HRM vs MFP database.......why so close and than so far?

What kind of HRM do you use? I have a Polar FT4 that comes with a band and usually it's pretty close to the number on MFP. That HRM is attached to me and MFP is an estimate based on what you weigh. I typically trust my HRM, but I've heard the accurate number is somewhere in between the two. I also don't eat back all of my exercise calories to prepare for the +/- factor.

Does yours have a band or is it just the watch?

Also -- MFP cannot tell how much energy you exerted doing the exercise and your HRM can. You don't have to use the MFP numbers, you can input your own. That's what I do, especially for the exercises where it does not even have a choice.

Also -- MFP cannot tell how much energy you exerted doing the exercise and your HRM can. You don't have to use the MFP numbers, you can input your own. That's what I do, especially for the exercises where it does not even have a choice.

thats my issue. if the HRM was always 20-30% over, then I would cut it down to about 10% over MFP. But its all over the place. lol

I almost never eat back my exercise calories, so its sort of a moot point overall. I just wondered why it was all over the place. Ill find out tonight with my rowing/cross fit class and see what it says compared to MFP and see how far I am off.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Agh. I wrote a post and it didn't post. Frustrating.

I think it's a lot to do with the amount of energy you expend while exercising. That's a huge variable and might be throwing the numbers -- especially if you cranked it up to 4 for awhile and tried logging it in MFP as 2.

Like you said though, since you don't eat them back it's a rather moot point, but I understand your desire to know. I guess it's nice to be able to get at least close to knowing how much you are burning off as long as you are cautious of the numbers.

Hope I helped a little! I only got mine July 5th, so I'm still learning with it.

This might be a "duh" question, but you did clear the calorie counter after the bike ride, right? so it's not adding both together?

Make sure your HRM is plush against your chest on tight, if it's bouncing around it may not get an accurate read. also, have you doctor test your blood pressure, if it's high your heart rate might be high when exercising. my HRM is generally on target with what website calcs/MFP have told me within 0-50 calorie range

Out of experience, I'm incredulous about the HRM figure. 445 cals for 21 min of walking (2.5 mph) sounds very unlikely, that would be more than 1270 cals per hour. I know no activity that burns that much energy, the highest values per hour are around the 600-700 mark, and walking is not a high-calorie burning activity.

Granted this depends on weight and may be different for me than you, but I think not by as much.

The HRM estimates calories based on your heart rate and other paramters ( age, weight). So maybe your heart rate reading was especially high because it was still elevated after the bicycle, but Stil....

I go with karahjoy, maybe the HRM didn't properly reset between activities.

Just try the walking routine again and compare.

I hadn't read that when I posted. I understand that you didn't wear the HRM while on the stationary bike.
Okay, still question, are you sure it was reset when you put it onfor the treadmill?

If it was... As I said, the figure is so unlikely that I would suspect the thing is broken.

Test it.
Wear it more often for similar activities, write down results and compare.
Do also wear it on the bike to see what it says then, relative to the bike's own estimate.
Make sure it is always reset when it starts.

Are the results consistent or all over the place?

Btw: i don't know your full weight but I guess i'm much smaller than you at 66 kg. okay.i would never, ever burn even 200 kcals in 20 minutes of walking, only in fairly fast running. Now I think that difference may be due to weight and age.i can believe 200,but not 445.

Ok, great graphical representation! As I said... Try again, compare the screenshots or write it down, see whether it's consistent.

Old thread, has anything new come of it? Peeaanuut, have you done more measurements?

I have to correct myself. Doing rope jumping, my HRM says that I can burn 70 calories in 5 min 15. That would make 1333 calories per hour, I didn't think there was an activity that could burn that much.

Granted this: average heart rate during those 5 minutes was 178 -- close to absolute max. That may have caused the high reading. And on the other hand, precisely because I do it at close to max heartrate, i.e. close to maximum effort, I can't imagine doing it for an hour.

But your heartrate wasn't that high... I'd really be curious what the thing does in repeated experiments.