mad or complimented????

shug458
shug458 Posts: 99
edited September 26 in Fitness and Exercise
Okay so I am not sure how to feel at the moment and let me tell you why!!!! My husband bought me a heart rate monitor tonight which I was extatic about (now I can REALLY tell how many TRUE calories I am burning) - I just busted my hump doing day 2 of JM 30 day shred and all i burned was 32 little tiny calories??? ARE YOU KIDDING ME! I am soaking wet with sweat - wanted to die but pushed myself and all it said was 32 calories. So that's why I am mad - BUT maybe I could consider that a compliment to me - they say the smaller you are and the least amount you have to lose the smaller the calories you will burn -
but still I am totally dissapointed. Did the same work out last night and accoridng to MFP I burned 207 - yeah not even close :(

On the bright side I feel great that I pushed my way through day 2 - boy am I sore!!!!!
«1

Replies

  • deathtaco
    deathtaco Posts: 237
    Doubt you only burned 32 calories :noway: !!

    Don't worry either. Exercise isn't a "here and now" thing anyway. Your body will continue to burn calories throughout the day due to various reasons.
  • AmyW4225
    AmyW4225 Posts: 302 Member
    I wonder if that is correct? That seems extremely low! Are you sure you have it set right? :laugh:
  • wildbio
    wildbio Posts: 42 Member
    That doesn't sound quite right. You might want to double check the HRM. If you're soaked in sweat then you most definitely should have burned more than just 32 calories.
  • crjugrl
    crjugrl Posts: 172
    I'd be interested to know this as well, although it seems like that's an awfully low number. I gained 4 pounds in the first 10 days of the 30 Day Shred. Not very happy, to say the least.
  • shug458
    shug458 Posts: 99
    My husband put my height and weight in and it said 32 :(
  • iamhealingmyself
    iamhealingmyself Posts: 579 Member
    was it your heart rate monitor that said you burned 32 calories? Did you set it up for your statistics (does it even have that option?) does it include a "zone" setting so you can determine your fat/cardio zones? all of that could impact your results. I wear my Polar FT4 when doing a slightly modified version of JM 30DS level 1 and can burn several hundred calories with hardly a sweat but a good leg burn. Something seems off somewhere. I know I had to create an exercise for me so I enter the total time and the calories my HRM says I burned as the system doesn't calculate that for me.
  • iamhealingmyself
    iamhealingmyself Posts: 579 Member
    I know mine has a chest strap and it needs to be wet before I put it on or it doesn't register correctly and stops at different times. Is it possible you bumped the "stop" or "pause" feature? I do that sometimes too, or push it to connect to the transmitter and forget to hit it again to actually start logging calories and don't realize that until the workout is over :grumble:
  • EDesq
    EDesq Posts: 1,527 Member
    Exercise is FARRR more important than the "Immediate" calories burned...ANYWAY, nothing can really give you an accurate account of what is "burned immediately."
  • fredam25
    fredam25 Posts: 2
    It's true--exercise doesn't burn all that many calories all at once unless you really kick in some serious time and effort. Where the exercise really benefits is in this--as your body gets stronger and more efficient, you start burning more calories just doing your daily activities. And it's also true that, if you're smaller, your heart doesn't have to work as hard to keep your body fueled while you exercise, so your heart rate will stay lower.
  • shug458
    shug458 Posts: 99
    as I burned calories the timer was going - 27 minutes = 32 calories - I dont understand - Im totally bummed
  • AmyW4225
    AmyW4225 Posts: 302 Member
    I'd be interested to know this as well, although it seems like that's an awfully low number. I gained 4 pounds in the first 10 days of the 30 Day Shred. Not very happy, to say the least.

    Your muscles are probably just retaining water. Keep it up and you will see results. :happy:
  • dlaplume2
    dlaplume2 Posts: 1,658 Member
    Did you make sure you wet the band. I was truly disappointed when MFY said I was burning 276 and my HRM said 190, but 32 is very low. I would double check the settings your husband put in, just to be sure. You know men are with instructions. :wink: :laugh: :wink: :laugh:
  • shug458
    shug458 Posts: 99
    wet the band????? it's the watch one - I just asked him and he said he put in all my stats 4'11" 30 yr old female 127lbs
  • kdouglas11
    kdouglas11 Posts: 185 Member
    Take it back! That sounds nuts! Jillian KILLS me!
  • laughingdani
    laughingdani Posts: 2,275 Member
    That's not right at all. I burn around 200-210 according to my HRM doing The Shred.
    I would take it back and get one with a chest strap for a more accurate reading.
  • ContinuousEffort
    ContinuousEffort Posts: 136
    I think the monitor is broken. You must have burned more than that. I would return it and try a different one.
  • tabi26
    tabi26 Posts: 535 Member
    Get one with a chest strap. They read better :)
  • Dreamerlove
    Dreamerlove Posts: 441 Member
    I'm not so sure about the smaller you are..less calories to burn thing. I do Chalean Johnson Turbo Fire, and she is tiny and VERY VERY fit and her hair drips when we are done working out, and she says everyone can burn 600 cals...but I'm not an expert. I know that if you have a heavy person and a fit person doing the same workout, yes the heavy person will burn more, BUT the fit person will be able to do more and not modify moves...but idk
  • MakingAChoice
    MakingAChoice Posts: 481 Member
    My husband put my height and weight in and it said 32 :(

    Might want to make sure the hubby did not typo your weight or something. 32 calories doing a 30 day shred would not be possible, it should be in the hundreds.
  • robin52077
    robin52077 Posts: 4,383 Member
    wet the band????? it's the watch one - I just asked him and he said he put in all my stats 4'11" 30 yr old female 127lbs

    The watch ones are crap. Really. You have to touch it to register your HR, right? Well, if you touched it when you started, then it was only recording your resting rate the whole time, if your HR went up, and you didn't touch it again, it doesn't register the higher rate. Conversely, if you touch it at a high HR, then slow down, it is still counting at the higher rate and you will get a grossly inflated number. Especially for circuit training like Shred, you'd have to touch it before and after each change in exercise, as they all have different intensity levels and your HR goes up and down dramatically during Shred. I burn 110 when I do level 1.
    So either commit to touching the darn thing every 30 seconds, or get one with a chest strap that monitors every beat of your heart in real time, no touching necessary!
  • shellgib
    shellgib Posts: 196 Member
    if it doesn't have a chest strap to relay your hr continuously then you have to frequently check your hr with your fingertips throughout the workout. did you do that?
  • MakingAChoice
    MakingAChoice Posts: 481 Member
    wet the band????? it's the watch one - I just asked him and he said he put in all my stats 4'11" 30 yr old female 127lbs

    If it is just a watch one with no chest strap I would take it back. The chest strap ones are much more accurate. Plus this one clearly is not working right.
  • crjugrl
    crjugrl Posts: 172
    I'd be interested to know this as well, although it seems like that's an awfully low number. I gained 4 pounds in the first 10 days of the 30 Day Shred. Not very happy, to say the least.

    Your muscles are probably just retaining water. Keep it up and you will see results. :happy:

    Ha, I wish they would spit it out. I just want to lose this weight and see these numbers go down lol. I'm not giving up. That doesn't help anything either. I just hope the results will start to come sooner rather than later :smile:
  • shug458
    shug458 Posts: 99
    no I didn't touch the HR part - now when I was sititng down doing nothing at all it said my HR was 86 - isn't that awfully low?
  • shug458
    shug458 Posts: 99
    unfortuantly I can't afford the more expensive HRM - :(
  • ceejay000
    ceejay000 Posts: 402 Member
    no I didn't touch the HR part - now when I was sititng down doing nothing at all it said my HR was 86 - isn't that awfully low?

    No, that's a normal resting heart rate.
  • bisky
    bisky Posts: 1,090 Member
    86, no that is somewhat normal. A resting heart rate should be between 60 - 80. Some very fit athletes have resting HR around 45 - 60.
  • robin52077
    robin52077 Posts: 4,383 Member
    unfortuantly I can't afford the more expensive HRM - :(

    take it back and save up. Better to wait till you can, than try to work with crap.

    You can get a Polar F4 on Amazon for 60. I have that one and the FT7 (90 bucks) but I don't use either since I got the BodyMediaFit, which counts your calorie expenditure round the clock, and tracks your steps, your activity level, and even your sleep quality. I highly recommend them!
  • Janworkingitout
    Janworkingitout Posts: 434 Member
    I don't mean to get personal but are you on prescribed beta blockers? These meds keep your heart rate artifically low and cause your calorie burn to be very low. At least this has been my experience.
  • mrmarius
    mrmarius Posts: 1,802 Member
    no I didn't touch the HR part - now when I was sititng down doing nothing at all it said my HR was 86 - isn't that awfully low?

    you just solvd your problem... i have one of those cheaper hrms and i pretty much just touch the monitor everytime an exercise changes or if i feel my intensity changing and its worked for me..
This discussion has been closed.

Categories