Anyone know how I could possibly rack up 10,437 steps one day and get a 258 calorie adjustment, when the day before I got 10,456 steps in and they gave me a 1,357 calorie adjustment??? It wasn't like I ran the steps one day and sauntered the other... one day I racked up all those steps just doing property checks and working (the day with the higher allotment), so they were spread out through out the day, the next day I actually walked half of them doing a walk around a local city park, and the rest were incidental as I walked around my day (the day with the WAY lower allotment.
Replies
What's the distance compare between them?
Also - if the serious stepping times kicked in the HRM-based calorie burn - that would be inflated.
Distance-based much more accurate.
Which device account is syncing this to MFP - you failed to mention?
Again - that's what actually matters.
You'll have to look on Fitbit for that info though.
It may be the stride length is incorrect too.
Ever walked a known distance at 2 mph (mid daily pace - not grocery store shuffle, not exercise pace - but in the middle) and confirmed the Fitbit saw the right distance?
If it's off - then it's ability to dynamically adjust to faster or slower paces will be impaired - which matters for lots of steps.
But it's only decent best for steady-state aerobic, same HR for 2-4 min blocks.
So the heat elevating HR isn't a valid estimate for non-aerobic activity like yoga.
Even a walk in hot temps would be better estimated by distance and time and manually entered, not by HR which could be elevated by the heat, but also barely in the aerobic range where inflated burn is normal.
Nice that Fitbit allows downloading that. Thanks a lot MFP!
All exercises for purpose of calorie count fall under general database - even strength training.
Aerobic in the sense I used it is merely a type of exercise - anaerobic, aerobic, below aerobic.
It's not a comment on how useful it is, but rather the effect on the body's aerobic system, and if in a range that causes improvements beyond merely using it.
Walking at casual pace usually does not enter that range for instance, at least after someone has done it a few times. Usually talking HR generally above 110 for extended time.
Now, walk hills or really fast pace, and you can keep it up there.
Hot yoga obtains a HR higher than the effort would require if not in a hot room - therefore the HR is not elevated because of the level of effort - but because of need to cool by pumping blood faster.
The aerobic level doesn't have to do with slow constant movement or high HR, but rather what it requires of the aerobic system in general.
Like if the breathing rate doesn't go up to match the elevated HR - the effort is not in what I was calling Aerobic level, as opposed to daily or anaerobic level.
Confusing too is that the whole exercise range is divided into multiple zones one of which is Aerobic - that's not what I was referring to either.