Heart rate monitor
Sweet_Pea4
Posts: 447 Member
Hello 
I had a garmin band and lost the heart rate monitor strap. So I'm looking just to buy a new heart rate monitor, which shows cals burnt etc. anyone know of a food one?
I had a garmin band and lost the heart rate monitor strap. So I'm looking just to buy a new heart rate monitor, which shows cals burnt etc. anyone know of a food one?
0
Replies
-
Good*0
-
I used the Polar FT 4 for 2 years with no issues. I have been using the Polar FT 7 for the past few months and like it a lot. Don't know about other brands as Polar HRM's are the only ones that I've tried.0
-
Garmin and others sell ANT+ HR straps.
All HRM calorie numbers are nothing more than estimates. Some models come closer to accurate than others under certain circumstances (steady state cardio) but none of them count calories.0 -
Thank you0
-
I use the Polar H7 Bluetooth HRM strap it works with my iPhone or attaches to my Polar m400 watch.
By far the best combo I have used0 -
Microsoft Band here. Love it. HRM, exercise modes, sleep mode, guided workouts. Looks like they're starting to sell them at Best Buy, Amazon, and Target now.0
-
I used a Polar FT4 for a little over 2 years and it just died on me. I will be purchasing the new Polar A300 the end of this month.0
-
The straps are all comparable when it comes to HR accuracy from the older Polar H1 to the H6 and H7, the Garmin basic or premium, Wahoo Tickr, 4iiii Viiiiva, Mio Alpha and Link .... the difference being in comfort and how they communicate to a phone/watch/head unit. For the most part Polar uses Gymlink and/or bluetooth 4.0 ... Garmin uses ANT+ ... Wahoo, Mio, and 4iiii do simultaneous bluetooth and ANT+.
The math is all done in the watch, head unit, phone, or piece of equipment. How close to accurate the caloric estimations are depends on the formula in the device. HR data is only useful for estimating calories from steady state cardio. There is no direct relationship between HR and calories burned for things like lifting and yoga. There isn't an established relationship for things like Zumba. That leaves cycling, rowing, running type activities for steady state with the study behind it to establish a relationship between HR, exertion level, VO2 max, and calories.0 -
Cant you just buy a new strap, unless ofc you want a change. Get one off ebay.0
-
brianpperkins wrote: »HR data is only useful for estimating calories from steady state cardio. There is no direct relationship between HR and calories burned for things like lifting and yoga. There isn't an established relationship for things like Zumba. That leaves cycling, rowing, running type activities for steady state with the study behind it to establish a relationship between HR, exertion level, VO2 max, and calories.
That's not entirely true. My Microsoft Band measures HR and some other collected data like steps and reps to come up with an estimate of calories burned while I'm working out at the gym (weights and HIIT). Most of this (I believe) is based off HR because I can see my HR post workout and see how much of it I spent in aerobic vs. anaerobic zone.
Can it tell if I'm deadlifting with 135 vs. 405? No. But...I can tell you there is a difference in my HR (during and after) between those two weights.
Also, as Microsoft turns on more sensors (galvanic, etc.) and tweaks their algorithms, it will get closer.0 -
Giving you a figure is one thing, knowing its accurate is another.0
-
That's not entirely true. My Microsoft Band measures HR and some other collected data like steps and reps to come up with an estimate of calories burned while I'm working out at the gym (weights and HIIT). Most of this (I believe) is based off HR because I can see my HR post workout and see how much of it I spent in aerobic vs. anaerobic zone.
Well if HR is the most significant contributor to the estimation that you get from your M$ toy, then it's unlikely to be a meaningful number. HR and calorie expenditure don't have a meaningful relationship in the anaerobic range.
fwiw I don't actually think that the M$ algorithm meaningfully uses much else, despite the marketing gibberish.
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »HR data is only useful for estimating calories from steady state cardio. There is no direct relationship between HR and calories burned for things like lifting and yoga. There isn't an established relationship for things like Zumba. That leaves cycling, rowing, running type activities for steady state with the study behind it to establish a relationship between HR, exertion level, VO2 max, and calories.
That's not entirely true. My Microsoft Band measures HR and some other collected data like steps and reps to come up with an estimate of calories burned while I'm working out at the gym (weights and HIIT). Most of this (I believe) is based off HR because I can see my HR post workout and see how much of it I spent in aerobic vs. anaerobic zone.
Can it tell if I'm deadlifting with 135 vs. 405? No. But...I can tell you there is a difference in my HR (during and after) between those two weights.
Also, as Microsoft turns on more sensors (galvanic, etc.) and tweaks their algorithms, it will get closer.
The SCIENCE does not support using HRM for estimating burns from intervals or lifting. There is not a relationship between HR and caloric burn for lifting. I'm sure your band can tell the difference in HR when you are excited or scared ... there isn't a relationship between HR and those conditions either.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »The SCIENCE does not support using HRM for estimating burns from intervals or lifting. There is not a relationship between HR and caloric burn for lifting. I'm sure your band can tell the difference in HR when you are excited or scared ... there isn't a relationship between HR and those conditions either.
Exercise in the Aerobic or Anaerobic zone (based on HR) yields the same benefits whether your HR is high from weights, cardio, or both. To say otherwise is silly. It's easy to structure a lifting workout with short rest periods and HIIT that elevates your HR and yields equal results (actually better - but not going there) as doing the same thing with straight cardio.0 -
Exercise in the Aerobic or Anaerobic zone (based on HR) yields the same benefits whether your HR is high from weights, cardio, or both. To say otherwise is silly. It's easy to structure a lifting workout with short rest periods and HIIT that elevates your HR and yields equal results (actually better - but not going there) as doing the same thing with straight cardio.
Notwithstanding the issues with your points, that doesn't support the suggestion that HR is a meaningful proxy for calorie expenditure when one is training in a way that the software isn't designed around.
The software is designed on the basis of research done using steady state, aerobic range, activity.
0 -
No. That isn't how it works. The burns between anaerobic and aerobic activities differ greatly. Lifting is not a big calorie burner. EPOC is greatly over hyped. Actually for HIIT to get near they hyped benefits requires exertion at over 95% of LTHR during the high intensity periods. Again, that is if you want to discuss this based on science and fact rather than marketing.0
-
-
Any ANT+ heart rate strap will work with a modern Garmin watch. Garmin's several HR straps, Wahoo Tickr (does ANT+ and Bluetooth simultaneously), Viiii Viiiiva strap (does ANT+ and Bluetooth simultaneously), Suunto.0 -
Thanks0
-
Fitbit charge hr. No band needed it's all in one, connects to mfp and calculates calories burned via heart rate. I'm in love with it0
-
I've had to sync mine, but mine is a couple of years old and not the top of the line. My husband and I both have garmins so sometimes I pick up his HR monitor rather than mine and have to sync it for it to recognize. It's pretty easy and if you don't have your manual, they are available on line. I do know our polar HR monitor doesn't work with our garmins and the garmin HRM is more gym equipment friendly than our polar hrm.0
-
Also, as Microsoft turns on more sensors (galvanic, etc.) and tweaks their algorithms, it will get closer.
No, it won't, because heart rate and calorie simply do not correlate, except in very specific circumstances (none of which you are meeting).
It's like trying to use the RPM of your lawnmower blade to estimate how long it will take to drive your car to the grocery store.0 -
-
I've ordered a new heart rate monitor strap now for my vivofit fit band. Thanks though anyway. £350
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions