How accurate is HRM when it comes to calorie burn.

Options
Hi, I am not sure if this topic has been done however I am keen on knowing how accurate HRM are? For some reason I feel as if it overestimates your calorie burn which is annoying but thats me making an assumation. Can anyone clarify how accurate it is.

Thanking you in advance
«1

Replies

  • talysshade
    talysshade Posts: 273 Member
    Options
    If it's one with a chest band it's very accurate.
  • mzenzer
    mzenzer Posts: 503 Member
    Options
    It's very accurate, and as accurate as it's going to get compared to any other method out there. Just make sure your stats are entered into it correctly and that you update your weight as you lose. Also, remember, depending on your resting metobolic rate, you need to subtract a certain amount of calories per hour from what your HRM says. For example, my RMR is about 80 calories, meaning I'd burn that in an hour laying on the couch staring at the ceiling. So if my HRM says I burned 580 calories, I subtract 80 calories leaving 500 as what I burned due to exercise.
  • tmthorn0927
    tmthorn0927 Posts: 155 Member
    Options
    I have one with a chest strap and I think it is low! So who knows. I don't make it my end all. As long as I am active I am good with whatever burn comes with that.
  • twinmama1987
    twinmama1987 Posts: 566 Member
    Options
    I think mine is accurate.. more so than a few others. Mine has a chest strap.. but some seem a bit .... generous, i guess.
  • thumper44
    thumper44 Posts: 1,464 Member
    Options
    Yes chest strap is very accurate. Better than any machine you would use.

    Give us some examples,
  • VParee
    VParee Posts: 26
    Options
    I have the Poloar Ft7 and got to say its pretty accurate. Everytime i have a weightloss i update it to make sure and only wear it when working out
  • ashkaps
    ashkaps Posts: 32
    Options
    I was also wondering this. I have the Polar FT4 with chest strap and sometimes feel that maybe the calorie counter is being over-estimated. But I'm not sure at all. Also, a question do people leave the timer on during weights the whole time or do you stop and start the watch at each set. I leave it running even when I'm resting between each sets. Is this bad? Inaccurate when measuring calories burned in a work out?

    Thanks
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Options
    It's as accurate as it can be from just measuring your heart rate. A fully assessment requires being fully wired up with a respiratory meter and all those other instruments you see people in laboratory wired up with that give a full assessment of metabolic rate.

    One thing that may be giving you a high burn is that it incorporates the calories you'd be burning at rest too, so don't count these twice. If your BMR is 1500 calories in 24 hours, you'd be burning 62.5 calories at rest. If you run for an hour , your HRM might say you've burned 600 calories, but you should record 537.5 as MFP already takes your BMR into account.

    Hope that makes sense!
  • W0zzie
    W0zzie Posts: 262 Member
    Options
    Polar FT7 here - and I consider it quite accurate.

    Just remember to update your stats if you lose - been caught on that once or twice. It can only work with what you give it - bad input = bad output LOL
  • Brownski860
    Brownski860 Posts: 361 Member
    Options
    Does the chest strap go below the boobs or above.. i'm confused. The instructions say chest muscle but shows the bottom of the pectoral muscle on a man! UGH! HELP!
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Options
    Does the chest strap go below the boobs or above.. i'm confused. The instructions say chest muscle but shows the bottom of the pectoral muscle on a man! UGH! HELP!
    Just below the boobs, under the strap of your sports bra.
  • thumper44
    thumper44 Posts: 1,464 Member
    Options
    It's very accurate, and as accurate as it's going to get compared to any other method out there. Just make sure your stats are entered into it correctly and that you update your weight as you lose. Also, remember, depending on your resting metobolic rate, you need to subtract a certain amount of calories per hour from what your HRM says. For example, my RMR is about 80 calories, meaning I'd burn that in an hour laying on the couch staring at the ceiling. So if my HRM says I burned 580 calories, I subtract 80 calories leaving 500 as what I burned due to exercise.

    I totally understand, but I think it a little differently.

    You burned 580 calories in an hour, and RMR is 80 calories, so 580-80 = 500 calorie burn as you stated above.
    But, during that hour you burned almost 10 calories / min on average, not 1.333/min like in RMR

    When most people finish exercising they are not cooled down when they look at their HRM for that 580 total.
    So for the next 10-15 mins while they are cooling down, getting their heart rate down, most people will burn another 80 calories very easily. You can't just shut your body down from burning 10 calories / min.?

