Shocking discovery

Options
madkcole
madkcole Posts: 110 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I've been reading in some posts how the exercise machines in the gym overestimate your calories burned. Well, today I thought I would see for myself and compared the calories burned tracked by my Polar heart monitor to the calories the bike said I was burning. TWENTY FIVE calorie difference! :o

Sure wish the slot machines in Vegas were "over-calibrated" like this!
«1

Replies

  • catt952
    catt952 Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    lol how much do those calorie counter things cost? Is it worth buying one? I work out in the gym and use the cardio machines alot.
  • madkcole
    madkcole Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    I think paid around $60 or $70 at Academy. But you might find a better deal on the Internet. Mine is a Polar but I don't know how it ranks against others out there. I think it's worth the investment. Mine is a T4 and you can program in your target heart rate range. After you complete your exercise it computes your average heart rate during your workout, the duration, and calories burned. I love mine!
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    Options
    I've seen those machines give double what my Polar shows. I've got a T4 too, I think, and I can't say enough good things about it. Highly recommend.
  • kk_inprogress
    kk_inprogress Posts: 3,077 Member
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    I've been reading in some posts how the exercise machines in the gym overestimate your calories burned. Well, today I thought I would see for myself and compared the calories burned tracked by my Polar heart monitor to the calories the bike said I was burning. TWENTY FIVE calorie difference! :o

    Sure wish the slot machines in Vegas were "over-calibrated" like this!

    My burns are overestimated by HUNDREDS sometimes. It's unreal.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?
  • mwyvr
    mwyvr Posts: 1,883 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    Because they spent money so it must be good? :neutral:

  • Faithful_Chosen
    Faithful_Chosen Posts: 401 Member
    Options
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    If I have to put my faith in something, especially for steady-state, it will always be my well programmed hrm.
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    Options
    Ellipticals are the ones that make me laugh. If I went on the burns they gave me, I could do an hour a day and have pan pizza for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    Read it on the internet, so it must be true.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    TWENTY FIVE calorie difference!

    I don't know if this is intended to be sarcastic or not.
  • SunnyPacheco
    SunnyPacheco Posts: 142 Member
    Options
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    madkcole wrote: »
    TWENTY FIVE calorie difference!

    I don't know if this is intended to be sarcastic or not.

    LOL I wondered the same. That's not that much?
  • G8rRay
    G8rRay Posts: 89 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    You know, it could be that the exercise equipment registered 50 cal burn and the HRM registered 25 cal burn. So... ;-)
  • madkcole
    madkcole Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    I can only assume my HRM is accurate since it's supposed to be tracking actual heart beats. If you know of a way to determine if the HRM is accurate or not I hope you share. Also, I keep reading on other posts not to trust the machines.
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    madkcole wrote: »
    TWENTY FIVE calorie difference!

    I don't know if this is intended to be sarcastic or not.

    Not meant to be sarcastic. :) I thought it was a pretty considerable difference. Still in learning mode when it comes to CICO, HRM, deficits, calories burned etc.

  • giantrobot_powerlifting
    giantrobot_powerlifting Posts: 2,598 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    I can only assume my HRM is accurate since it's supposed to be tracking actual heart beats. If you know of a way to determine if the HRM is accurate or not I hope you share. Also, I keep reading on other posts not to trust the machines.
    I think your assumption would be correct if every individual heartbeat directly translated into (and I am making up a number here) 12 calories per beat, but it does not. At best, it is a guess.

    Also, have you considered that both your HRM and the machine are off? Just because they align closely, does not necessarily mean they are giving you an accurate calorie burn estimation. Both are estimations and both could still be wrong -- or correct -- its really hard to know and that is why the advice on MFP is usually given to only eat half your calories back.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    DavPul wrote: »
    how do you know that your hrm reading was accurate?

    I can only assume my HRM is accurate since it's supposed to be tracking actual heart beats. If you know of a way to determine if the HRM is accurate or not I hope you share. Also, I keep reading on other posts not to trust the machines.

    You're making an assumption that HR correlates to calorie expenditure. An understandable assumption given that the marketing filth at Polar and others do spend a lot of time peddling that particular myth.

    The algorithms are based on research work that was carried out on treadmills and cycle ergometers. That research demonstrated a strong correlation when undertaking steady state work in the aerobic range, with significant levels of error when either above or below the aerobic range, or where the effort is not steady state.
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    madkcole wrote: »
    TWENTY FIVE calorie difference!

    I don't know if this is intended to be sarcastic or not.

    Not meant to be sarcastic. :) I thought it was a pretty considerable difference. Still in learning mode when it comes to CICO, HRM, deficits, calories burned etc.

    It does depend on the total calorie expenditure that you're talking about, if you burned 100 cals then yes a 25% difference would be significant. Note the use of difference rather than error, as you don't know which is closer to reality.

    If, on the other hand, you burned 1000 calories, around a 8-10 mile run for me, then that 25cals is lost in the noise.

    I can run the same GPX data through Garmin, Strava, Endomondo and Runkeeper and they'll all give me different answers. For a 1000 cal session that spread could easily be 300 cals.

    In practice 25 cals is about a quarter of a banana...
  • madkcole
    madkcole Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    Thanks everyone but honestly I'm more confused than ever. All I wanted to do was find a way to track calories burned and calories consumed and based on what I've learned so far nothing is really accurate. LOL. Thought MFP would help with that but now I'm not so sure. I want to be accurate which is why I signed up with MFP and bought a heart monitor but it seems like there is no true way to know what's right! #feelingfrustrated
  • ValerieMartini2Olives
    ValerieMartini2Olives Posts: 3,024 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't exactly call that "shocking"
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    They are all best estimates. You could go to several online calculators and check your estimated burns that way to get a ballpark number for free.

    https://www.supertracker.usda.gov/physicalactivitytracker.aspx

    http://calorielab.com/burned/

    http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/calories.htm

  • giantrobot_powerlifting
    giantrobot_powerlifting Posts: 2,598 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    Thanks everyone but honestly I'm more confused than ever. All I wanted to do was find a way to track calories burned and calories consumed and based on what I've learned so far nothing is really accurate. LOL. Thought MFP would help with that but now I'm not so sure. I want to be accurate which is why I signed up with MFP and bought a heart monitor but it seems like there is no true way to know what's right! #feelingfrustrated

    Estimate your TDEE (which includes all exercise) and subtract -250 to -500 calories under your estimated TDEE if cutting, add +250 to +500 calories over your estimated TDEE if bulking and adjust by +/-10% if you are not seeing the results you are looking for. Keep the HRM as a fun interesting gadget, or Craigslist.

    Time. Patience. Trust the process.

    Done.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    madkcole wrote: »
    Thanks everyone but honestly I'm more confused than ever. All I wanted to do was find a way to track calories burned and calories consumed and based on what I've learned so far nothing is really accurate. LOL. Thought MFP would help with that but now I'm not so sure. I want to be accurate which is why I signed up with MFP and bought a heart monitor but it seems like there is no true way to know what's right! #feelingfrustrated

    Pick a method, stick with it. After a month evaluate whether you're losing faster, slower or pretty much on plan. If faster, then you're underestimating, if slower you're overestimating. Adjust as required to keep on plan.

    No method is accurate in all circumstances, as long as it's consistently wrong then you can work with that and mitigate the error over time.

Categories