Polar vs. MyFitnessPal Calorie Calculation

Immerito
Immerito Posts: 105 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
According to MyFitnessPal, I burned 75 calories in 20 minutes of lifting.

According to Polar FT7, I burned 130 calories in 20 minutes of lifting.

Which is right?

Replies

  • hnsr1021
    hnsr1021 Posts: 58 Member
    I would think the polar was right considering it takes into account your heart rate.
  • jefferytmc
    jefferytmc Posts: 26 Member
    Always take the lower to be safe.

    But HRM are not accurate when it comes to activities like lifting. They are meant for cardio type work.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I would think the polar was right considering it takes into account your heart rate.

    The problem is is that with weight lifting, the elevated HR isn't the same. The Polar is assuming it is due to steady state cardio activity and giving an estimation for that.
    HRMs are not accurate for calorie estimations for weight lifting.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1044313-this-is-why-hrms-have-limited-use-for-tracking-calories

    It is impossible to say which is more accurate, both are estimates. With weight lifting there are so many variables, it makes it difficult to estimate.
    Personally, I always opt for the lower number.
  • EddieHaskell97
    EddieHaskell97 Posts: 2,227 Member
    I was wondering about that. The Polar units I use are an elliptical and a treadmill. The Elliptical takes my heart rate from the handles after it asks my age and weight, but I for the treadmill to get my heart rate, I'd need to hold on to a bar at the front, or get a bluetooth HRM for it to link to. I don't hang on to anything when I'm running, but I was wondering if either machine would be accurate anyway, just with age and weight information.

    I'm 6'3 and 210 lbs. The treadmill says I burn 142 calories when I run a mile at 7.6 mph. That seems a little high, doesn't it?
  • jefferytmc
    jefferytmc Posts: 26 Member
    You would be more accurate if you had the chest strap.

    Partly because you can input more info into the watch or phone.

    And partly because it knows your HR constantly, not just the couple of times you grab the bar.

    Most of the calculation by the machine is taking your age and weight and perceived exertion on the treadmill and estimating the calories from that.

    Put the same info into the treadmill and let it just run without you on it for 1 mile and you will get the same results.
  • looseseal
    looseseal Posts: 216 Member
    I was wondering about that. The Polar units I use are an elliptical and a treadmill. The Elliptical takes my heart rate from the handles after it asks my age and weight, but I for the treadmill to get my heart rate, I'd need to hold on to a bar at the front, or get a bluetooth HRM for it to link to. I don't hang on to anything when I'm running, but I was wondering if either machine would be accurate anyway, just with age and weight information.

    I'm 6'3 and 210 lbs. The treadmill says I burn 142 calories when I run a mile at 7.6 mph. That seems a little high, doesn't it?

    For how long?

    Also, on treadmills the higher the incline the more cals you burn.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I was wondering about that. The Polar units I use are an elliptical and a treadmill. The Elliptical takes my heart rate from the handles after it asks my age and weight, but I for the treadmill to get my heart rate, I'd need to hold on to a bar at the front, or get a bluetooth HRM for it to link to. I don't hang on to anything when I'm running, but I was wondering if either machine would be accurate anyway, just with age and weight information.

    I'm 6'3 and 210 lbs. The treadmill says I burn 142 calories when I run a mile at 7.6 mph. That seems a little high, doesn't it?

    The "average" for running is about 100 calories a mile. That is based on a 150lb runner, so someone who weighs more will burn more.

    I've seen a few sources use .63 x bodyweight = net calories per mile. That would put you at around 132. Not a whole lot of difference from the treadmill.

    If going by HR, a chest strap is pretty much a necessity to better accuracy. But here is a post on the topic as well
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/exercise-calories-sometimes-the-cardio-machines-are-more-accurate-404739

Categories