Yet another HRM question...

Options
ParkerH47
ParkerH47 Posts: 463 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Sorry for the repeats I tried searching but couldn't seem to find what I'm looking for.

I've never used one before, but I'm looking to buy a heart rate monitor.

I would be using it mostly for walking and spurts of running, and I'm really just aiming for a pretty accurate measure of calories burned.

I would also like the option to sync it with MFP- which is the part I'm having trouble finding information on. I've seen a lot on the boards about the Polar FT4 and FT7 but thats about the limit of my knowledge.

Thanks in advance for all your help! :smile:

Replies

  • ParkerH47
    ParkerH47 Posts: 463 Member
    Options
    What heart rate monitors do you guys use?
  • jdhcm2006
    jdhcm2006 Posts: 2,254 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar FT7. It's a good one and it gets the job done. I have since switched to a Garmin VivoFit w/ HRM activity tracker because I wanted to know what my steps were during events at my job.
  • bwogilvie
    bwogilvie Posts: 2,130 Member
    Options
    HRMs are great at measuring your heart rate. Whether they are also great at estimating calories burned depends on how closely your activity matches their design parameters.

    One study of the Polar F6 showed that, even calibrated with subjects' actual VO2max and HRmax, it overestimated energy expenditure by 27% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178923). An earlier study showed that the Polar S410 overestimated energy expenditure in women by 12% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15292754). Another study found that the Polar S810i overestimated expenditure when exercising lightly but not moderately (http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/21/v9n3-21abst.php). The research seems to suggest that HRMs are less accurate for women than they are for men.

    The study by Keytel et al (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15966347) that produced a widely-used formula found that it was reasonably accurate for groups when VO2max had been measured, but less accurate without measurement of VO2max - in the latter case, over 26% of the variance in energy expenditure was not explained by their equation, which uses heart rate, gender, age, and weight to estimate calories consumed.

    And that is doing moderate to intense, steady-state cardio. The scenario you mention, walking with occasional running spurts, is not likely to produce accurate estimates from most HRMs, unless you're walking fast enough that it is hard for you to sing.

    It's possible that HRMs using Firstbeat, Inc.'s proprietary algorithm would produce more accurate results. They're quite a bit more expensive than a typical HRM, though; Suunto and Garmin are the main manufacturers that license Firstbeat technology (though not for all their products).

    For what it's worth, MFP's exercise database seems to be a lot more accurate for walking than it is for other activities.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    edited October 2014
    Options
    Polar FT4 is a good basic heart rate monitor. You want one with a chest strap. It does not link to MFP. Only activity trackers are linked to MFP. You enter workout calories manually. HRMs are designed for steady state cardio workouts.

    An activity tracker is a different animal. These are worn 24/7 and can be linked MFP and because your workout is step based...the count won't be too far off. No chest strap measuring your pulse though. Your steps are monitored morning, noon, and night. I like my FitBit One.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    Options
    I use a Garmin 410 with GPS because I run. Frankly, at this point I'm more interested in the GPS capabilities than the calories component because after several years of running I already know with near certainty how many calories I burn per mile. The Garmin uses a HRM chest strap with ANT+ (as opposed to bluetooth).

    You can't like a HRM directly to MFP. You can, however, link it to an app that you'd use during your activity which then links to MFP. You'd want to look through the available apps to find one you like and then find from the app which type of HRM strap to purchase to work with the app.
  • Yasbox45
    Yasbox45 Posts: 8 Member
    Options
    Hi I cycle and use a Garmin with build in GPS which also links to MFP. What I'm struggling with and do not like is it's way too generous and it doesn't remove the background calories. Today it's showing I have 300 calories left over when I know it's more like 90/100.

    Is there a way of deducting background calories?
  • Deena_Bean
    Deena_Bean Posts: 906 Member
    Options
    Polar FT4 - works great, cheaper than a lot of the others and is sufficient for basics. I don't have a need for anything much fancier than that.
  • ParkerH47
    ParkerH47 Posts: 463 Member
    Options
    Thanks everyone!
    bwogilvie wrote: »
    HRMs are great at measuring your heart rate. Whether they are also great at estimating calories burned depends on how closely your activity matches their design parameters.

    One study of the Polar F6 showed that, even calibrated with subjects' actual VO2max and HRmax, it overestimated energy expenditure by 27% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178923). An earlier study showed that the Polar S410 overestimated energy expenditure in women by 12% (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15292754). Another study found that the Polar S810i overestimated expenditure when exercising lightly but not moderately (http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/21/v9n3-21abst.php). The research seems to suggest that HRMs are less accurate for women than they are for men.

    The study by Keytel et al (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15966347) that produced a widely-used formula found that it was reasonably accurate for groups when VO2max had been measured, but less accurate without measurement of VO2max - in the latter case, over 26% of the variance in energy expenditure was not explained by their equation, which uses heart rate, gender, age, and weight to estimate calories consumed.

    And that is doing moderate to intense, steady-state cardio. The scenario you mention, walking with occasional running spurts, is not likely to produce accurate estimates from most HRMs, unless you're walking fast enough that it is hard for you to sing.

    It's possible that HRMs using Firstbeat, Inc.'s proprietary algorithm would produce more accurate results. They're quite a bit more expensive than a typical HRM, though; Suunto and Garmin are the main manufacturers that license Firstbeat technology (though not for all their products).

    For what it's worth, MFP's exercise database seems to be a lot more accurate for walking than it is for other activities.

    Great info, thanks. Do you think an HRM would still be MORE accurate than a fitbit or even simply adding exercise into MFP?

  • thinerme1
    thinerme1 Posts: 7
    Options
    I have the Garmin vivofit and I like it. It does link to MFP. The Garmin gives more exercise calories than MFP but I usually go with it since I wear the HRM band. With that said I still leave 200-300 calories everyday to adjust for any calorie adjustments. I don't believe anything is perfect in science . It is all relative.
  • Pirate_chick
    Pirate_chick Posts: 1,216 Member
    Options
    I have a polar FT7 Works for what I need it for. I also have a Fitbit.
  • Adaniel65
    Adaniel65 Posts: 105 Member
    Options
    I use the Polar FT7. I wanted something to track during workouts only and this does the trick and is simple to setup and use. I'm very satisfied with it!
  • kjm3579
    kjm3579 Posts: 3,975 Member
    Options
    http://www.polar.com/us-en/products/accessories/H7_heart_rate_sensor

    I use the Polar H7 monitor and link it to my iPhone using Cyclemeter for running and cycling.
  • bwogilvie
    bwogilvie Posts: 2,130 Member
    Options
    ParkerH47 wrote: »
    Great info, thanks. Do you think an HRM would still be MORE accurate than a fitbit or even simply adding exercise into MFP?

    I wouldn't get a HRM to estimate calories if my main exercise was walking with short jogs. If you're thinking of doing more intense cardio - at a speed where it's difficult to speak in full sentences, and impossible to sing - then a HRM might be worth it, along with a book on how to use them effectively.

Categories