Logging lifting in MFP Vs. HRM
Options
thekyleo
Posts: 632 Member
so I was using a HRM for a while and used it to log my weightlifting. I today decided not to use it and to use MFP to log weightlifting. I did notice a stark contrast in the amount of calories burned. Which is better to log... HRM or just use MFP.
0
Replies
-
The heartrate monitor is more accurate IMO.0
-
HRM is more accurate for cardio. If you research calories burned during strength training there are formulas to get more precise count. I currently do Chalean Extreme and my HRM tells me I burn about 65 calories during a 35 minute strength training session. I have figured it out to be more like 212 calories. I always go on the low end. Good Luck!0
-
The heartrate monitor is more accurate IMO.
see that's what I was thinking because MFP doesn't take into account how hard you are working. I think I might just stick with the heart rate monitor0 -
HRM is more accurate for cardio. If you research calories burned during strength training there are formulas to get more precise count. I currently do Chalean Extreme and my HRM tells me I burn about 65 calories during a 35 minute strength training session. I have figured it out to be more like 212 calories. I always go on the low end. Good Luck!
I would check your HRM, 65 calories seems to be really low for 35 minutes. It may be a connection issue0 -
A HRM is pretty much useless for weight training...weight training is an anaerobic activity...HRM's are only relatively accurate for an aerobic activity. Your HR doesn't determine your burn...it is just used in an algorithm to estimate what % of VO2 max you're working at...given that anaerobic activity is a really ****ty measure of VO2 max, the HRM assumes a steady state cardio (aerobic) activity is being performed and sustained.0
-
The heartrate monitor is more accurate IMO.
see that's what I was thinking because MFP doesn't take into account how hard you are working. I think I might just stick with the heart rate monitor
Actually this is not correct. HRMs are not accurate at all for strength training and will, in most cases, overestimate. If you are doing a circuit training routine it might be a little closer but a regular lifting routine - no.
http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
People here tend to way overestimate the accuracy of HRMs for calorie estimates.0 -
Actually this is not correct. HRMs are not accurate at all for strength training and will, in most cases, overestimate. If you are doing a circuit training routine it might be a little closer but a regular lifting routine - no.
http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
People here tend to way overestimate the accuracy of HRMs for calorie estimates.
^^ This........0 -
HRM or just use MFP.
Neither - they are both useless.
Take a rough value and apply it consistently presuming your workouts does not change that much from session to session.0 -
Bumping...
So how do you know how many calories you burn during weight training if HRM and MFP are both overestimates? Is that why MFP has a separate section under exercise to record strength training?0 -
Bumping...
So how do you know how many calories you burn during weight training if HRM and MFP are both overestimates? Is that why MFP has a separate section under exercise to record strength training?
I wouldn't say MFP overestimated. If anything, this is the one place MFP does not overestimate.
Honestly when I was tracking, I would use the number MFP gave me, which was 200. I felt that was a good number as it gave me a bit more to eat, but wasn't such a huge number that it would kill my deficit if it was off.
You don't burn a ton weight lifting, but there are far more benefits.
Basically my suggestion is pick a number, log it consistently and monitor how it works.0 -
Bumping...
So how do you know how many calories you burn during weight training if HRM and MFP are both overestimates? Is that why MFP has a separate section under exercise to record strength training?
I wouldn't say MFP overestimated. If anything, this is the one place MFP does not overestimate.
Honestly when I was tracking, I would use the number MFP gave me, which was 200. I felt that was a good number as it gave me a bit more to eat, but wasn't such a huge number that it would kill my deficit if it was off.
You don't burn a ton weight lifting, but there are far more benefits.
Basically my suggestion is pick a number, log it consistently and monitor how it works.
OK, then what number should I settle on. I'm usually lifting for about 45 minutes0 -
I usually do about 60 mins. strength training, MFP gives me almost 200 calories burned, I only count 100 calories.0
-
My HRM is not working... i guess i might as well not bother wasting my time fixing it?0
-
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.0 -
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories0 -
The heartrate monitor is more accurate IMO.
Nooooo, HRM's are only accurate for steady state cardio, even not good for interval cardio routines. As caloric burn really has little to do with HR, but the HRM assumes steady state cardio and x HR, and using HR to gauge intensity relative to Max HR (Max HR calcs are also off for most people). It then uses that info to estimate oxygen uptake which is more of how cals burned is calculated, but oxygen uptake and HR do not correlate for non steady state cardio leaving HRMs to grossly overestimate cals burned strength training.
I suggest changing your activity level up to the next setting if you strength train often, and put cals burned in as 1.0 -
OK, then what number should I settle on. I'm usually lifting for about 45 minutes
I have zero information on you, your workout routine, your calorie intake, your deficit, your weight, etc. I can't even begin to estimate.Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
Why? Particularly if you are not looking to eat those calories back. That's one of the few things I don't like about this system, people get so wrapped up in "burns". It also tends to lead people to want to see/believe higher burns which can lead some down the wrong path.
If you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes and get results, the burn is irrelevant.
But to put it in perspective. An "average" (their words not mine) person running a 10 minute mile for 45 minutes will burn 450 calories. 200 for 45 minutes of strength training is not all that off to me. Especially considering that most of us rest for a good portion of that time.0 -
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
That's why it's no a great idea to associate exercise, especially weight training, with calorie burn. It can set up an unhealthy and negative relationship with exercise which means you jack it in completely as it appears to be a waste of time in comparison to the effort you expend.
Weights make you strong, they make you powerful, it preserves your muscle mass so you looking great once the fat is lost, it balances your mood and makes you sexually irresistible.
Reward enough no?0 -
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
That's why it's no a great idea to associate exercise, especially weight training, with calorie burn. It can set up an unhealthy and negative relationship with exercise which means you jack it in completely as it appears to be a waste of time in comparison to the effort you expend.
Weights make you strong, they make you powerful, it preserves your muscle mass so you looking great once the fat is lost, it balances your mood and makes you sexually irresistible.
Reward enough no?
i guess i really don't understand your reply0 -
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
That's why it's no a great idea to associate exercise, especially weight training, with calorie burn. It can set up an unhealthy and negative relationship with exercise which means you jack it in completely as it appears to be a waste of time in comparison to the effort you expend.
Weights make you strong, they make you powerful, it preserves your muscle mass so you looking great once the fat is lost, it balances your mood and makes you sexually irresistible.
Reward enough no?
i guess i really don't understand your reply
In simple terms: Work out for the health benefits, not the calories burned.0 -
OK, then what number should I settle on. I'm usually lifting for about 45 minutes
I have zero information on you, your workout routine, your calorie intake, your deficit, your weight, etc. I can't even begin to estimate.Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
Why? Particularly if you are not looking to eat those calories back. That's one of the few things I don't like about this system, people get so wrapped up in "burns". It also tends to lead people to want to see/believe higher burns which can lead some down the wrong path.
If you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes and get results, the burn is irrelevant.
But to put it in perspective. An "average" (their words not mine) person running a 10 minute mile for 45 minutes will burn 450 calories. 200 for 45 minutes of strength training is not all that off to me. Especially considering that most of us rest for a good portion of that time.
Makes sense to me. If I'm eating at a calorie deficit for weight loss though, would it hurt anything to not add weight training calories burned since there's no real accurate way to measure? Or would this lead to LBM loss?0 -
Using MFP, my calories for weight training were always WAY off. I ALWAYS go by my HRM, and it's more accurate overall to my individual body type and energy use. It never burns as many calories as running or some other cardio exercise, but there are weight exercises that I do that can definitely get my heart rate up, and I definitely would count that as cardio.0
-
A HRM is pretty much useless for weight training...weight training is an anaerobic activity...HRM's are only relatively accurate for an aerobic activity. Your HR doesn't determine your burn...it is just used in an algorithm to estimate what % of VO2 max you're working at...given that anaerobic activity is a really ****ty measure of VO2 max, the HRM assumes a steady state cardio (aerobic) activity is being performed and sustained.
^This.
HRMs are for tracking steady state cardio only. It is important to note that HRMs are not accurate for weight lifting and will not give you an accurate burn. They are also not meant for HIIT. Temperature extremes and daily burn tracking (e.g. I wear it all day to find out what I should be taking in) are also inaccurate. HRMs are for steady state aerobic exercise only!
This is a helpful blog post for understanding HRMs:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-214720 -
Of course the burn amount is different for everyone, so MFP estimate will be more accurate on average for bigger and stronger guys and less accurate for smaller and women. I find its pretty good for me, and most people could probably just reduce the time a bit before plugging it in and it would be fine. So if you just adjust it based on what you are doing, it works: if you push/pull/lift hundreds of pounds, its going to be closer than if you are doing a small portion of your bodyweight. If I'm going to exercise wrist extensors with 55lbs, its going to be way overestimating, but if I'm doing over 3x my bodyweight on the leg press its going to underestimate. If you think about these situations and modify it accordingly, its much better than picking a number, and almost always better than HRM.
HRM is downright awful for most weight training logging, it will go way over for most people on most exercises, or go under if its adjusted poorly. If you are doing circuit training it may be a bit more accurate. HRM is meant to measure a continuous aerobic effort and weight training is a sporadic periodic anaerobic exercise. Any spike in your HR is measured as increased activity and calorie burning, but merely holding your breath and bearing down you can spike your HR, and that spike lasts for a while after the activity has stopped. If you go back to wrist extensor working while you hold your breath and strain, I'm sure you could get "amazing" calorie numbers off a HRM doing 10lbs with them. Likewise the less used to the exercises and adapted to them you are, the more your HR will increase doing the exercise, so newer/more out of shape people will have huge HRM readings for lifting, while long time lifters may get close to reality even.0 -
Strength training alone burns very little over your TDEE which is why it's not logged. If you feel you just have to have a reward for it go to the Cardio section of MFP and use the strength training estimate.
The idea of strength training is to build or maintain muscle mass. If you're looking for a big burn to eat then do cardio.
I'm not looking for a big burn to eat, but it's kind of a let down when you bust your @$$ for 45 minutes to an hour and you only burn 200 calories
That's why it's no a great idea to associate exercise, especially weight training, with calorie burn. It can set up an unhealthy and negative relationship with exercise which means you jack it in completely as it appears to be a waste of time in comparison to the effort you expend.
Weights make you strong, they make you powerful, it preserves your muscle mass so you looking great once the fat is lost, it balances your mood and makes you sexually irresistible.
Reward enough no?
i guess i really don't understand your reply
In simple terms: Work out for the health benefits, not the calories burned.
then why do we track the exercise's then if it really doesn't make a difference?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396.5K Introduce Yourself
- 44.2K Getting Started
- 260.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 449 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.3K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.5K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions