Does fitbit really work?
Options
Replies
-
I had Carge HR and unfortunately it overestimated my calories by a lot - around 300 per day. So after several months I stopped using it.0
-
@jillchavarria22 I use fitbit versa.
@sparks9777 In some ways it doesn't matter but in some ways it does matter because if it says i burned 5000 extra calories and i only burned 1000 then i may gain weight and im trying to lose weight.
(im not burning that much just an example lol)
Overall I'm happy to read its most feel its fairly accurate. Just gonna watch for a week or two and see how i respond to eating back 50% ish of extra calories burned. (if im hungry)
All in all its a fun & useful early b day gift and it definitely makes me want to get my steps in each day
Ty all for your advice and support
1 -
I have the Charge 2. I've had a fitbit for almost 2 years now and I absolutely love it. I personally prefer MFP to track my food. I've used my fitbit, but I don't like it. I love the fact that fitbit tracks my sleep, heart rate, and even my monthly cycle. I also like the vibrating alarm...no more loud music or beeping from my alarm clock! That thing is GONE! The biggest thing with fitbit that I really like is the community aspect. Get friends and join step challenges. I did NOT join the community right away, but once I did I got triggered. I got triggered to MOVE. I've met great people on there that I've done challenges week after week. I wanted to WIN, and so I moved. Now, I'm not so triggered with steps, but I've consistently exercised everyday Monday-Friday since I started doing fitbit step challenges. I lost a little weight, but most importantly I gained muscle. I do weights sometimes...but I started running consistently. I know I use that word "consistently" a lot here, but CONSISTENCY is what makes you stronger and leaner. I know there is a community here on MFP, but it wasn't until the fitbit community that I really started to MOVE MY BODY. I LOVE MY FITBIT and I highly recommend it!!5
-
Charge HR 2 here and it underestimates my calories.3
-
I have an HR Charge and I enjoy it- because it motivates me to get my walk in.0
-
i did a little test today walked on treadmill for 30 mins... Treadmill said 150 cals, Fitbit was in the high 200's almost double.... Interesting lol.. Wonder which is right. (i entered in treadmill under exercise in fitbit while i did it)0
-
-
I had Carge HR and unfortunately it overestimated my calories by a lot - around 300 per day. So after several months I stopped using it.
Keep in mind that Fitbit will only be as accurate as your tracking. A lot of people eat more than than they think.
If I believed my Charge 2, I would be at least 20 lbs heavier than I am now, lol (and I've been lazy in my logging too).3 -
If for any reason you'd prefer ordinary pedometers, you can still find decent ones for about $15-20
I used to use the Nike and the fitbit, too many reasons I went back to old school. Regardless of
the method, seeing the numbers you create in the little window is motivating all on it's own! 0 -
Yes. I entered my info in treadmill. I also weigh and measure food when ever possible. So I think my calories going in are fairly accurate most days. Just gonna be careful not to eat back all my calories fitbit says I am burning. Maybe half lol. Burning that many calories just seems to good to be true lol.0
-
Best to use fitbit as a tool to gauge TDEE vs. kcals burned (i.e. 30 min treadmill) because fitbit captures BMR + activity as the day progresses (very useful for determining NEAT). Pretty hard to calculate & record things like time spent pacing, standing up vs. sitting vs. laying down on a day to day basis without fitbit or similar device.
Still need to calculate kcals consumed though vs. fitbit TDEE & assess progress (weight, tape measurements, etc.) to determine accuracy2 -
Mine seems quite accurate, (Charge 2 HR) it may understate slightly (I do quite a bit of higher impact stuff). My HRM (myzone belt) gives me a higher burn figure, but anything finds it harder to estimate at higher end of HR, so I hope by the lower.
I also like it because when I started on this journey it gave me a base line and a measure I could use to improve movement. It was motivating, and still is0 -
i did a little test today walked on treadmill for 30 mins... Treadmill said 150 cals, Fitbit was in the high 200's almost double.... Interesting lol.. Wonder which is right. (i entered in treadmill under exercise in fitbit while i did it)
FitBit is rarely going to “match” any number for exercise since FitBit is a total activity tracker and is measuring your BMR and NEAT in addition to the exercise burn.
Additionally when you look at the exercise adjustments in MFP from FitBit, a lot of people are confused and skeptical if they don’t understand what those adjustments represent: The diferemce between what MFP thinks you’d burn in a Day based on the stats you entered and activity level you chose... and the burn that FitBit estimates based on your total activity. It won’t match directly to an exercise output and if you’ve chosen Sedentary, but typically get 8k or more steps - your adjustments will be higher because you really aren’t Sedentary.7 -
Yes. I entered my info in treadmill. I also weigh and measure food when ever possible. So I think my calories going in are fairly accurate most days. Just gonna be careful not to eat back all my calories fitbit says I am burning. Maybe half lol. Burning that many calories just seems to good to be true lol.
One difference is Fitbit Versa will be continuously monitoring your HR. Once your HR gets high enough they start to use that in determining calories burned. A portion of the exercise burn is also your BMR and the treadmill likely reported NET calories not gross.
So for example:
175 calories during my 25 min workout this morning.
Of that about 23.3 was my BMR (based on estimated 14 calories burned every 15 mins for BMR).
So my NET was 151.7 for the workout.2 -
Oo that makes alot of sense. I understand Thanks 0
-
I have a fitbit charge 2 and it's my companion for fitness every day. I love it. However, I view the calories burned differently than some people.
I really don't care if calories burned is accurate or not. Everyone is different and I don't think it's possible to have perfect accuracy. What matters is using calories burned as a reference point. So, I know if I consume 1800 cals or less from food and burn 3000+ cals according to fitbit, that calorie deficit leads to being right on track for my goals. I've tested it, so I'm going based on results. I know exactly how much weight I'll loose and inches I'll loose based on that reference point. I think its the best way to use calorie calculators like fitbit. Test it out, measure your results, and use it as a reference. Then it's highly accurate. Forget about the online calculators that take your age, height, etc...4 -
tbright1965 wrote: »
No, that was just the estimate for the ride. This is why I don't trust the estimates.
I tracked the entire ride on my Fitbit, pausing it during my brunch stop 35 miles into the ride. Fitbit estimated 4806 calories over 52.6 miles.
MapMyRide, also using GPS like my Fitbit Surge, I broke the ride into two rides. One, on the way to the brunch and a return ride.
Ride up, MMR claimed 3113 calories over the 34.9 miles up. It then claimed 1719 calories over the 18.4 on the way back. So again in the 4800 calorie range. Distance was closer to what the odometer on my bike indicated at 53.3. My bike odometer had 53.4 miles indicated.
After having slept, not sure where I got the 5200 calorie number from, so maybe I saw another number, or was just confused after (apparently) being in such a large calorie deficit (sarcasm.)
I don't allow myself to eat more than 1/2 of any recorded exercise calories.
I'm sure I burned a ton of calories. But I didn't burn nearly 5000 in 3.6 hours on my bicycle.
So I'd take calorie estimates with a healthy grain of salt.
My actual consumption yesterday was on the order of 2200 calories. I'm 5'11" and 215 pounds, FWIW.
Seriously, 2 woos?
So those who are giving woos, do you really trust that I'm burning over 1000 calories/hour, BMR + exercise?
I don't.
I'd LOVE for it to be true so I could plow through a box of thin mints. (Well, there is still T2D to worry about.) But it's not true, so I don't trust the numbers.
Woo away, sheesh!
3 -
tbright1965 wrote: »tbright1965 wrote: »
No, that was just the estimate for the ride. This is why I don't trust the estimates.
I tracked the entire ride on my Fitbit, pausing it during my brunch stop 35 miles into the ride. Fitbit estimated 4806 calories over 52.6 miles.
MapMyRide, also using GPS like my Fitbit Surge, I broke the ride into two rides. One, on the way to the brunch and a return ride.
Ride up, MMR claimed 3113 calories over the 34.9 miles up. It then claimed 1719 calories over the 18.4 on the way back. So again in the 4800 calorie range. Distance was closer to what the odometer on my bike indicated at 53.3. My bike odometer had 53.4 miles indicated.
After having slept, not sure where I got the 5200 calorie number from, so maybe I saw another number, or was just confused after (apparently) being in such a large calorie deficit (sarcasm.)
I don't allow myself to eat more than 1/2 of any recorded exercise calories.
I'm sure I burned a ton of calories. But I didn't burn nearly 5000 in 3.6 hours on my bicycle.
So I'd take calorie estimates with a healthy grain of salt.
My actual consumption yesterday was on the order of 2200 calories. I'm 5'11" and 215 pounds, FWIW.
Seriously, 2 woos?
So those who are giving woos, do you really trust that I'm burning over 1000 calories/hour, BMR + exercise?
I don't.
I'd LOVE for it to be true so I could plow through a box of thin mints. (Well, there is still T2D to worry about.) But it's not true, so I don't trust the numbers.
Woo away, sheesh!
Whether you can trust your numbers to "eat" them or not depends on the interaction of:
--the quality of your food intake log
--the quality of your caloric expenditure log
--the quality of your weight change measurement
--how close to "average" you happen to be
All but the last are somewhat under one's control. You start by semi-trusting your numbers and you adjust based on results.
Cycling is a very well researched activity. A 15mph bike ride is a MET 10 activity. The higher the speed the more the MET value increases. Inclines and wind also have an effect. Some apps try to adjust for inclines and your bike's weight. (f.e. 16-19mph without drafting is about 12 MET)
A direct power meter would give you a better approximation. Strava will probably give you the most accurate estimation possible, short of being wired directly.
This means that a 100kg person engaged in that activity for 1 hour will burn approximately 1000 Calories (10 x 100 x 1)
Alternatively an 80kg person engaged in a MET 10 activity for 0.5 hours would burn ~400 Cal (10 x 80 x 0.5).
Whether YOU can eat those calories depends on the factors I outlined initially. However, this does not negate the fact that an average person engaged in that activity would, on average, burn this amount of calories.1 -
Bobthedog3232 wrote: »It’s fantastic when they work they can’t be faulted but they aren’t durable have had two and both have died just randomly lasted no more then a year charge 2 that is
This is why I switched to a Garmin Vivofit (I have the Vivofit 2). My first Fitbit stopped holding a charge after about 14 months. Vivofits use watch batteries so you never have to charge it. I just changed the batteries a couple of weeks ago after 3 years on the old ones.
No matter what brand of tracker you use, the more you use it and the more accurate your food logging is, the closer to real numbers it will become. After about 3 months of meticulous logging, my calories burned were within 100 calories of those I calculated using real time data.2 -
Let's keep it confined to one number, which is what I was talking about, the expenditure.
(Edited to add, I do realize I also posted my food consumption of about 2200 calories Sunday, so perhaps that causes some confusion. Just wasn't hungry on Sunday. It was Monday where my body wanted to eat all the foods.)
My logging is pretty good, but not really relevant to the idea that the Fitbit gets an accurate calorie number.
All the Fitbit knows is the GPS data it picks up, the HR data it picks up and how much I weigh, my age and gender. So it came up with ~4800 calories in 3.6 hours of work averaging just under 15MPH.
It doesn't know anything about wind. I do believe it has terrain data from comparing the GPS data to geodata out there.
So if I rounded up my speed and my weight to be 100kg (I'm a few kg below) I'd only get to 10x100x3.6 or 3600 calories, or about 3/4rs of the value presented.
I believe my sedentary burn is around the 100 calories/hour, so even adding on another 350 for BMR, I'm still below 4k, but certainly closer.
I do agree, to get a better reading, a power meter is needed.
What I've found works for me is to only eat back 1/2 of what MMR and Fitbit suggest are my burns. That has kept me on a 1-2 pound per week weight loss.
I do weigh calorie dense foods on my food scale. So if I have a omelette, I weigh the cheese,but not the veggies I put in it.
So far, for the past 7.5 months, that approach has allowed me to drop 50#
I simply caution people to be a little skeptical of the calorie burns offered up by such tools.
It would be unwise for me to take the 4800 calorie figure as permission to eat 4800 calories of cookies just because I rode my bike.Whether you can trust your numbers to "eat" them or not depends on the interaction of:
--the quality of your food intake log
--the quality of your caloric expenditure log
--the quality of your weight change measurement
--how close to "average" you happen to be
All but the last are somewhat under one's control. You start by semi-trusting your numbers and you adjust based on results.
Cycling is a very well researched activity. A 15mph bike ride is a MET 10 activity. The higher the speed the more the MET value increases. Inclines and wind also have an effect. Some apps try to adjust for inclines and your bike's weight. (f.e. 16-19mph without drafting is about 12 MET)
A direct power meter would give you a better approximation. Strava will probably give you the most accurate estimation possible, short of being wired directly.
This means that a 100kg person engaged in that activity for 1 hour will burn approximately 1000 Calories (10 x 100 x 1)
Alternatively an 80kg person engaged in a MET 10 activity for 0.5 hours would burn ~400 Cal (10 x 80 x 0.5).
Whether YOU can eat those calories depends on the factors I outlined initially. However, this does not negate the fact that an average person engaged in that activity would, on average, burn this amount of calories.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions