certainly would count towards calories burned above your BMR

I don't think heart rate monitors are inaccurate...I've been using mine for some time now and checked it's accuracy against heart rate monitors at work (I'm a Nurse Practitioner) and found that indeed it is very accurate.

Looking at the idea of overestimating your calorie burn however I think tends to be a bit of a problem on here. I believe that for the individual who is truly committed to losing weight only those calories burned TRULY working out should be tracked. For example...walking in the mall shopping...sure it burns calories but it's also a normal part of every day life. Unless you are breaking a sweat or breathing hard to shop you probably shouldn't be counting it or you are just going to cheat yourself and eat back far too many calories.

Exactly this. But hey they are only cheating themselves.

...walking in the mall shopping...sure it burns calories but it's also a normal part of every day life. Unless you are breaking a sweat or breathing hard to shop you probably shouldn't be counting it or you are just going to cheat yourself and eat back far too many calories.

However, a BMR is based in your metabolic rate- if you were to just lay in bed and do absolutely NOTHING. The act if getting out of bed has just burned up a calorie, so walking the mall certainly would count towards calories burned above your BMR

True -- but your calorie requirements on MFP are not based off your BMR. If they were, there would be no need to put in your activity level. Getting out of bed is part of "daily activities" which are included in the math.

So you shouldn't count anything that is a regular daily activity as "exercise you eat back." I don't count walking to the bus, cooking dinner, carrying laundry to the basement, any of that stuff. I have been counting my purposeful "Now I will go walk for 30 minutes straight" walks, as they are activity I've made an effort to *add* to my days. I've let myself get pretty sedentary, and I used "sedentary" as my MFP setting. But even if you're sedentary, if walking from Target to Old Navy is something you usually to, you shouldnt' count it as exercise.

I actually think a lot of people here are overestimating their activity levels. I've seen people say "Oh, no one who ever stands up and walks to the bathroom is truly sedentary," but the studies I've read on BMR calculations suggest that most americans who have sit-down jobs and don't walk for pleasure or play sports are ridiculously sedentary. So sedentary, in fact, that even doing a 30 minute exercise class a couple times a week isn't enough to raise them to "lightly active" if they drive to the class and then drive home and watch tv for the rest of the night.

As another poster pointed out, a lot of people use regular HRM wrong. I have a Polar FT7. I can't wear mine all day and expect it to be correct. Regular HRM are made to measure HR and calorie burns when your HR is elevated.

Personally, I don't understand why people put cleaning, food prep, and the other normal life tasks as exercise. I will very rarely put cleaning as exercise in my day. This is only when I do a really big cleaning where it takes me hours to clean the whole house... even than I put in maybe 1/4 of the time I spent cleaning. For normal cleanings I don't log. It's part of my daily activity.

Also, some HRM may overestimate calorie burns depending on the model. I had a watch only HRM at one point and with those they only take your most recent HR instead of the constant HR one with a chest strap takes. When I had the watch only one and would check my HR when I was working out hard, sometimes I forgot to recheck it and therefore my calorie burns would be far too high.

Also, keep in mind when on someones feed it normally only mentions the most recent activity logged. So say they ran for 2 hours than added cleaning... it may say "... burned 1300 calories including 30 minutes of light cleaning" .. It groups all the exercise together.

This content has been removed.

My heart rate monitor (Polar FT7) measures my calorie burns at less than what myfitnesspal does. When running I tend to see what MFP gives me, my Nike + app, and then my HRM. My HRM is always less than MFP (even if only a few calories) and pretty close to Nike +.

You are supposed to take BMR out of your results though. So, if your BMR is 75 calories an hour and you wear it 2 hours then yes you take 150 calories off your burn.

Many good responses on here so I will not repeat them. General rule of thumb in playing it safe is to subtract 10% from your HRM calorie burn when logging it.

I just got a Polar HR monitor and really enjoying it. It actually is pretty close to the same calories as what the gym treadmill was giving me. I like how I can see where I am with my heart rate and where I can amp it up next time. I only use it when Im working out at the gym (doing real exercise). I dont count my daily activities like cleaning or shopping (although the way I shop could be considered an sporting event...LOL).