HR Monitor Help

OK.. so I posted some of this before, but didn't get much response, so I'm trying again here.. :smile:

I just got my Polar F4... First, I have to say that I love it... I believe I'm getting addicted b/c I'm wearing it all the time...

anyway... I wore it for 24 hours and it clocked me at over 2200 calories for the day... I purposely wore it on a day when I didn't do any exercise and it was a pretty slow day (I have a desk job)... can this possibly be right? I can't imagine it to be...

Also.. what constitues 'exercise'?? I went for a bike ride last night (pulling my twin girls behind me) and I wore my monitor then... my heart rate was definitely elevated from my resting rate, but I only got to the low end of my range for a few seconds here and there (up hills)... for the most part, I was in the 90s (my resting HR is in the 60s)... my HR monitor says I burned 200 calories in a 40 minute ride... do I trust this?

Lastly.. the 'range' on the monitor for my age is 120 - 157... 120 feels like I'm taking a walk in the park and I am fine in the 160s... @ 170 I hit a wall... I assume to burn the most calories I need to get my HR as high as I can for as long as I can... RIGHT?! Should I be trusting this monitor??

Replies

  • petunia
    petunia Posts: 336 Member
    OK.. so I posted some of this before, but didn't get much response, so I'm trying again here.. :smile:

    I just got my Polar F4... First, I have to say that I love it... I believe I'm getting addicted b/c I'm wearing it all the time...

    anyway... I wore it for 24 hours and it clocked me at over 2200 calories for the day... I purposely wore it on a day when I didn't do any exercise and it was a pretty slow day (I have a desk job)... can this possibly be right? I can't imagine it to be...

    Also.. what constitues 'exercise'?? I went for a bike ride last night (pulling my twin girls behind me) and I wore my monitor then... my heart rate was definitely elevated from my resting rate, but I only got to the low end of my range for a few seconds here and there (up hills)... for the most part, I was in the 90s (my resting HR is in the 60s)... my HR monitor says I burned 200 calories in a 40 minute ride... do I trust this?

    Lastly.. the 'range' on the monitor for my age is 120 - 157... 120 feels like I'm taking a walk in the park and I am fine in the 160s... @ 170 I hit a wall... I assume to burn the most calories I need to get my HR as high as I can for as long as I can... RIGHT?! Should I be trusting this monitor??
  • lotusfromthemud
    lotusfromthemud Posts: 5,335 Member
    Yes. . .the "2200" can be correct! Remember that that would be to maintain your current weight if you ate all of those calories, so to lose you subtract a deficit from that amount. On non-exercise days, I'm eating around 1900 calories and still losing inches. . . as you lose weight, your daily calorie expenditure will become lower. (think of it this way. . .right now wherever you go you're carrying extra weight. . . imagine carrying a twenty pound weight at the gym all the time. . .)

    The one caveat about calorie "burn" on the HRM is that you would also burn calories if you weren't exercising during that same time. In other words, if you sit on the sofa for an hour, you expend calories. If you exercise for an hour, you expend more calories. But. . .you didn't magically add an extra hour to your day, so you need to subtract those calories you would have burned sitting on the sofa. (BMR calories) I always deduct around 50 calories from my "exercise burn" per my HRM to account for this.

    For me, exercise is anything above and beyond. . .on some days I work in a really low HR range, but I still count it as exercise if I wouldn't normally include it in my day. . .if I'd normally include it, I count it as activity.

    High heart rate is not necessarily your goal in cardio, especially if you want your cardio to be primarily fat-burning. High intensity intervals are great for increasing your endurance, but long slow burn is supposedly better for weight loss.:flowerforyou:
  • petunia
    petunia Posts: 336 Member

    The one caveat about calorie "burn" on the HRM is that you would also burn calories if you weren't exercising during that same time. In other words, if you sit on the sofa for an hour, you expend calories. If you exercise for an hour, you expend more calories. But. . .you didn't magically add an extra hour to your day, so you need to subtract those calories you would have burned sitting on the sofa. (BMR calories) I always deduct around 50 calories from my "exercise burn" per my HRM to account for this.

    I thought about this... you're right... if I burn 200 calories in an hour of an activity, that's only about 80- 100 calories more than I'd burn just by sitting on the couch! I wondered if anyone subracted their 'BMR' calories from their exercise calories...

    Thanks for the information.. I appreciate the help! I guess I'll have to weigh (pun intended) the fat-burn option (better for losing weight) vs. the high calorie option (means I get to eat more) :laugh:
  • lotusfromthemud
    lotusfromthemud Posts: 5,335 Member
    I don't subtract all my BMR calories, in the hope that I get enough "afterburn" from my workout to balance out the rest. My BMR calories are around 70 per hour, so I just take away 50 per hour.

    I also mix up my workouts, doing intervals some days for cardio and long slow for others. That's just what I've had success with.:flowerforyou: