heybales wrote: »

Acacia2India wrote: »

heybales wrote: »

luckydays27 wrote: »

I'll be getting one of the HR versions of FB once they come out and doing a side by side comparison just like I did with the FB One/Flex. My One has helped me lose 50+ lbs but I know that its not exactly right as I am eating a tad more than what MFP/FB says I should eat and I am still (very slowly) losing weight.

I want to try the new versions to see what TDEE number I get based on the "all day" HR input. If its no difference than my One, I will return it and keep eating a bit more than suggested.

Sadly, there is no correlation between HR and calorie burn outside of aerobic exercise.

They won't use HR for that purpose during the day, merely to provide some more daily info to perhaps find meaningful, or at least they'll try to convince you it is.

Really? Then what's the point? This is one of the reasons I was waiting for this model.

Direct from FB's site: "Monitor heart rate automatically and continuously right on your wrist to accurately track calorie burn, maintain workout intensity, maximize training and optimize health"

Bah-humbug.

And be very afraid if they are claiming something that studies have clearly shown have absolutely no correlation.

Heart rate and below aerobic exercise zone calorie burn. Totally unrelated. And for both men and women, avg start of the aerobic zone is 90 bpm.
There is a whole lot of daily activity below that.

Someone could hope and wish all they like that it would be great to be related - it just isn't though.

I can get my heart rate above 90 just by sitting here if I consume a bit more caffeine. I haven't gotten up for 40 minutes and my pulse is 87 right now.

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I can get my heart rate above 90 just by sitting here if I consume a bit more caffeine. I haven't gotten up for 40 minutes and my pulse is 87 right now.

And perfect example of why even the relationship between HR and calorie burn is a loose one.

There are many reasons for an elevated HR totally unrelated to actually putting forth any hard effort that requires more oxygen to burn more fuel.

Dehydrated, nervous, stimulates, tired from prior workout, out of shape, ect.
All cause false elevated HR, and all HRM's (except Garmin with FirstBeat algorithms) will assume higher HR means harder effort, and assign higher calorie burn.
When that just isn't true.

Acacia2India wrote: »

So how does one find an accurate account of their daily calorie burn?

You won't find accurate, you can find best estimates. Some better than others.

Best is adjusting the height on the Fitbit so it is using a BMR that closes matches your best estimated Katch BMR and Cunningham RMR based on bodyfat%. That takes care of all non-moving time.

Moving time is best estimated with manually entered stride length.

And then exercise time outside walking and slow running, is best estimated with HRM and your own personal calorie burn formula based on treadmill test.
The except being lifting is just used with the database entry.

Outside that, for a woman wait 4 weeks while doing the exact same exercise routine for amount of time and daily life about the same, accurate food logging for calories eaten, and then looking at how much you gain or lose.
That spells out how much deficit or surplus you had between what you ate and what you burned.
Now maintain that level of daily life, and that number applies.

1973mikeg wrote: »

I picked up a Surge this past Sunday. I upgraded from a one. I do like it so far. I can't wait to see if they update it for biking. I do like to see my heart rate while I climb those stairs. Helps me keep going when my knees start to say stop.

Is that one of the activity types when you choose to start a workout activity?

It just seems to big and bulky for me. I barely like to wear my flex to bed. Plus I got my flex cheap on ebay buying a used one. I have a app on my phone I use to take my heart rate measurment.

MyNameIsCaffeine wrote: »

I was really excited for the Charge HR. I wanted a Force, missed out, and for only $20 more the extra data would be worth it. However, the more I look at the Jawbone Up3, the more I like it instead. There's no display, but there's so much data and it sounds like the sensors are better than FitBit's....

I can't wait to read the reviews.

My husband really wants one.

The Charge HR has been released for pre-order!

I love it. I bought mine on Friday, and so far I'm enjoying it. It took getting used to because I haven't worn a watch in nearly a decade, so having something on my wrist is weird. I switched to say I was wearing it on my dominant hand rather than non-dominant because I wanted it to be less sensitve. It also pairs with MFP in a slightly more odd way than I had expected. I used MapMyFitness third party site and it would literally log my walk or run on my newsfeed, and pick out the best description, so I was expecting the same, but instead it takes your overall burn throughout the day, matches with what your projection is with MFP and calculates the difference. I'm minorly concerned that this will result in overeating. I may stop eating back my calories, at least in part. So far so good. I really enjoy that I can control my music, and read my phone messages from the watch. This will be handy when riding bike or skiing as it's irritating to have to dig out the phone. It's really comfortable... and seriousy, for someone that actually wore a watch regularly, it would be completely unnoticable. And for the girl that thought it was too huge and looked bad on a girl... it looks just fine. They make it in Red as well... so for the people more interested in fashion I guess there's that.

Bit the bullet and got the Surge because it will not be so easy to lose as the 2 clipons I had. It is clunky and much too big for my small ladylike wrist, but it is getting the job done. Still trying to figure out how to get it and MyFitnessPal to talk to each other. I hope I won't be sorry I didn't wait for the iWatch.