HRM says I burn HEAPS - is this bad?

Bettsy_A
Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
edited November 10 in Fitness and Exercise
I only just got a Heart Rate Monitor and have been doing my usual exercises. I'm finding my HRM is saying I'm burning WAY more calories than those in the MFP database.

I'm not really in the know about Heart Rate/Calories/Weight but was just wondering, is this normal? I'm finding I'm burning sometimes 200 more calories than those in the database.

Or am I just unnecessarily worrying and this is a really good thing? :P
«1

Replies

  • japruzze
    japruzze Posts: 453 Member
    Can't help. I find the whole thing confusing. Since I started using my HRM I'm finding I burn fewer calories than what I've found in the MFP database or what the cardio machines tell me. I don't get it so I just accept it and have committed myself to always using the HRM to determine calories burned via exercise. Right or wrong, I don't know, but it's consistent.
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    I guess it's one of those "everyone is unique" kind of scenarios? I'll just trust the HRM. The salesman said that there is nothing more accurate than heart readings, so I'll follow my heart :)
  • zasiiniya
    zasiiniya Posts: 100 Member
    Do you know how much your body naturally burns per hour? Don't you need to subtract that from your hourly total or else you're counting calories already figured into your MFP goal?
  • Di3012
    Di3012 Posts: 2,247 Member
    Can't help. I find the whole thing confusing. Since I started using my HRM I'm finding I burn fewer calories than what I've found in the MFP database or what the cardio machines tell me. I don't get it so I just accept it and have committed myself to always using the HRM to determine calories burned via exercise. Right or wrong, I don't know, but it's consistent.

    Same here. I consider the HRM accurate though because it has my age, sex, height and weight input into it, whereas my treadmill didn't have all my personal info input, it just displayed an average burn (which I have recently found out, is set by the manufacturers for a 185lb male).
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    Hmmm i'm not sure. I'll look into how I can figure out my hourly normal burn. Ah I knew I failed maths class for a reason haha!
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    Ahh that's interesting to know! My HRM has my details in it as well, so I guess it's going to be the most accurate information I can get!
    Maybe I'll just be happy and go "yippee, I'm burning more than I thought!"
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,966 Member
    MFP is UNDER estimating your calories burned?? Oh no... I always thought it kind of over estimated so I always manually lower the number in my exercise diary lol... I really need to get a heart rate monitor. But they're so expensive :(
  • tataliciousd89
    tataliciousd89 Posts: 465
    My HRM says I burn more but only by a little. It says I burn 250 walking to school where MFP says I burn about 200. Some is probably what I burn just staying alive and all that good stuff, but I wear a 30 lb backpack and I think that has something to do with it too. I just use the lower number to be safe.
  • AngelikaLumiere
    AngelikaLumiere Posts: 862 Member
    I was amazed when I first got mine that I burned so much more than MFP said I was. But since then I have learned that I have a large frame and I found out if you are under eating you will burn more (not necessarily a good thing) My HRM subtracts the resting rate calories, check and make sure whether yours does or not. If not, wear your HRM while laying down for 15 minutes and see what your resting rate is (multiply calories burned by 4 for the hourly rate) then subtract this amount when you exercise. MFP already calculates your resting rate for the whole day in figuring out what you should be eating. The HRM is the most accurate measure for an individual, glad you got one.
  • vjrose
    vjrose Posts: 809 Member
    HRM's fall in the 30 to 50 range unless you want a Polar with a bunch of bells and whistles, and chest belt monitors are the most accurate and give you a continuous feed so you can check where you are at HR wise during your workout without stopping to check it.
  • skir927
    skir927 Posts: 61 Member
    My HRM says I burn a lot more than the MFP database too! I usually eat some, if not all of my exercise calories back, and when I was eating back what my HRM said I burned, I maintained and even gained a pound. But MFP's estimate seems really low, and only eating back those calories left me still hungry. So now I average the two numbers and it works out - I still lose and I'm not ravenous. You might just want to play around with it and see what works for you.
  • SandyandJesus
    SandyandJesus Posts: 11
    Ladies, lets just loose the weight. I use a lot of energy when I walk because I need oxygen on occasions. My heart pumps a lot and if it tells me I am burning calories that will be great, otherwise I just do the best I can. God Bless and hope we all reach our goals.:smile:
  • Dauntlessness
    Dauntlessness Posts: 1,489 Member
    I have found my HRM is so much more accurate then MFP. Like another person said on here, MFP was overestimating my calories burned...by a lot. It goes the same way for cardio machines. The elliptical said I burned 1k and I only burned 550-600. The treadmill was even worse, I think it was 400-500 calories per 1k.

    This is what it comes down to:
    Effort = Heart rate raised. Its simple. MFP and machines don't have a way a way of measuring that.
  • Chloe_Chaos_
    Chloe_Chaos_ Posts: 150 Member
    I have never used MFP exercise estimates but from what I've read they are all a little over generous. However, your HRM is custom to you with your height weight and age and target heart rates. The machines at the gym are always over what my HRM says I'm at, I think this might have something to do with them not taking into account the height of the user (I'm not sure). Your HRM is the only thing that takes all of your personal factors and constant heart rate into account. I would just be happy your burning so many calories lol
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    They are! the best one I could find was $130 :/ But I thought it contributes in the long run so thought it a great investment. I looked on ebay but I'm a bit wary of those sellers :P
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,330 Member
    It depends on the HRM. For women the Timex HRM will or estimate because it does not let you enter your sex and is by default male. Those without chest straps are useless for calorie calculation even if they give you a number it is no better than guessing. HRMs with a chest strap that allow you to enter sex, height, age are better, but to be really accurate you also need to be able to enter your VO2 Max. Here is a helpful post on how to make your HRM more accurate http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/429688-new-hrm-how-to-make-the-calorie-estimate-more-accurate
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    I was amazed when I first got mine that I burned so much more than MFP said I was. But since then I have learned that I have a large frame and I found out if you are under eating you will burn more (not necessarily a good thing) My HRM subtracts the resting rate calories, check and make sure whether yours does or not. If not, wear your HRM while laying down for 15 minutes and see what your resting rate is (multiply calories burned by 4 for the hourly rate) then subtract this amount when you exercise. MFP already calculates your resting rate for the whole day in figuring out what you should be eating. The HRM is the most accurate measure for an individual, glad you got one.

    I'll try that resting one! So far I've only put it all on for my exercises, but resting rate would be good to know as well
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    It depends on the HRM. For women the Timex HRM will or estimate because it does not let you enter your sex and is by default male. Those without chest straps are useless for calorie calculation even if they give you a number it is no better than guessing. HRMs with a chest strap that allow you to enter sex, height, age are better, but to be really accurate you also need to be able to enter your VO2 Max. Here is a helpful post on how to make your HRM more accurate http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/429688-new-hrm-how-to-make-the-calorie-estimate-more-accurate

    thank you so much for that! Exactly what I needed! :D I have the chest strap HRM, the salesman said they are better and more accurate.
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    I have never used MFP exercise estimates but from what I've read they are all a little over generous. However, your HRM is custom to you with your height weight and age and target heart rates. The machines at the gym are always over what my HRM says I'm at, I think this might have something to do with them not taking into account the height of the user (I'm not sure). Your HRM is the only thing that takes all of your personal factors and constant heart rate into account. I would just be happy your burning so many calories lol

    heheh yes, I think I'll take that road of just being grateful :) I'd be more entitled to whinge if I was burning much much less haha
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    I have found my HRM is so much more accurate then MFP. Like another person said on here, MFP was overestimating my calories burned...by a lot. It goes the same way for cardio machines. The elliptical said I burned 1k and I only burned 550-600. The treadmill was even worse, I think it was 400-500 calories per 1k.

    This is what it comes down to:
    Effort = Heart rate raised. Its simple. MFP and machines don't have a way a way of measuring that.

    Good point! In other words follow your heart! :) Plus I have the strap HRM, so it's right on my heart the whole time
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    Ladies, lets just loose the weight. I use a lot of energy when I walk because I need oxygen on occasions. My heart pumps a lot and if it tells me I am burning calories that will be great, otherwise I just do the best I can. God Bless and hope we all reach our goals.:smile:

    haha hear hear! I'll second that :)
  • glowbuggy
    glowbuggy Posts: 50 Member
    What HRM's do you all have? I just got one for my birthday, but it only counts cals when its counting my steps. I am thinking I am going to take it back, but dont know what kind to get...

    Suggestions w/o paying both my arms and my legs????
  • 970Mikaela1
    970Mikaela1 Posts: 2,013 Member
    I subtract what my BMR would be for the length of time i worked out from what my HRM says. About 80 calories an hourish is what I take off from the total of my HRM.
  • Chloe_Chaos_
    Chloe_Chaos_ Posts: 150 Member
    PS: my HRM is a new balance N4 and I love it. Has the chest strap and everything. My Mom as the Polar FT4 which is also amazing. Both are $70-$100 depending on where you buy them.
  • Mom0fTwo
    Mom0fTwo Posts: 326 Member
    Do you know how much your body naturally burns per hour? Don't you need to subtract that from your hourly total or else you're counting calories already figured into your MFP goal?


    I have a friend that wears hers all day and has been doing so for about a month cause she was always hungry/ tired, apparently with breast feeding and exercise and daily mom routines she burns some where around 2500-3500 cals a day which is crazy so now she tries to keep her deficit at 500 cals or less, i have considered getting one cause being a mom i know i do a lot but there are also a lot of days i barely do anything, just curious myself really lol
  • tinksmommy2006
    tinksmommy2006 Posts: 575
    Do you know how much your body naturally burns per hour? Don't you need to subtract that from your hourly total or else you're counting calories already figured into your MFP goal?

    If she is only using it during work out times...no you do not subtract.
  • Bettsy_A
    Bettsy_A Posts: 81 Member
    What HRM's do you all have? I just got one for my birthday, but it only counts cals when its counting my steps. I am thinking I am going to take it back, but dont know what kind to get...

    Suggestions w/o paying both my arms and my legs????

    My one is one that comes in watch form alongside a chest strap with a little sensor on it. I think the steps one is a sort of pedometer or something :P
    I got one after saving over a few weeks, all I can suggest :P Keep those arms and legs heheh
  • Cal28
    Cal28 Posts: 514 Member
    Suggestions w/o paying both my arms and my legs????

    I have a Polar FT60 which on the current exchange rate for us was pretty cheap from Amazon.com.
    However lots of people have the basic model the FT4 which is also meant to be pretty good. x
  • AmandaCaswell1982
    AmandaCaswell1982 Posts: 170 Member
    It depends on the TYPE of activity- from what I've read, if your activity is purely cardio (running, walking, etc) it's pretty accurate (well, depending on the type of HRM) But for strength training, it's not. For example, I have always logged the circuit training I do and burn usually 500 or so calories an hour. Walking/jogging 3 miles for an hour was about 200ish. With my new HRM it says the circuit training is 250ish and the walking/jogging is 470ish cals. It balances out mostly for me, and I am just logging my HRM readings (as another poster said, consistency!)
  • juliep1974
    juliep1974 Posts: 222 Member
    MFP underestimated my burn for most activities too so it does happen. If you are at all worried about the amount it says you are burning, there are a couple websites that will calculate calories based on your sex, weight and average heart rate so you can compare what they say vs what your HRM says. The HRM is the best estimate though.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories