Figuring out calories burned...

Options
FirecrackerJess
FirecrackerJess Posts: 276 Member
edited November 2023 in Getting Started
Is this good to figure out calories burned from walking?

I am using this.

http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html

I check my heart rate about 4 times through out my nightly walk. Its not a high tech watch, so you have to manually check it by using your fingers and the little metal plates on the watch. But I take 3-4 heart rate checks, average the heart rate out and use the average number in that calculator. I'm not sure if that's accurate but it's all I have to go by cause I don't think the apps are right either. I use about 3 apps to measure my walking and they all say different for calories burned.

Thanks.

Replies

  • FirecrackerJess
    FirecrackerJess Posts: 276 Member
    Options
    Anyone? Thoughts?
  • poohpoohpeapod
    poohpoohpeapod Posts: 776 Member
    Options
    How would we know, what is the average HR? How many caloris is it staing that you burned?
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    For walking, if the incline isn't to great, you get much better accuracy than even a HRM from standard formula's regarding treadmill.

    After all, treadmill is the most tested exercise machine.

    In fact, it's how you test your HRM to know if it's doing any good.

    You can do the same thing with that other site, see what it says compared to more accurate method.

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

    And the MFP exercise database uses exactly those formula's too.

    What depends is if you hit that speed on avg for the whole walk, walking flat or level, no incline.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Walking is a pretty straightforward exercise, if you know how far you go in how long, you can estimate the speed and use MFP's tool.

    MFP's calorie calculators can be off for some activities, but it's pretty trustworthy for walking and running. You're overcomplicating it by using your HR for this activity.
  • poohpoohpeapod
    poohpoohpeapod Posts: 776 Member
    Options
    I do not agree about over complicating. Heart rate and calories can vary greatly. I did a walk yesterday and today, I thought the pace was the same, calorie difference according to polar hrm almost 150. Our bodies do not work exactly the same energy wise everyday.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    I do not agree about over complicating. Heart rate and calories can vary greatly. I did a walk yesterday and today, I thought the pace was the same, calorie difference according to polar hrm almost 150. Our bodies do not work exactly the same energy wise everyday.

    They actually do though. It's physics. Unless you were wildly swinging your arms the whole time, or you had a drastically higher incline the second day, your HRM was wrong one or both days.
  • poohpoohpeapod
    poohpoohpeapod Posts: 776 Member
    Options
    no, if someone took a blood pressure med one day, and not the next, water , ect/ Also, like you just stated we do not move our arms exactly the same way, at the same pace every single step. That is impossible we are not robots.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    no, if someone took a blood pressure med one day, and not the next, water , ect/ Also, like you just stated we do not move our arms exactly the same way, at the same pace every single step. That is impossible we are not robots.

    If your heart rate changes because of your blood pressure medication, it has nothing to do with how many calories your body requires to perform an exercise. Heart rate does not directly correlate to calorie burns.
  • poohpoohpeapod
    poohpoohpeapod Posts: 776 Member
    Options
    Your talking in circles. It does affect calories burned, if the hr is higher your body is working harder, burning more calories. Not physics, biology. Ok night night :noway:
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Your talking in circles. It does affect calories burned, if the hr is higher your body is working harder, burning more calories. Not physics, biology. Ok night night :noway:
    I will remember this conversation when you post your thread about how you're confused why you aren't getting the results you expect when you're so accurate about your burns.
  • FirecrackerJess
    FirecrackerJess Posts: 276 Member
    Options
    I check my heart rate through out the walk, 4-8 times, average it out and use that for the calculator. I do not have a real expensive monitor, mine is just a watch that you use your fingers on metal plates to figure it out. It doesn't calculate calories so I have to do it on my own.
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Options
    I check my heart rate through out the walk, 4-8 times, average it out and use that for the calculator. I do not have a real expensive monitor, mine is just a watch that you use your fingers on metal plates to figure it out. It doesn't calculate calories so I have to do it on my own.

    Well, your original question was about accuracy. You haven't really given many details, so it's hard to say.

    I did go to the site and enter my information from my last workout that I used my HRM. The website did calculate slightly higher then what my HRM said, but only by 10 calories. Now depending on the duration of your walks, checking your heart rate only 4 times might not actually be frequent enough to give you an accurate average.

    The apps on your phone will give different numbers depending on:
    - settings
    - how they track your walks (gps or acceleration)
    - what formula they are using for calorie burns
    - if the tracking is accurate

    For example my walk tonight:
    - Zombies,Run! (phone app)
    Gave me a calorie burn of 280
    Weight information is outdated...:tongue: by about 4lbs
    Has no idea how tall I am or my gender
    - Nike+ Running (phone app)
    Gave me a calorie burn of 335
    Weight information is also outdated, but only by 1lb
    Knows height and gender
    - Fitbit Zip (activity tracker)
    Gave me a calorie burn of 406 (on top of my bmr)
    Weight information is correct
    Knows height, gender and body fat %
    - MFP
    Says 317 calories based on my average speed

    All that being said, I trust my fitbit. I've been using it since April and trusting it's calorie counts for walking/running. Even though it is giving me the highest calorie burn on my walks, I'm still losing weight (BF% is also going down). I could probably lose weight faster by using the lower numbers, but I average close to 2lbs per week loss as it is and don't really want to go any faster. Point is everything is going to be an estimate.

    I also don't have a real expensive HRM ($30), but I trust the accuracy of mine since it does have a chest strap and continuously monitors my HR during a workout. I think its going to come down to trial and error. Everything is just an estimate, there are no exacts to this and you have to find what works for you.

    How long have you been using the calorie burns from the website?
    Have you lost weight while using the calorie burn estimates the site provided?

    If you go a month or more where your weight and/or BF% don't change, then maybe re-evaluate how your estimating your calorie burns. Until then though, I'd say pick a method and stick with it for awhile (4 - 6 weeks). If you feel that at the end of that time your not losing the weight that you should have, then try a different method.

    Good luck :flowerforyou:
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Your talking in circles. It does affect calories burned, if the hr is higher your body is working harder, burning more calories. Not physics, biology. Ok night night :noway:

    Actually no. Your heart can be working harder for a whole bunch of reasons not related to your actual physical activity. Now if you are talking about the few extra calories your heart burns merely beating faster, like you got scared and it races for a bit, ya, that's immaterial to actual energy spent moving.

    Now you can educate yourself on the many reasons why your HR can read higher without you actually burning more calories from the exercise.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/773451-is-my-hrm-giving-me-incorrect-calorie-burn

    For instance, easiest test in the world for everyone to do.

    Get on your treadmill and walk at a hard incline and pace that will get you sweating really well for 60 min. Note the HR on paper (if you have Garmin this is recorded live anyway) every 5 min and notice how it goes up during the whole hour. It may actually take a dip there within first 15 min as warmup is over, and then start creeping up again.

    Cardiac drift.

    You kept the pace and incline the same, but your HR is going up. Did gravity just change, did your mass just get heavier (probably less actually with sweat loss), did you just get less efficient (possible if tired near end)?

    No, your body is spending the same amount of energy lifting the same amount of mass against gravity - that doesn't change. You taking old man small steps or big huge strides can sure cause a difference, but not walking normal for you.

    No, your blood just thickened from sweating away some blood volume, and for the heart to get the same amount of oxygen to your muscles as it was doing from the start, must now beat faster. You are using the same amount of oxygen, you are burning the same amount of calories, but your HR is up.

    You've just discovered why HR is NOT totally related to calorie burn. It is a lose correlation, but it's the best we have outside a true metabolic cart. But a finely tuned pedometer or FitBit or BodyMedia can be might close too, since they use weight and pace too.

    Because it's the amount of oxygen used that actually correlates to calories burned.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories