FitBit/Jawbone versus HRM

rjpittner
rjpittner Posts: 70 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I am finding so much conflicting information in regard to these fitness trackers! PLEASE someone clear it up for me! From my understanding, the former are affiliated with an app--the device itself is a fancy pedometer that also tracks your sleep cycle. The latter tracks your heart rate, obviously making tracking calorie expenditure more accurate. I use MFP for fitness tracking, so the app really doesn't have much appeal to me. However, where I get thrown off is HOW the FitBit/Jawbone work; do they track your calorie expenditure via a heart-rate monitoring device or are you having to log everything in?

Thanks so much for any and all input!

Replies

  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    It comes down to what data are you trying to track about your life then finding the tools that work best to collect and package that information into something useable. The apps share data so activity tracked on a device is visible on MFP and the food logged here is trackable on fitbit and some HRM/GPS apps.

    Fitbits and Jawbones are just fancy pedometers that track your activity throughout the day. They are good for showing when you get off your butt and move around which enables you to see if you're really as active as you think. Jawbone requires syncing through an app on your phone via a wired connection. Fitbits can connect via bluetooth with your phone or through your PC via a wireless adapter that slides in a USB port. Mine shows when I go for a run and tracks those steps along with when I'm stuck at my desk for hours at a time and get up for a refill of the coffee cup or to go to the restroom. They track general activity and can tell, to a degree, just how active you truly are at a given time. A run shows as "very active" and it counts calories during that time accordingly. Sitting on my rear end shows caloric burn at something close to BRM. Sleep tracking is based upon movement so the fitbit only reports times clearly awake (the 2am bathroom trip) and restless as you toss and turn.

    HRMs require a mechanism for getting the data. The most basic watches just give you a pulse with no export to some requiring an app to see what you've done. I use mine when I'm doing cardio alongside the fitbit. Most of my cardio is running so a GPS/HRM app works for me. It's only good when it's on and tracking and I don't wear the HRM 24/7.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Neither. They predict your activity via an accelerometer and assign calories based on that. It's basically a Wii-mote. If it detects the motion of say, "walking, 4mph" it applies a multiplier factor to the BMR estimate it gives you based on database info of that activity. It's all estimates based on population averages but for me they're pretty accurate and I log nothing.
  • rjpittner
    rjpittner Posts: 70 Member
    That having been said (which I thank you both for taking the time to reply), a FitBit "ticks" your steps in the same concept as a pedometer and generalizes the calories you burned based on that? There is no monitoring on the device's end that configures your individualized calorie expenditure?
  • determined_erin
    determined_erin Posts: 571 Member
    That having been said (which I thank you both for taking the time to reply), a FitBit "ticks" your steps in the same concept as a pedometer and generalizes the calories you burned based on that? There is no monitoring on the device's end that configures your individualized calorie expenditure?

    The BodyMedia armbands gather your actual calorie burns. It's the most accurate tracker. I used a BodyMedia Core for a year. Now I'm using a FitBit One because I just want a pocket device to track my step count.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    That having been said (which I thank you both for taking the time to reply), a FitBit "ticks" your steps in the same concept as a pedometer and generalizes the calories you burned based on that? There is no monitoring on the device's end that configures your individualized calorie expenditure?
    The monitoring is the accelerometer. The calories are estimated how I said above. The Body Media uses the same method, but it adds some other sensors in. I got similar estimates from both.

    Nothing (short of calorimetry with a hose in your mouth), including the Body Media and the HRMs, "gathers actual burn" data. It's all based on estimates based on population averages, based on the profile data you give it (age, gender, weight, etc.) and assumptions it makes based on the inputs it detects.
  • sandjar131
    sandjar131 Posts: 41 Member
    I have a FitBit Force and a Polar HRM (with a chest strap). I use the FitBit to track general activity (steps, etc) and like the alarm feature (I have it buzzing several times a day to remind me to get up and leave my desk for a bit, and to get more water). I got the FitBit instead of the Jawbone just because of the watch feature on the Force, and Bluetooth. There is some amount of personalization - you have to put in your height/weight/age/etc when you set it up (for the calorie calculations), and it works with MFP so it keeps track of your weight as you go forward.

    I use the HRM to more accurately track my calorie burn during exercise. Since the FitBit is really a pedometer, it doesn't really track the calorie burn well for the workouts I do (things like Insanity and P90X).
  • sabianhunter
    sabianhunter Posts: 17 Member
    I use both a fitbit and a HRM.

    The fitbit I wear all day long. I like it cause it tells me how active I've been that day and whether I need to get off my bum a bit more (desk job!!).

    I wear a HRM to my workouts, I do strength-training, circuit training type workouts and the fitbit isn't gonna do much good if i'm doing ab/arm work... Now the HRM doesn't still give you the whole picture cause there is much more to a strength workout than your heartrate, but it's the best I can do to monitor my calories burned. Yes, it's based on averages, telling a person my size SHOULD burn this much, and i'm ok with that.

    After working out I have to go into MFP app and replace the calories during my workout time that my fitbit logged with the HRM amount.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    That having been said (which I thank you both for taking the time to reply), a FitBit "ticks" your steps in the same concept as a pedometer and generalizes the calories you burned based on that? There is no monitoring on the device's end that configures your individualized calorie expenditure?
    Or said differently, it doesn't just count steps and apply something like "one step = 1.2 calories" and give you a running total. It does something similar to what the MFP and other exercise databases do (uses databases of averages burns for people your size, gender, age, etc.) but you can skip the logging step because it detects that you're walking Xmph, running Ymph, or whatever.
  • rjpittner
    rjpittner Posts: 70 Member
    Or said differently, it doesn't just count steps and apply something like "one step = 1.2 calories" and give you a running total. It does something similar to what the MFP and other exercise databases do (uses databases of averages burns for people your size, gender, age, etc.) but you can skip the logging step because it detects that you're walking Xmph, running Ymph, or whatever.

    This answers my question perfectly. Thank you so much! I just wasn't too thrilled about the prospect of still having to log all of my activity. I think I might go with the FitBit, but still haven't completely reached a decision yet. Thanks again everyone! :)
  • determined_erin
    determined_erin Posts: 571 Member
    A man's calorie burn of doing 45 minutes of a spin exercise class:

    Microsoft_Excel_610x456.png

    This is why I feel the BodyMedia is the most accurate tracker.

    Source of that image: http://news.cnet.com/8301-33620_3-57588371-278/my-life-with-the-bodymedia-fit-activity-tracker/
  • rjpittner
    rjpittner Posts: 70 Member
    A man's calorie burn of doing 45 minutes of a spin exercise class:

    [img][/img]

    This is why I feel the BodyMedia is the most accurate tracker.

    Really interesting. I'll have to do some more investigation for sure.
  • ifaber
    ifaber Posts: 195 Member
    If you know for a fact that you are going to be doing activities like spinning, biking, basically anything outside of walking or running, the Fitbit isn't going to be the most accurate because of the way it is set up. However, for normal daily activity it is really great. I like that the app and site is free to use unless you want the premium membership. However, I found that the free site and reports are great for me. I do have a Polar FT4 for when I want to workout 'on purpose' in addition to my daily walk abouts. So it all boils down to what YOU want the device to do and what will work for you and then decide based on that. I think they are all pretty good but because I have a fitbit and I always use a HRM to figure out my cals when I exercise, I am partial to my fitbit.
  • SJCon
    SJCon Posts: 224
    A man's calorie burn of doing 45 minutes of a spin exercise class:

    [img][/img]

    This is why I feel the BodyMedia is the most accurate tracker.

    Really interesting. I'll have to do some more investigation for sure.

    There are various styles of "Activity Monitors" and what they record depends on the style. Fitbit Ultra is often clipped on a Bra or kept in a pocket. the Flex and Force are wrist type and so see steps better but not good for when you walk with your hands in your pockets, cycling etc. The Jawbone is in this category. Personally I like this style but some don't like it showing. The Body Media records steps and is worn on the upper arm so maybe not as accurate as a wrist one but it does NOT use steps to calculate calorie burn. That is done with sensors for skin temp, resistance and an accelerometer. I have found the Body Media as the most accurate for all day wear. Heart rate monitors use a chest strap or a Light sensors like the phone apps that you hold your finger over the flash. The wrist light sensing ones are not as reliable as the chest straps but some find Chest straps as uncomfortable. HRM are the most accurate for estimating calories during FULL Cardio workouts and their estimates do vary based on model. Some allow for entry of a personal VO2 max that makes the burn much more personal and accurate for the individual. So unlike what some have said not all HRMs are created equal. Sometimes they even use differing calculations among models by the same manufacturer.

    I my mind the best of all worlds is something Like Polar's "Loop" (Google it) but the visibility is poor IMO and there are so issues in the HRM chest strap for it. I would not recommend it.

    If you can wait 5-8 weeks wait and buy a "Vivofit" by Garmin (Google it) It has a battery that lasts a year before you replace it and is water resistant to 50 meters so you never have to take it off BUT is a wrist model so it is visible. You can use it with and as a HRM but as of now does not link to MFP. I still prefer and Love my Bodymedia.

    BTW Bodymedia has a sale on and 12 months free subscription right now.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    A man's calorie burn of doing 45 minutes of a spin exercise class:

    Microsoft_Excel_610x456.png

    This is why I feel the BodyMedia is the most accurate tracker.

    Source of that image: http://news.cnet.com/8301-33620_3-57588371-278/my-life-with-the-bodymedia-fit-activity-tracker/
    They must've really improved it. I had one 4 years ago and it didn't track that sort of thing any better than the rest then. I wonder how it's getting all that calorie burn from arm skin temp and impedence.

    I didn't know Jawbone owned BodyMedia, since last spring. I wonder if that's why they never came out with that cute Core2 in the cnet article.

Categories