If exercise calculators aren't accurate and HRMs aren't accurate, then what the heck is?!?

Options
13»

Replies

  • niblue
    niblue Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    My Garmin watch with chest strap seems accurate enough to me. It's certainly accurate enough to help with pace management, and I'm sure the calorie used estimates are accurate enough to be of some assistance with weight-loss management.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    emmylootwo wrote: »
    Thanks all. I guess I am little too anal retentive over the numbers. I weigh and I log all my food down to the gram, and it feels almost like an exact science, although I realize it's not. And then I try to log my exercise, and one calculator says I burn 300 calories, another says I burn 150. If the inaccuracies of not weighing your food can eat up your week's deficit, just imagine what would happen if you also had an inaccurate exercise calorie estimate! I understand that everything is an estimate, but it would be nice to know that at least one of those estimates is close to the truth... I don't know which one to believe. I have used an HRM in the past and relied on it's estimates, although I never ate any of the exercise calories back as I should have. It's frustrating to now find out that the HRM wasn't as accurate as I thought it was. Here I was imagining that the HRM could tell how many calories your body was burning based on how fast your heart was beating! Ooops.

    Thanks for the advice everyone.

    It'd be nice if it worked that way all of the time, even for SS cardio, but no. Too many factors mess with your heart rate that have nothing to do with the actual energy you're expending for super reliable accuracy, though for most SS cardio an HRM works well enough. It's not as though you really need to-the-calorie accuracy.

    Since I don't think anyone answered your question on SS cardio, that'd be any cardio where your intensity doesn't change rapidly. So, intervals would be a problem, though the longer the interval the less of a problem they are. If you do decide to use an HRM, make sure it's properly calibrated for your max HR, etc.
  • Triplestep
    Triplestep Posts: 239 Member
    Options
    Machka9 wrote: »
    • And I don't count walking around the office, walking around at home, standing in meetings, doing housework, walking around grocery stores, walking through parking lots on the way to the grocery store, taking the two flights of stairs to the library, taking the three flights of the stairs to the women's clothing section of one of the local stores, pacing at the bus stop, etc. etc. etc. ... I figure all those little bits and pieces are bonus calories burned to compensate for any miscalculations I might have made along the way.

    ^^ This is why I don't use a tracker - I don't want to log all the little things I am trying to make habitual, and I know myself - I would be checking that tracker all day long.

    Instead I turn my HRM on when I leave the gym locker room, and turn it off when I walk back in. Then I log those calories and move on. I also give myself 150 calories for the hour I spend with my trainer at a training studio, but I'm not wearing my HRM then and I'm sure sometimes it's more, and sometimes it's less. When I do these things, weigh and log food, and eat at a deficit, I lose.

  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,345 Member
    Options
    You'll know by your own accumulation of data over a period of time what's accurate for you...that is if you chart your weight loss/track cals etc

    Although the online calculators are usually never far away iml. I also find FitBit is actually very accurate for me. It's about trial and error in general though.
  • eeejer
    eeejer Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    It is all a crapshoot. Try, measure, adjust. That is the only method that works.
  • akf2000
    akf2000 Posts: 278 Member
    Options
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    What is accurate? Honestly time and data points. MFP is a tool and really a blunt one at that. I'm finding it useful as a food diary and calorie calculator, but only if time is taken to ensure the products entered are correct.

    I started changing up my diet on May 13 and logging here on the 24th. Following the MFP calorie suggestion of 1590 daily and logging exercise calories but only maybe eating back 10%-20% at most. After losing 21lbs since May 13 and 15 in the last 16 days, I'm pretty sure my calories in is too low, even though I'm not finding myself hungry. I don't however really trust the MFP exercise calories numbers.

    I'm going to try changing my setting from sedentary, as I have a desk job, to lightly active as I'm powerlifting 3x a week and doing a pretty good 30min uphill walk daily but pretend exercise calories don't exist as theoretically they are already accounted for. Just eat to the next "activity" level suggested at 1850 cals and see what happens over the next couple weeks.

    Really only way I can see to get accurate data is use MFP or some other food diary as the raw "input" of calories in and track scale/measurement changes over time to see if that calories in number needs tweaking based on activity levels.

    I'm in almost exactly the same position. I started May 10th, same calorie suggestion as you, same eat-back, and same loss. AND I'm also not hungry.

    You are really not sedentary. I was reading in another thread where someone found it strange that a user who walked 6,000 steps a day classed themselves as 'sedentary', which really got me thinking. Yes, I do a desk job but I walk 2 hours a day. It's time to lose the sedentary and up the calories.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    I should point out that a lot of people who research and purchase tracking devices end up liking the feedback they get from them, whether it's performance monitoring or calorie burn. A lot of those who think, hello? This is just heart rate not calories tend not to buy one, which is completely okay and makes sense! If you think you might find one useful, you should get it. Be familiar with any return policies and get to using it ASAP though lol
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited June 2016
    Options
    I read this before I bought my chest strap for my Garmin device.. I did some research and this is older blog sums it up pretty well.

    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

    And a little more on HRM's and using it for strength training for those interested.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/hrms-cannot-count-calories-during-strength-training-17698
  • Anaris2014
    Anaris2014 Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    akf2000 wrote: »
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    What is accurate? Honestly time and data points. MFP is a tool and really a blunt one at that. I'm finding it useful as a food diary and calorie calculator, but only if time is taken to ensure the products entered are correct.

    I started changing up my diet on May 13 and logging here on the 24th. Following the MFP calorie suggestion of 1590 daily and logging exercise calories but only maybe eating back 10%-20% at most. After losing 21lbs since May 13 and 15 in the last 16 days, I'm pretty sure my calories in is too low, even though I'm not finding myself hungry. I don't however really trust the MFP exercise calories numbers.

    I'm going to try changing my setting from sedentary, as I have a desk job, to lightly active as I'm powerlifting 3x a week and doing a pretty good 30min uphill walk daily but pretend exercise calories don't exist as theoretically they are already accounted for. Just eat to the next "activity" level suggested at 1850 cals and see what happens over the next couple weeks.

    Really only way I can see to get accurate data is use MFP or some other food diary as the raw "input" of calories in and track scale/measurement changes over time to see if that calories in number needs tweaking based on activity levels.

    I'm in almost exactly the same position. I started May 10th, same calorie suggestion as you, same eat-back, and same loss. AND I'm also not hungry.

    You are really not sedentary. I was reading in another thread where someone found it strange that a user who walked 6,000 steps a day classed themselves as 'sedentary', which really got me thinking. Yes, I do a desk job but I walk 2 hours a day. It's time to lose the sedentary and up the calories.

    That's a good point I do 14k steps a day but consider myself sedentary because I sit at a desk all day. That said, I still don't lose weight (probably because I binge eat).

Categories