MFP versus my HRM

Options
Walking for 30 min using MFP 3mph = 153 calories
Walking for 30 min using HRM = 252 calories

In order to get MFP to give me roughly the same calories I have to put it at 4.5mph (description as very, very brisk walking) which was not the case, my heart rate did not go higher then 55%

Replies

  • AmyRhubarb
    AmyRhubarb Posts: 6,890 Member
    Options
    What type of HRM do you have? Does it have a chest strap? If so, I would say the HRM is more accurate. MFP gives different readings for my various exercises as well, sometimes higher, sometimes lower, than what my HRm says (I have a New Balance N4).
  • HittingHerStride
    Options
    I am confident the HRM is more accurate, I was trying to make a point the MFP is not as accurate as we would like it to be. I now also double check my own calories, sugar, sodium, protein and fiber contents and no longer count on the accuracy of the food listed in the database. At this point the most helpful part about MFP is the forums. And even then you have to take every thing with a grain of salt because everyone has an opinion.
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    It really does depend on what kind of HRM you have.. Chest strap ones will be more accurate than not chest strap ones, and Timex's is notorious for being over-inflated when it comes to calorie burn.

    I have a Polar and I think it's pretty accurate when it's used in the correct conditions. I always take strength training with my HRM with a bit of salt!
  • MarincicS
    MarincicS Posts: 265 Member
    Options
    For me, MFP usually estimates way more calories than i burn. Next comes the optimistic machines at the gym. Third in line is my FitBit. Always the lowest, and likely most accurate, is my heart rate monitor. That's the one i go with.
  • KathieSwenson
    Options
    I go with my HRM but thats because I can take an intervals in it determins based on where my heart rate is. I deem that more reliable than something just telling me oh you walked a mile then you burned this many calories. That is not true the heavier you are the more you are going to burn. the lighter you are the more you have to do. Im seeing that now with my exercising. I was burning alot more when I was 220 than I am now at 188. Hopefully I start to see weight loss again soon!
  • tito_diaz
    tito_diaz Posts: 32
    Options
    I use my hrm also and used to manipulate the minutes worked out to get the actual calories I burned. Then I realized all I had to do was click on the calories and I was able to input a set amount. That being said I also like to hike and you can create your own exercises. Hope this helps. Also im using the android app
  • tito_diaz
    tito_diaz Posts: 32
    Options
    Wow I just read what I wrote, hope it makes sense lol
  • beccadaniixox
    beccadaniixox Posts: 542 Member
    Options
    You can still log it as 3.0mph. Just manually change the calories it gives you. :)
  • electricmeow
    electricmeow Posts: 68 Member
    Options
    Your fitness level and overall comfort with the exercise should make an impact too, right? For example, when I was young, my mom used to force me (as a couch potato) on 2 mile walks. KILLED ME! I would have difficulty keeping conversation, bottoms of my feet would ache, I would be so hungry etc etc... NOW, I walk 5 miles a day just as my main source of transportation. Living in the city forces me to walk everywhere, and I enjoy it. I only feel my heart pumping when walking up hills. Walking is nothing to me anymore.

    When you compare these two scenarios, I probably burned more calories when I was younger, at the same weight, by being terribly out of shape. My heart was pumpin! Likewise, I now probably burn only 2/3 of MFP's suggested walking calories.
  • tito_diaz
    tito_diaz Posts: 32
    Options
    Im almost 35 and still cant talk and hike lol and I commend you for walking to work! Thats awesome! I would but I work 43 miles from home