Charge HR AND One
Options
Replies
-
They just said set stride length, running stride and reset it afterwards.
Wondering if the equation you gave me for stride works? 2ft 4.1 inches if I plug that in my HR.
0 -
I think I officially give up -- if the One is the more accurate then why stress over the HR
Today mess
HR
One
0 -
WarmDontBurn wrote: »They just said set stride length, running stride and reset it afterwards.
Wondering if the equation you gave me for stride works? 2ft 4.1 inches if I plug that in my HR.
It should not help - because the Charge was missing a healthy amount of steps. So it would still be off big time.
You could accept the fact it is going to miss steps, and then calculate stride length as I did above with the reduced steps it sees.
But I'd be concerned that it is only during the walking workout it's missing it that bad, but during normal activities it's much better.
So now you'd be using a bogus stride length trying to correct an low seen step count that should not actually apply during daily activities.
Me, I'm curious, I'd count some steps walking around doing normal things, just to see.
I also spent like 2 months proving out the sensors on the BodyMedia didn't work worth squat, well, for me, but I doubt for anyone as good as they claimed they did.0 -
I am over it! I gave it to my husband last night and if it isn't his thing (he wants to track sleep) it's going back!
Just want to clarify 1 thing though -- I read in another post (glassyo's actually) where it was discovered the One was not very accurate -- would you say based on the info I provided the One is as accurate as it can be?
0 -
I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.
All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.0 -
evilunclematt wrote: »I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.
All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.
My understanding - based on what heybales has said and the fact that it makes sense - is that the Charge HR (and, I assume, the Surge), still computes calories based on steps when your heart rate is below the "Fat Burn Zone" or it isn't detecting a lot of steps. This prevents it from attributing a lot of calorie expenditure to your high heart rate when you're actually just watching a horror flick. This is also why you need to enter activities like weight lifting manually. Your heart rate is up, but you're not taking a lot of steps.
So, my understanding is that steps, not heart rate, are used most of the time to calculate calorie burn. However, the Charge HR is probably more accurate on calorie burn when doing exercise such as walking, running, dancing, etc.0 -
So the Charge HR stride distance is off.
Is one set to default, the other you manually set?
Because 3 mph for 1.5 hr should be 4.5 miles with those 7611 steps.
I wouldn't do the math with those step figures of the Charge though, because they are obviously off, under reported.
And since steps equal distance with time equals pace with weight equals calories burned - yes, steps do matter actually to your concern about calories.evilunclematt wrote: »I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.
All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.
I thought the same and that is why I wanted to love the HR because I figured based on the HR is would be more accurate.
I assumed that steps didn't matter -- only calorie burn but as I bolded from a previous response that does not appear to be the case.
I can look back for about 16 weeks and see that my burn has never been over 2577 and average is about 2248 -- So yesterday's 2800 burn by the end of the day leaves me uneasy. I also in those past 16 weeks used my Polar FT4 hrm as well during some walks -- so if HR is the factor is should have read higher those days too.
0 -
evilunclematt wrote: »I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.
All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.
Look at your Fitbit daily graph of calorie burn, the 15 or 5 min increments better.
See the lows that are all the same as while you are sleeping?
That's the calorie burn you are given with no steps seen. That's BMR level burn, calculated from gender, age, weight, height.
Except for the HR types seeing an increased HR high enough with higher steps auto-turning on HR calorie burn formula, or you hitting the button on the device to start a record - all calories burned above sleeping is based on steps.
Your hour workout may not be.
Look at your stats, most folks burn more in daily activity than exercise.
And regarding HR accuracy - do you have a means of checking when it's really a good workout and calories burned are higher?
Oh, the reason why your calories do that in the adjustment during the day?
Your prior device probably had calorie estimation disabled, the new device new account doesn't have that option in same place.
You can read about that in the FAQ in the stickies of this group.0 -
It's interesting, because I've worn both a One and Charge HR 24/7 since January and I've found the Charge to be an average of 2k steps/day higher than the One. My sense was the Charge was awarding too many steps for arm movement, I wore it one day when casually folding clothes for a while and earned thousands of steps on the Charge and just a few hundred on the One. I have more faith in my One results, although I may be wrong.0
