HRM verses MFP database??? So confused :(
lauriallen
Posts: 39
So here's my issue (for today LOL), I bought a HRM last night to see exactly what I am burning and where my heart rate sits when I am working out. So today I went for my power walk at lunch (and I do have to admit there are some hills on my trail) whoever my HRM said I burned over 400 cal in 45 mins??? I check the one on the database and it says 192 cals (moderate speed) for 45 mins? Which one do I use? I don't know if my HRM is out or what? I don't want to use the wrong one and be out to lunch...oh wowus me! :sad:
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks all and have a super duper day. :drinker:
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks all and have a super duper day. :drinker:
0
Replies
-
I'm having the same problem! I mean, if my HRM is right, then, awesome for me! If MFP is right, and I eat my exercise cals, I'll gain like 100lbs!
I have a Timex Personal Trainer with a chest strap. What is yours?0 -
the HRM is pretty much always more accurate.. if the walk really brought your heart rate up it's definitely possible. Be sure you got all the settings in the watch right though.. then it should be accurate, far more than the database.0
-
If your HRM has a chest strap and you entered all your personal data in it correctly.....then definitely the HRM
the database here is based on averages....nothing specific. For me and many others, we are not "average" so it was way off.
Good job!0 -
Your HRM should be right as long as you have set it up properly, ie, weight, age, etc and are using a chest strap. I would go with the reading on your HRM. MFP is just an average.0
-
Just remember that the ones set up in the database have been added by people...so your HRM does your body- so you can go to my exercise and type it in and put your own calorie burn in.
Does your HRM have a chest strap? it will be more accurate then the database0 -
I don't know why your HRM is so out of whack compared to MFP, as my HRM doesn't give me cals. However what I do is put my average HR over the course of the workout (which the HM does give me) and the length of time with a couple other tidbits on this website tool's, and it tells me how many cals I burn per hour and how many for my actual length of time I did. I hope this helps!
http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm
At least that way I know it is taking the intensity of my workout into consideration. I do find that for the level I workout at (which is fairly intense), MFP is pretty accurate for my particular exercise of choice - the elliptical machine.0 -
I think the HRM would be more accurate, do you know what your resting Heart Rate is before you do your walk, some people have a higher resting heart rate that others and if its high, it could make the HRM think your burning more than you are0
-
Did you double check that you have entered both your weight and maximum heart rate correctly? Your HRM probably uses your percentage of maximum heart rate when calculating calorie burn, so an error there can throw your calculation off. I.e., if your max HR is too low, then your HR while exercising will be a greater percentage of your max HR, resulting in a higher calorie burn. The most common formula for calculating max HR is 220 minus your age, though there are lots and lots of different formulas.0
-
i often find there's a big differnce between wht my gym equipment tells me and MFP database so i use the gyms figures mostly. i find difficult is working out calories burned during resistance/weights so i don't usually count these but figure it's extra exercise cals i'm not eatign so it's good. MFP is mostly data other people have entered so use your own data as it's probably more accurate (providing all programmed right as said before). stick with it!0
-
Just remember that the ones set up in the database have been added by people
Please cite where you heard this information. If that were correct the specific items added would have an * like the food individuals add. If I were to search Turbo Fire for example, it is not in the system despite dozens of people on MFP doing this b/c exercises an individual adds is ONLY on their own list, it's not shared.0 -
The MFP numbers aren't necessarily accurate, but that number sounds far too high. I'd guess something's wrong with your HRM's calculation, unless you were speed-walking with a weighted backpack.0
-
The MFP database is set up on the assumption of an average fitness level for your weight and age, and average exertion levels of the various listed activities.
A decent HRM that reads out calories is very dependent on age, weight, and fitness level that you enter into the device to calculate exertion levels based upon your bpm.
If you HRM doesn't ask for age, weight, and fitness level, or it isn't entered correctly, it cannot accurately record calories expended. If it is set up correctly, a better quality HRM is a much better calculator of calories expended; its using your real HR to calculate based upon assumptions used for your age and fitness.
The more fit you are, the less calories you will burn for a given activity at a given exertion level. The more fit you are, the more efficient your body is at producing power and work at a given energy consumption.
As a rule of thumb, if your HRM is under-reporting compared to MFP data, you aren't working as hard as what would be considered average for the activity for a person similar to you. If it is over-reporting, the opposite is true.
To give an example, right now I'm riding my road bike quite a bit (165 miles in the last 10 days). My average speed is 17-18 MPH, but the MFP database more aligns with the exertion level for "bike, vigorous 14-16 MPH" (my bike is aerodynamic and I'm wearing a Kit). Depending on just how hard I go out, I have to goal seek the number of minutes to match what my HRM says I expended, because my HRM is more accurate. Generally I have to adjust the minutes downward because I'm not working as hard as the average person like me. But if I go out really hard, pushing an average speed 18+ MPH for an hour for instance, I may have to adjust the minutes upward. I still like using the database because it tells me a relative number to compare my personal effort to.
My goal by the way is to match my personal best in a time trial of 22.5 MPH for an hour. Hopefully in August I'll be in the 20's. Need to lose more weight to get there. Blubber is the enemy.
Hope this makes sense to someone out there.0 -
My hubby bought it for me it's one that goes on my wrist and it uses my heart rate prior to exercise, during warm up, during my exercise and during cool down to calculate my calories burned. OMG this is just way too confusing, maybe I'll just go back to MFP even if it's lower at least I'll be safe.0
-
My hubby bought it for me it's one that goes on my wrist and it uses my heart rate prior to exercise, during warm up, during my exercise and during cool down to calculate my calories burned. OMG this is just way too confusing, maybe I'll just go back to MFP even if it's lower at least I'll be safe.0
-
Thanks everyone for the pointers and I am taking my HRM back and getting a new one, I'll just tell the hubby it wasn't working properly...0
-
I found that my numbers were a lot different also. Mine seem to be more acurate with my HRM. Do a couple of checks for yourself. While you have your HRM on, check your pulse, see how they compare at different excersion levels. When I did this it matched up better with my HRM than with what my treadmill said, or what I found on HRM. Not everyone is the same, it is very possible that you burned that many calories in that amount of time. For me personally, when I walk on my treadmill I average about 100 calories per 10 minutes. I know this is not the same for others who may be in better shape than I am. Hope this helps! (:0
-
It's all best guessing. But the HRM is likely to be more accurate than the site. That's really the only reason I re-activated my bodybugg. Some of the burns the site calculates are crazy. Even though the site is "tuned" for your specific weight and everything, you likely have to program all of that into your HRM, which is then also working off of your own body, and not a database on a computer somewhere.
I say go with the HRM unless you start noticing that you're not making any progress.0 -
My goal by the way is to match my personal best in a time trial of 22.5 MPH for an hour. Hopefully in August I'll be in the 20's. Need to lose more weight to get there. Blubber is the enemy.
Ain't that the truth! And thanks for the awesome post/reply. Great in-depth answer!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions