What I can I use to help work out calories burnt

mightyseasider
mightyseasider Posts: 7
in Fitness and Exercise
Hi,

I'm looking for some advice regarding how to work out how many calories burned working out?

Is there something good to wear on my wrist that is quite accurate but not too expensive?

Thanks :)

Replies

  • knra_grl
    knra_grl Posts: 1,566 Member
    http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm <<< you can use an online calculator until you find what you want

    I have a polar loop with a HRM - total cost about $200 but I bought the loop first then the HRM - I am happy with it
  • yogicarl
    yogicarl Posts: 1,260 Member
    Look up the activity you are doing on MFP Exercise database, key in the exercise duration and there you go; calories burned.

    Nothing you buy will be any more accurate or inaccurate as there are too many variables anyway. The best you or any device can do is work out a rough estimate.
  • mistiblake08
    mistiblake08 Posts: 80 Member
    MFP overestimates calorie burns so a HRM is better to use. I paid $7 for mine on Amazon. The differences between what it said I burned and what MFP said I did ranged from 100-300 calories. Big difference! HRMs are a better estimate based on your weight and heart rate for the exercise.
  • mightyseasider
    mightyseasider Posts: 7
    Do all HRM show your calories burned? Complete novice I'm afraid :( x
  • yogicarl
    yogicarl Posts: 1,260 Member
    MFP overestimates calorie burns so a HRM is better to use. I paid $7 for mine on Amazon. The differences between what it said I burned and what MFP said I did ranged from 100-300 calories. Big difference! HRMs are a better estimate based on your weight and heart rate for the exercise.

    - so just eat back half of what the MFP estimate is. Just as accurate as a HRM.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    MFP overestimates calorie burns so a HRM is better to use. I paid $7 for mine on Amazon. The differences between what it said I burned and what MFP said I did ranged from 100-300 calories. Big difference! HRMs are a better estimate based on your weight and heart rate for the exercise.

    1. You found a hrm for $7?
    2. You trust a $7 hrm to be remotely accurate?
    3. Even if the hrm was $300, how do you know for a fact that the calorie output is correct? Different than mfp doesn't automatically ensure accuracy
  • yogicarl
    yogicarl Posts: 1,260 Member
    I follow the DavPul method - works for me.
  • lisaabenjamin
    lisaabenjamin Posts: 665 Member
    Look up the activity you are doing on MFP Exercise database, key in the exercise duration and there you go; calories burned.

    Nothing you buy will be any more accurate or inaccurate as there are too many variables anyway. The best you or any device can do is work out a rough estimate.

    I disagree.

    The MFP database entries are not very accurate because they just use a mathematical formula to calculate the "average" number of calories burnt by the "average" person doing that activity. The database entries only take into account the time you spent working out, not how hard you were working out.

    A heart rate monitor on the other hand is more accurate (though nothing is ever going to be completely accurate) because it factors your heart rate into the equation. This gives a measure of how hard you are working.

    It should be noted however that a HRM is only really good for "steady state cardio", i.e. activities where you are doing the same thing for a period of time, like running, walking, swimming, dancing etc. If you're doing things like circuit training or HIIT then they're not that accurate because your heart rate is constantly changing with the different activities.
  • yogicarl
    yogicarl Posts: 1,260 Member
    "A heart rate monitor on the other hand is more accurate (though nothing is ever going to be completely accurate) because it factors your heart rate into the equation"

    I take your point, but although the HRM takes into account your personal heartrate during cardio, if the rest of the formula is out all that is happening is the final calorie burn figure is adjusted to take heartbeats per minute into account - still not accurate if the whole equation is not relative to you.

    The only reliable way would be to eat a reasonable amount considering your activity over the entire week, maintain a regular exercise program, record your weight once per week over four weeks and then adjust calorie intake accordingly. For example, if you are trying to lose weight and you gained weight - eat a little less.

    My own experience with HRMs was the HRM was giving me a calorie burn that was too high for my activity, but I decided to trust it and ate accordingly. I put on around 1lb per week with that thing - now a lot happier using the method I described above.

    Just because an HRM reading is adjusted by your own heartrate still does not make it accurate.
  • mightyseasider
    mightyseasider Posts: 7
    Thanks everyone, I'm currently on week four of insanity and eating 1250 cals a day so hopefully the weight will come off :)
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Based on your ticker you should be eating more if you want to keep your energy level high
  • mightyseasider
    mightyseasider Posts: 7
    Lol what's my ticker?!?
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Under your post. Says 3 pounds lost with 65 pounds to go. That's your ticker
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Do all HRM show your calories burned? Complete novice I'm afraid :( x

    No.....not all HRMs show calories burned. There are also differences among HRMs that do give calorie burn estimates too.

    Any decent HRM should have you input your height, weight, age, and gender. Your HRM will make assumptions based on this data. Men have more muscle mass....muscle uses more calories... so men generally burn more. Older people generally have lost lean muscle....so they burn less.....etc.

    HRMs that are wrist only will measure your pulse from time to time. HRMs with a chest strap will measure your heart rate constantly. Comparing your resting heart rate against you working out is the estimate for exertion level. The problem with wrist only models....you often have to stop what you are doing to take your pulse.

    HRMs are designed for steady state cardio.....if your workouts are something else.....a HRM is much less accurate.
  • mightyseasider
    mightyseasider Posts: 7
    Thanku :)

Categories