HIIT over estimation
fishshark
Posts: 1,886 Member
I do a lot of HIIT and i have read a bunch on here that HRMs will over estimate calories burned for HIIT and I was wondering why that is. I have a chest strap on btw. 45 mins of a HIIT video i will burn about 320.. which doesn't seem like a huge over estimation. just confused.
0
Replies
-
45 minutes seems awfully long for HIIT. Usually HIIT sessions are much shorter; 5-20 minutes seems typical. It's hard to go all out, even in intervals, for 45 minutes. Are you just doing interval training?
My guess on the overestimation is that HRMs are designed to work best for steady-state cardio, and that they overestimate due to the highly elevated HR in the intervals. Just an edumacated guess on my part.0 -
45 minutes seems awfully long for HIIT. Usually HIIT sessions are much shorter; 5-20 minutes seems typical. It's hard to go all out, even in intervals, for 45 minutes. Are you just doing interval training?
My guess on the overestimation is that HRMs are designed to work best for steady-state cardio, and that they overestimate due to the highly elevated HR in the intervals. Just an edumacated guess on my part.
I'm doing a fitness blunder 45 min hit video with 10 min warm up and 10 min cool down so yes it would be about 25 mins of the actual HIIT training0 -
HRM are designed based on a specific set of assumptions. That does not include the way your heart rate goes through a gradual reduction during the recovery periods. Therefore, it overstates calories burned.
Consider this: Would the type of movie you’re watching cause you to burn more calories (no other considerations other than the type)? Well, your heart rate will be higher during an action or horror film versus a comedy or drama. Do you think you’re burning more calories just because your heart rate is higher?
0 -
HRMs are for steady state cardio only. It usually says so when you review the product or manual for the HRM.
Here is some info in regards to that. If you want to go by that, then stick with it for 4-8 weeks. If you aren't losing or gaining, then cut the number of that down by around 30-50%.
Another option is to just go with a set number. For example - 300. If your food logging is accurate and you are using a food scale for your food but there is no improvement in either (body/weight) scale number or inches for 6-8 weeks, then start logging it as 200 or 250 and go from there.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/entry/jsconnect?client_id=1367006945&Target=/discussion/10443130 -
hahah yea I've been awake since 2 am painting my house I'm a but loopy haha! ok so I should stop using a HRM since its just marketing?0 -
AllanMisner wrote: »HRM are designed based on a specific set of assumptions. That does not include the way your heart rate goes through a gradual reduction during the recovery periods. Therefore, it overstates calories burned.
Consider this: Would the type of movie you’re watching cause you to burn more calories (no other considerations other than the type)? Well, your heart rate will be higher during an action or horror film versus a comedy or drama. Do you think you’re burning more calories just because your heart rate is higher?
good point... so then there is no way to ever tell how many calories i am burning? it is all just BS?0 -
All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.0
-
AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?0 -
AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.0 -
dieselbyte wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.
its been about 3 weeks since i have started and I'm pretty much just maintaining. TDEE- 20% method would mean 1335 is a deficit but thats not eating back fitness calories0 -
Fitness Blender offers a range of burned calories. Does your number fall somewhere in their range? I'm familiar with their "HIIT" workouts, and I don't think 350 calories in 45 minutes sounds unreasonable. That said, if you haven't really lost yet, maybe only eat some of them back.
(BTW, if you're actually using TDEE-20%, that already includes exercise calories, or at least it should. If you eat them back, you're essentially eating them twice.)0 -
dieselbyte wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.
its been about 3 weeks since i have started and I'm pretty much just maintaining. TDEE- 20% method would mean 1335 is a deficit but thats not eating back fitness calories
How did you get 1335? That's really aggressive and doesn't sound ike just -20% off TDEE unless you didn't choose the correct activity level.
And TDEE is different than the method that MFP uses.
MFP is based off the NEAT Method, which means their calorie goal number they give you is to be netted. This means they expect you to eat back your exercise calories.
TDEE -5-20% includes exercise calories, so you either don't log your exercise or log it as a 1 calorie burn. If you follow this, then you really don't need to know how many calories you are burning.
In either case, picking the correct activity level is important.
Then again, you said you haven't been losing for three weeks. Is it just the scale number or are you still losing inches?0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »dieselbyte wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.
its been about 3 weeks since i have started and I'm pretty much just maintaining. TDEE- 20% method would mean 1335 is a deficit but thats not eating back fitness calories
How did you get 1335? That's really aggressive and doesn't sound ike just -20% off TDEE unless you didn't choose the correct activity level.
And TDEE is different than the method that MFP uses.
MFP is based off the NEAT Method, which means their calorie goal number they give you is to be netted. This means they expect you to eat back your exercise calories.
TDEE -5-20% includes exercise calories, so you either don't log your exercise or log it as a 1 calorie burn. If you follow this, then you really don't need to know how many calories you are burning.
In either case, picking the correct activity level is important.
Then again, you said you haven't been losing for three weeks. Is it just the scale number or are you still losing inches?
i am sedentary and do a couple of hours of working out a week but mostly i am sitting i sat for 9 hours today. so according to the scooby site thats how i got 1335. I just go by whatever the site said. the lowest activity is desk job with little to no exorcize. I don't know what is considered light or medium and so fourth. Besides sleeping I am sitting for about 9 hours of the day. I will work out maybe 3 days a week right now.. i want to up it as I can now take more time for working out.0 -
determined_14 wrote: »Fitness Blender offers a range of burned calories. Does your number fall somewhere in their range? I'm familiar with their "HIIT" workouts, and I don't think 350 calories in 45 minutes sounds unreasonable. That said, if you haven't really lost yet, maybe only eat some of them back.
(BTW, if you're actually using TDEE-20%, that already includes exercise calories, or at least it should. If you eat them back, you're essentially eating them twice.)
yes I am usually closer to the lower number of fitness blenders calories but now i feel like the HRM is useless after what everyone said lol. I have been using the neat method but today i thought about switching to the TDEE-20% so I looked it up. It really is confusing because I don't really know which method to use, how much I should be working out, and the correct number of calories i should eat.0 -
determined_14 wrote: »Fitness Blender offers a range of burned calories. Does your number fall somewhere in their range? I'm familiar with their "HIIT" workouts, and I don't think 350 calories in 45 minutes sounds unreasonable. That said, if you haven't really lost yet, maybe only eat some of them back.
(BTW, if you're actually using TDEE-20%, that already includes exercise calories, or at least it should. If you eat them back, you're essentially eating them twice.)
yes I am usually closer to the lower number of fitness blenders calories but now i feel like the HRM is useless after what everyone said lol. I have been using the neat method but today i thought about switching to the TDEE-20% so I looked it up. It really is confusing because I don't really know which method to use, how much I should be working out, and the correct number of calories i should eat.
I always log the lowest or at least close to the low end of Fitness Blender's estimated calorie burns. I have a lot of confidence in their knowledge and experience, so I trust their numbers. Sticking with the low end feels pretty safe. Then I typically eat back most or all of my calories burned. And I've been losing weight pretty much right on schedule. Good luck!0 -
determined_14 wrote: »determined_14 wrote: »Fitness Blender offers a range of burned calories. Does your number fall somewhere in their range? I'm familiar with their "HIIT" workouts, and I don't think 350 calories in 45 minutes sounds unreasonable. That said, if you haven't really lost yet, maybe only eat some of them back.
(BTW, if you're actually using TDEE-20%, that already includes exercise calories, or at least it should. If you eat them back, you're essentially eating them twice.)
yes I am usually closer to the lower number of fitness blenders calories but now i feel like the HRM is useless after what everyone said lol. I have been using the neat method but today i thought about switching to the TDEE-20% so I looked it up. It really is confusing because I don't really know which method to use, how much I should be working out, and the correct number of calories i should eat.
I always log the lowest or at least close to the low end of Fitness Blender's estimated calorie burns. I have a lot of confidence in their knowledge and experience, so I trust their numbers. Sticking with the low end feels pretty safe. Then I typically eat back most or all of my calories burned. And I've been losing weight pretty much right on schedule. Good luck!
thank u! this was very helpful. i as well trust what they are saying over there they are great trainers!0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »dieselbyte wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.
its been about 3 weeks since i have started and I'm pretty much just maintaining. TDEE- 20% method would mean 1335 is a deficit but thats not eating back fitness calories
How did you get 1335? That's really aggressive and doesn't sound ike just -20% off TDEE unless you didn't choose the correct activity level.
And TDEE is different than the method that MFP uses.
MFP is based off the NEAT Method, which means their calorie goal number they give you is to be netted. This means they expect you to eat back your exercise calories.
TDEE -5-20% includes exercise calories, so you either don't log your exercise or log it as a 1 calorie burn. If you follow this, then you really don't need to know how many calories you are burning.
In either case, picking the correct activity level is important.
Then again, you said you haven't been losing for three weeks. Is it just the scale number or are you still losing inches?
i am sedentary and do a couple of hours of working out a week but mostly i am sitting i sat for 9 hours today. so according to the scooby site thats how i got 1335. I just go by whatever the site said. the lowest activity is desk job with little to no exorcize. I don't know what is considered light or medium and so fourth. Besides sleeping I am sitting for about 9 hours of the day. I will work out maybe 3 days a week right now.. i want to up it as I can now take more time for working out.
If you go by scooby's website, it also gives the option for 1-3 hours light workout a week. That'd be you. Actually, if you are doing HIIT, then you might want to consider the 3-5 hours a week of moderate exercise level.
And since you are using this method, you don't eat back exercise calories so it doesn't matter how much the burn is because exercise cals are included. You shouldn't be recording them or at least logging them at a 1 cal burn. But you need to pick the correct activity level if you use TDEE/Scooby's calculator.0 -
Sounds like you're doing circuit workouts. If I do those, for example with 30 seconds exercise and 10 seconds break I only count the 30 seconds exercise. Thus if I do 6 exercises 6 times I only count 18 minutes of exercise and not 24 minutes. I think that gets closer to the actual calorie expenditure0
-
PikaKnight wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »dieselbyte wrote: »PikaKnight wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »All calorie burns are just estimates (as is the calories we eat). Plug a number you feel is reasonable and if, after a few weeks your not seeing the results you expected, tweak the estimate going forward. Everybody is different, so take time to experiment on yourself and you’ll find your balance soon enough.
I have been relying so much on my HRM to plug in my exorcise calories and now i feel like its been a waste! would there be much difference if i just stopped using and used MFP calories burned numbers?
MFP's numbers can also be exaggerated.
Just pick one and if it's working for now, keep at it. If it stops, then start adjusting your calories burned manually by taking 10%, then 20%, etc off the burn.
thank you! my calories to lose weight are 1335 so i have basically just been working out to eat more haha but now I'm afraid i am over calculating. thanks for the help everyone
What is your average weight loss? If what you are doing is working, and you are losing at a steady pace, then even though the caloric burn might be overestimated, you are still balancing it in the end.
its been about 3 weeks since i have started and I'm pretty much just maintaining. TDEE- 20% method would mean 1335 is a deficit but thats not eating back fitness calories
How did you get 1335? That's really aggressive and doesn't sound ike just -20% off TDEE unless you didn't choose the correct activity level.
And TDEE is different than the method that MFP uses.
MFP is based off the NEAT Method, which means their calorie goal number they give you is to be netted. This means they expect you to eat back your exercise calories.
TDEE -5-20% includes exercise calories, so you either don't log your exercise or log it as a 1 calorie burn. If you follow this, then you really don't need to know how many calories you are burning.
In either case, picking the correct activity level is important.
Then again, you said you haven't been losing for three weeks. Is it just the scale number or are you still losing inches?
i am sedentary and do a couple of hours of working out a week but mostly i am sitting i sat for 9 hours today. so according to the scooby site thats how i got 1335. I just go by whatever the site said. the lowest activity is desk job with little to no exorcize. I don't know what is considered light or medium and so fourth. Besides sleeping I am sitting for about 9 hours of the day. I will work out maybe 3 days a week right now.. i want to up it as I can now take more time for working out.
If you go by scooby's website, it also gives the option for 1-3 hours light workout a week. That'd be you. Actually, if you are doing HIIT, then you might want to consider the 3-5 hours a week of moderate exercise level.
And since you are using this method, you don't eat back exercise calories so it doesn't matter how much the burn is because exercise cals are included. You shouldn't be recording them or at least logging them at a 1 cal burn. But you need to pick the correct activity level if you use TDEE/Scooby's calculator.
thank u! i never know which activity level to pick and this was very helpful because i am sedentary most of the day i always just choose that but since i am working out i do think i need to up it.. and since i dont need to worrry about eating back calories this makes it so easy for me lol!0 -
Sounds like you're doing circuit workouts. If I do those, for example with 30 seconds exercise and 10 seconds break I only count the 30 seconds exercise. Thus if I do 6 exercises 6 times I only count 18 minutes of exercise and not 24 minutes. I think that gets closer to the actual calorie expenditure
thats a good point i was thinking i probably shouldnt be counting the 10 second breaks because i sure do utilize that 10 seconds haha0 -
Also bear in mind that if you're doing true HIIT and going all out that your body is continuing to burn calories at a higher rate for a while after your workout because of post exercise oxygen consumption so I wouldn't worry about the overestimate if that does exist. As long as you don't lay down flat on the floor for the break as it's meant to be "active rest". But as a previous poster said if you aren't eating back your calories it doesn't totally matter.
And don't feel like you wasted your money because a heart rate monitor is one of the most useful tools for intensity training so that you know you're actually getting your heart rate way up. If you're not working it to that extent then it doesn't really work!0 -
Also bear in mind that if you're doing true HIIT and going all out that your body is continuing to burn calories at a higher rate for a while after your workout because of post exercise oxygen consumption so I wouldn't worry about the overestimate if that does exist. As long as you don't lay down flat on the floor for the break as it's meant to be "active rest". But as a previous poster said if you aren't eating back your calories it doesn't totally matter.
And don't feel like you wasted your money because a heart rate monitor is one of the most useful tools for intensity training so that you know you're actually getting your heart rate way up. If you're not working it to that extent then it doesn't really work!
Except HRMs are for steady state cardio only. Not HIIT. ^Points at previous posts about it.0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »Also bear in mind that if you're doing true HIIT and going all out that your body is continuing to burn calories at a higher rate for a while after your workout because of post exercise oxygen consumption so I wouldn't worry about the overestimate if that does exist. As long as you don't lay down flat on the floor for the break as it's meant to be "active rest". But as a previous poster said if you aren't eating back your calories it doesn't totally matter.
And don't feel like you wasted your money because a heart rate monitor is one of the most useful tools for intensity training so that you know you're actually getting your heart rate way up. If you're not working it to that extent then it doesn't really work!
Except HRMs are for steady state cardio only. Not HIIT. ^Points at previous posts about it.
I think the above posters only meant that HRMs aren't accurate for *calorie burn* during HIIT, not that they can't measure heart rate at all. Unless I missed something...0 -
Yeah exactly. How would that work?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions