Yikes! I have been logging wrong all this time!

Hi!
I use a polar FT4 and swear by it! I've seen much more progress since using it than I did before hand when I was just going by MFP. Also a online exercise community called Bodyrock.tv a huge amount of their followers swear by Polar heart rate monitors too!

seems like there is a double difference now:
1. used to log 60 mins as 45 mins.
2. more accurate calorie tracking.

anyway, use this the way you feel fit. Were you losing weight before or not? Were you hungry all the time? Eating more would mean results are slower.

HRMs are at least a fairly accurate estimate. I always use my Polar FT4's burn. As you become more fit and weigh less, make sure you're adjusting your weight in the HRM's settings... But as you do become more fit, you will start burning less.

Be sure you've set your settings properly for weight, height and age, but over all it should be fairly reliable. Don't forget to adjust them for every 5lbs or so change.

Also, be sure to thoroughly rinse the strap after every workout, and toss it in the washer ever 5 or so - be sure to take off the transmitter and no dryer!! If its dirty the readings can get a little funky, but I've found mine (older FT4) usually goes lower when it's dirty, not higher.

With those considerations- should be fairly accurate? Of course, any calorie estimate is just that, even based on calculations and heart rate data, I still take my readings with a bit of leeway, same thing with my food tracking, and don't go down to the single calorie each day, but keep things in a range.

My Zumba classes are 400-600 depending on instructor/playlist or if I'm teaching, so I'd definitely think those results are in range. Enjoy!

I too have the polar Ft4 and I don't think it always accurately measures my heart rate. Sometimes, even though I am running at the same pace for 45 minutes, all of a sudden the wrist watch will say my heart rate is 180, then go back down to 150. Clearly that's not right. I think mine is also kind loopy and I plan to contact the manufacturer, but I have noticed this in the past as well. So just an FYI if yours is acting up as well....

Same here, please check this....
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1181964-hrm-calories-is-more-than-what-machine-side

Those burns sound way too high IMO. I know my HRM overestimates burns by nearly 40% despite me putting in all my numbers correctly.

OP, try putting your numbers into the heart rate calorie calculator on this site: Shapesense.com. Calculate your gross burn, and then use that number to calculate your net burn. See how the numbers match up. I would use the lower number myself,

As a former cardiac nurse, I can tell you this: If your heart rate was actually at 200 bpm for any length of time you would have felt light headed, dizzy, somewhat nauseous, and essentially like death warmed over. Unless you are EXTREMELY fit, that is. Even if you are already extremely fit with loads of aerobic conditioning under your belt, you would have been feeling as though you were working at maximum exertion. How did you feel when you were taking that class? If you honestly felt like you were going to die, and you were completely wiped out afterwards, then your HRM is probably correct. If you felt like it was a great class, and you gave it your all, but you still felt energetic and okay afterwards, then your HRM is probably NOT correct. There is a known issue with some polar straps that they will pick up static electricity from the movement of your clothing (especially tech fabrics like wicking and fast dry) in fast paced exercises or windy conditions. This extra electrical activity is interpreted as extra heart beats, artificially elevating your max and average HR, and thus exaggerating your calorie burn. It can be minimized by the use of ultrasound gel. So, I would not look at this as an automatic license to eat more. Look at your progress. You've been taking this same class for a while. What is your weight loss like? Are you hitting the MFP predictions for five weeks out pretty regularly? Or are you dropping weight so fast that it seems like several hundred calories a day are magically disappearing somewhere? Or, are you finding the weight is stubborn and hard to get off? How are you feeling? Listen to your body. Are you hungry? Really hungry? Not bored, not eating to stuff emotions, not thirsty, not having cravings or a fit of the munchies. Are you actually hungry? As in, do you feel like your body needs more protein, more complex carbs, more healthy fats, more nutrients and fuel? If so, you should eat. If it's one of the other things, you should not eat. And if you can't tell the difference that is your first order of business.

Good luck.

Acronyms used

bpm = beats per minute
HR = heart rate
HRM = heart rate monitor

Edit: Spelling is hard.

Echoing what others have said. Make sure you've set-up your HRM right for you age/height/weight etc. Also, is it one where you set your 'working' range - think Polar call it OwnCal? My HRM records cals burnt when heart rate is over 100 (ie. I'm exercising).

Your burn does sound rather high. For an average (ish) person, burns are usually 100 cals/10 mins (I know this is simplistic), while working hard.

I'm 143lb female and going absolutely flat-out at HIIT and Tabata style training, I get between 400-500 cals in 45 mins with max heart rate around high 170s.

Have an experiment and keep an eye on your HRM while exercising to see what it's recording.

im 5'9 and weight 215 - so me burning more calories makes sense imo.

Just be sure you set it up to your specifications and you should be good. MFP can be over or under depending on the individual which is why the HRM is best. It takes into account your age and current fitness level, MFP exercise data base does not.

I say take the cals and run!

I use a Garmin Forerunner to track my burn during CrossFit (our box does a lot of cardio). Another girl in the class uses a Polar. Last time we compared, my burn for the 60 minute class came in at 375 and hers came in at 599. We lift a comparable weight - she may lift a little less. She runs a little faster, though.

Mine is programmed for my height, weight, age and activity level. I don't know about her programming.

I'm glad my numbers are more conservative, but I was surprised at the discrepancy.

Can anyone tell me the best way to log T25 workouts? I really want to get my food and exercise as accurately logged as possible. Thanks!

So I do a fair amount of walking (at least 40 minutes a day), aerobics and zumba every week. I have been using the MFP settings to calculate my calorie burn, but because I know it wasn't very accurate, I would log 60 minutes of Aerobics as 45 minutes for example, giving me around 350-400cals burn.

My finace bought me a polar ft4 heart rate monitor and I used it for my aerobics class yesterday for the first time. I burned 679kcals in the 60 minutes and my maximum heard rate was 200!!!! So I have been logging nearly half of what I actually burned? I am so confused (and happy)! I was certain I would burn less than what MFP said and I can't wrap my head around the fact that I can eat LOADS more now.

Any chance my Polar hrm is wrong? lol!

Actually yes there is a possibility the Polar is wrong for that type of activity. HRM's are designed for caloric burns during steady state cardio only, so probably a slight over estimation. On top of that HRM give you total burn, with includes what you would have burned had you not worked out (maintenance calories/minute x the number of minutes worked out) So in that 60 mins you probably would have burned 75-90 calories doing nothing, plus the error for it not being steady state. I would suggest eating only 75% of them back, whihc would put you near what you were logging to prior to using the HRM

I agree on the thought of reducing the burn by your estimated BMR. I do this. However, for a relatively small woman, it's probably closer to the 60 to 65 calories an hour range (that's what mine is, tested in a lab). So, I take about 90% of my HRM's number and use that.