    So, is all that extra math needed?
  • purplepollypops
    purplepollypops Posts: 323 Member
    Options
    I've found mine (which was really cheap, only £14.99 from Lloyds Pharmacy) to be very accurate. I was seriously overestimating my calorie burn before I got it and now it makes me work harder to gain an extra 2 or 300 cals.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    It's as accurate as it can be from just measuring your heart rate. A fully assessment requires being fully wired up with a respiratory meter and all those other instruments you see people in laboratory wired up with that give a full assessment of metabolic rate.

    One thing that may be giving you a high burn is that it incorporates the calories you'd be burning at rest too, so don't count these twice. If your BMR is 1500 calories in 24 hours, you'd be burning 62.5 calories at rest. If you run for an hour , your HRM might say you've burned 600 calories, but you should record 537.5 as MFP already takes your BMR into account.

    Hope that makes sense!

    Ditto the resting calroies should be backed out, but I would argue that you should be backing out maintenance calories, not BMR, as if you did not workout you would be doing something else (sitting, walking, etc) and BMR is the amount you burn in a coma. So you should actually back out maintenance (may only make 0.25 to 0.5 cals/minute difference from using BMR, but it will make a difference the longer your workouts are) So if you BMR is 1500 and you are sedentary your maintenance will be around 1800 which is 75/hour (1800/24, 12.5 higher than using BMR only) so if your HRM says 600 in one hour you should really only enter 525 (600-75) into MFP to eat back.

    To get your maintenance calories go to your goals page and look at calories burned from normal activity, that is maintenance calories.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    It's very accurate, and as accurate as it's going to get compared to any other method out there. Just make sure your stats are entered into it correctly and that you update your weight as you lose. Also, remember, depending on your resting metobolic rate, you need to subtract a certain amount of calories per hour from what your HRM says. For example, my RMR is about 80 calories, meaning I'd burn that in an hour laying on the couch staring at the ceiling. So if my HRM says I burned 580 calories, I subtract 80 calories leaving 500 as what I burned due to exercise.

    I totally understand, but I think it a little differently.

    You burned 580 calories in an hour, and RMR is 80 calories, so 580-80 = 500 calorie burn as you stated above.
    But, during that hour you burned almost 10 calories / min on average, not 1.333/min like in RMR

    When most people finish exercising they are not cooled down when they look at their HRM for that 580 total.
    So for the next 10-15 mins while they are cooling down, getting their heart rate down, most people will burn another 80 calories very easily. You can't just shut your body down from burning 10 calories / min.?

    So, is all that extra math needed?

    I see your point but many HRM users keep theirs on until they finish the cool down, once you are no longer moving, even if you HR is elevated you don't burn much more than you would at rest. Your HRM might show that you do, but it is assuming in the calculation that you are still moving and calculates HR as the only variable, which is not accurate, when you are not performing exercise.
  • ashkaps
    ashkaps Posts: 32
    Options
    Also, a question do people leave the timer on during weights the whole time or do you stop and start the watch at each set. I leave it running even when I'm resting between each sets. Is this bad? Inaccurate when measuring calories burned in a work out?

    Thanks

    Anyone?
  • mocha76
    mocha76 Posts: 184 Member
    Options
    interesting discussion. bump!
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Also, a question do people leave the timer on during weights the whole time or do you stop and start the watch at each set. I leave it running even when I'm resting between each sets. Is this bad? Inaccurate when measuring calories burned in a work out?

    Thanks

    Anyone?

    You can leave it on for circuit training, very little rest, may slightly overestimate the burn, but if you stop while you are resting during no circuit strength training you will under estimate, while leaving it on will overestimate. HRM's do an okay job estimating calories burned while strength training, but are way more accurate and the embedded calculation in the HRM is designed to give you calories burned doing aerobic (cardio) activity.
  • georgebrown10
    georgebrown10 Posts: 28 Member
    Options
    All these reponses have been helpful. I am just trying to make sure its not overestimating as that would just annoy me.
  • CeleryStalker
    CeleryStalker Posts: 665 Member
    Options
    They vary, to be honest. I have a HRM chest strap with my Garmin 305, and also one with my Polar F6. The Garmin is always higher...WAY higher, to the tune of 1,000 extra calories. Garmin is known for being high on the caloric expenditure estimation. Polar is the industry standard for accuracy in HRM-based calorie tracking.