Another HRM and Calories Question
bryant28408
Posts: 52 Member
I understand that HRM's use an algorithm to determine calories burned. That model takes weight into account. HRM's are best at steady state computations.
I am 292, male and still new at the whole fitness thing. I have a muscle issue which gives me an odd gait with a short stride. 1 hour of walking through the neighborhood with elevation changes of no more than 20-30 feet gives me a heart rate averaging about 140. My pace averages about 26. I sustain this, without stopping, for one hour with no difficulties. My Polar monitor suggests in excess of 500 calories for that hour. My max HR should be about 168.
I usually do not eat my extra calories and I am loosing weight but I am curious if the calories seem reasonable to you veteran fitness folks.
I am 292, male and still new at the whole fitness thing. I have a muscle issue which gives me an odd gait with a short stride. 1 hour of walking through the neighborhood with elevation changes of no more than 20-30 feet gives me a heart rate averaging about 140. My pace averages about 26. I sustain this, without stopping, for one hour with no difficulties. My Polar monitor suggests in excess of 500 calories for that hour. My max HR should be about 168.
I usually do not eat my extra calories and I am loosing weight but I am curious if the calories seem reasonable to you veteran fitness folks.
0
Replies
-
This is more accurate than HRM between 2-4 mph walking and 4-6.3 mph running, flat to probably 3% incline before differences in walking up incline could throw it off, or may not. Short or long stride doesn't matter still same mass moved same distance. Now, you hopping on each step, or bending down to knee, ect - sure, that's extreme example of gait changes that make a difference.
http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
292 @ 60 min w/ 1% incline @ 2.6 mph - 467 calories gross to compare to HRM reported.
So it's over-reporting, but not badly.
Now, on that site, NET is what you would burn above otherwise resting - 327.
So one way to view it, at this weight, every hour you were going to burn 140 calories just at rest anyway.
But actually, in a diet, you are already accounted to burn so many calories. Your non-exercise maintenance figure.
MFP - Home - Goals - Calories burned from normal activity
Take that divided by 24 - that's how many calories in a diet you are already accounting for every hr.
467 minus that bigger figure = how much you eat back.
Oh, if the HRM has no VO2max stat, it's using weight and height to get your BMI.
There are studies relating BMI to VO2max depending on how good or bad it is for your gender and age.
So now you see why those 4 stats are used. Bad BMI, assumed bad fitness level.
But watch your stats, you will get fit much faster than you will lose weight, and you'll find that HR dropping greatly if you kept that same pace (but you'll probably speed up) - but the HRM would report much less calorie burn. Untrue.
Use the site above as weight drops and your speed increases to get an idea of how far off your HRM is getting.0 -
Thanks.
The gait issue is two fold and probably related. I have little to no calf strength.I cannot stand on my tiptoes not even when leaning over onto a table or bench. I am doing claf exercises at the gym with seat raises placing a weight on my knee and lifting it. I am at about 40 pounds X 10 reps now and it is very slowly improving. Anyway, I have no "push off" from my feet and toes; I am almost walking flat footed. The problem is pronounced on any incline. FYI, the condition is called inclusion body myositis. Docs says there is nothing to be done and that it is progressive. Since he can do nothing and I cannot make it worse I have decided to ignore the diagnosis and keep moving.
I'm heading over to the site and will check it out.
Thanks again!0 -
Well, the walking will for sure increase that calf then, at least somewhat I'm sure.
The sitting one though, actually works a different calf muscle not used as much in normal walking pushoff. Still good for support, just different.
Still good, keep doing it for good balance.
This is what you are lacking - www.exrx.net/Muscles/Gastrocnemius.html
This is what you are working - http://www.exrx.net/Muscles/Soleus.html
So you have just learned to move with what I called backpacking steps, transferring work to the glutes. It's valid, and probably does mean you are burning slightly more than formula would estimate, just using the bigger glutes instead.0 -
That's great information. I was looking at the gastroc section and saw the seated calf extension. I actually did that today in the gym and worked with about 60 pounds. The other exercises are beyond me right now. I think I will keep working it, aiming for about 3 sets X 10 reps? Does that sound reasonable to increase my strength?0
-
Oh sure, that's great.
Considering what the muscle is used for though, I'd suggest 3 x 15-18 reps, more endurance range.
When you can do 18 with good form, increase weight by 5 lbs per leg and drop to 15 reps.
Increase reps by 1 if form is good.
Repeat.
To keep balance between legs, or rather to prevent unbalance, might do each leg separately.0 -
OK, but let me explain my thinking and then correct me. At this point, since the muscle is so weak, I was thinking of strength over endurance. I was thinking that once I was able to do standing body weight calf raises I would begin to focus on endurance. Is my thinking flawed? I really appreciate your help here.
Also, treating each leg separately makes good since. My left is weaker and smaller than the right.0 -
Good point, eventually you'll reach ability to do standing or assisted standing, and your walking will start providing the endurance component.
So that is in middle of hypertrophy range, and at the start you can gain muscle, might as well go for it.0
