calories burned expirement: MFP vs Polar vs Body Bugg

Wait.. so the BB gave you a reading when you were not even wearing it?

loved reading all the info!!

With the BB, you have the option to 'edit off body' for any period of time where you've had the unit off your body for greater than half an hour. So what you do is you take it off for swimming or cycling or what have you, then put it back on. The next time you sync, which is required every so often, I forget how long, but you HAVE to offload the data because the unit only has enough memory to store a week or two worth of data, plus it needs to charge, both are done by removing the unit and plugging into your computer via USB, you will have the option under 'Calories Burned' to 'edit off body'.

The system knows when it's on your body and when it's not, so if you took it off for two hours between 12pm and 2pm, you would see that time period when you edit off body. You select it, then pick the option 'i was not active during this time except for the following' and then you are provided a series of drop down lists to select your activity, duration, and effort.

Because the unit is gathering data from your body all day long while you wear it, it's supposed to be able to fairly accurately guess how many calories you've burned during the time frame which you had it off body.

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me because of this:

Let's say I just rode my bike for 2 hours, at a 16-20mph pace. Well, first off, there is a HUGE difference in the effort it takes to pedal at 16mph vs 20mph. I can comfortably ride at an average pace of ~18mph, but 20mph? Oh hell no. And if I did, I'd burn a lot more calories trying to keep that pace.

Also, how does the system know how hard I worked to go that pace? It may have been a hilly route, it may have been flat. It's much harder to ride a hilly route than a flat route, of course. What about wind? Yesterday there was a 10mph head wind in our face the entire time. The system cant possibly know this or account for it.

The most accurate measurement of calories burned and the coinciding effort given during the ride is going to be via a power meter. Those things can actually measure the amount of force you are applying to the cranks on your bike, and they also log your heart rate, etc. So if I'm pedaling uphill, and exerting more force on the pedals to get myself up that hill, or into a headwind, the power meter is going to know. Heh, I wish I could trade in my garmin, polar, and BB for a Power Tap. Those suckers cost like $1200 or something. I'm just not sure I'm ready to blow that kind of money on something that is only going to record data for when I'm on the bike. If I was more interested in training harder and increasing my performance on the bike, it'd be a no-brainer, but as much as I love cycling, I'm in it for the fun, not for competition. I think if I took it to that level, it'd be less fun. I can kick *kitten* on my cycling team without having to train for it, and that's all the fun I need, LOL!!

Keep the info coming!

I can't wait to try my new Polar C200 Cad and find out how it compares to my CatEye HRM and MFP

Stu, you can count on it. I can't wait to see your results either. I checked into the Polar C200 briefly....that thing is just a HRM and cadence sensor, right? Let me know how the cadence sensor holds up. I have one for my Garmin, and I guess because of the design, I always end up breaking mine. LOL

I read somewhere (I have a KiFit - UK BodyMedia Fit), that if you wear a HRM at the same time - the results from each will be affected.

That doesnt make sense because the BB doesnt record heart rate, and the HRM doesnt record skin temp/etc. The folks at BB told me to wear my HRM along with my BB so I can get an idea of what is 'normal' so when I edit off body, I can compare and feel comfortable with the results BB is providing me.

OK even though it was pissing rain out, I went and did my laps around the Emperor's Palace

My new Polar C200 Cad bicycle computer/HRM worked well.

ride to the palace
HRM: 110 cal
MFP: 139 cal

1st lap
HRM: 160 cal
MFP: 231 cal

Next three laps
HRM: 512 cal
MFP: 753 cal

ride home
HRM: 160 cal <<-- take note the HRM scored me higher here...?
MFP: 124 cal

Polar C200 Cad HRM for the total workout 942 Calories
My Fitness Pal website calorie calculator 1247 calories

That is right around 25% high, OK, now I know I can live with that :bigsmile:

On another note, I was surprised at how often I went above the recommended limits for training, and my total upper limit is supposed to be 173 bpm and I hit 181 max on one hill :noway:

Maybe I have to take it back a step or two...?

I'm guessing you either had a tail wind on the way back, or had more downhill, or maybe had a head wind or uphill on the way out. Does your Polar record elevation and stuff like my Garmin does? It'd be interesting to see.

First of all thanks for starting this conversation, it has been very interesting.

Second, I LOVE my Bodybugg! I wear it like it is part of my wardrobe and I would have to agree that the more you wear it the more accurate it is. My first month of this journey was done without the Bugg and I did not lose a single pound because come to find out I was accidentally starving myself. I have been using mine for 17wks now and I have done nothing but lose weight especially in wks that I am very strict with my diet.

Well, you're welcome and congrats! I'm addicted to my BB. I, like you, wear it like its part of my wardrobe. LOL I was at the pet store the other day and the lady behind the register was like, 'what is that on your arm??' I like seeing how well I've slept the night before. Usually, it confirms what I already knew...I slept like crap! LMAO!

The one thing I really love about it is that it shows me how many calories I'm burning throughout the day. I mean, I did pretty much nothing but mill around the house tidying up yesterday, in addition to sitting on my butt in front of a computer working, and I burned close to 2800 calories.

Using a BMR calculator to find my estimated BMR (1,716) and multiplying it by 1.2 to find my 'active metabolic rate' to reflect 'sedentary' gives me 2059 calories and multiplying it by 1.3 to relfect 'lightly active' gives me 2359, both which underestimate the amount of calories I'm really burning.

Hmm, I guess my metabolism is cranking a little hotter than most online calculators give it credit for, eh? LOL