HRM accuracy - how do you track calories burned?

T_Marie4
T_Marie4 Posts: 104 Member
edited December 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
So I've been doing online research regarding HRM accuracy in calories burned - according to most sites, it yields a 12% overestimate of calories burned, and on averate is 75% accurate. SOOO - do you enter your calories burned as stated from your HRM, or do you take 75% of that and use those numbers instead? I just want to be honest and accurate with what I am tracking. One of the sites I read is below. Thanks!

http://www.livestrong.com/article/490909-the-accuracy-of-calories-burned-in-polar-heart-rate-monitors/

Replies

  • debgcook
    debgcook Posts: 64
    Depends on what kind you have. Most of them are accurate.
  • meg7399
    meg7399 Posts: 672 Member
    Depends on what kind you have. Most of them are accurate.
    Well according to her research they are not.
  • trail_rnr
    trail_rnr Posts: 337 Member
    If you have one that is programmable and "smart" (that is, learns about you and adjusts over time), it can be pretty accurate. Probably more accurate than 75% (but certainly still with some error).

    I figure with the inevitable error in counting calories to begin with, the error in the HRM isn't worth worrying about. I still managed to lose weight using calories burned info from a HRM and calories eaten through MFP.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    From my understanding HRMs with no V02 Max accounts for 75% of caloric burn, the other 25% is estimated making them 85-95% accurate. If you have V02 Max entered correctly it will account for about 85% cals burned with the other 15% being estimated so they end up being 90-98% correct (over or under)

    All HRMs will be a little different, and if you cannot adjust V02Max a HRM will more than likely underestimate a "fit" person's caloric burn. That being said, if you feel it is over estimating you can back out maintenance calories as the HRM gives total calories during the exercise time, not the amount you burned above what you would have burned had you not worked out.

    To do this you would take maintenance/24/60 to get cals you burn/min, not working out. So if your maintenance is 2400 then you would burn 1.67 cals/min not working out, so if you workout for 30 min and your HRM says you burned 300 cals, the amount you would put into MFP would be 250 (300-1.67*30).
  • ReneeJ814
    ReneeJ814 Posts: 72 Member
    I track the calories burned as stated on my HRM. Even though it may not be fully accurate, it's more accurate than the MFP database and I find that it's more accurate that what the calories burned on any machine says. I think there's really no way of knowing exactly how many calories you burn each workout, so all the HRM does is give you an estimate. Besides, I'm terrible at math. LOL!
  • sweetendeavor
    sweetendeavor Posts: 72 Member
    I usually enter what my HRM records but do not eat back all of my exercise calories to account for this.
  • cbeutler
    cbeutler Posts: 667 Member
    I did some research on this too, after getting a couple of odd readings.

    Specifically for Polar make sure you take the Fit Test if your watch supports it.
    Make sure you use water to wet the strap prior to starting
    Keep your weight and other statistics updated in the watch
    polar told me there can be a problem if there is a lot of electrical interference.

    All that said I just use the number out of the watch unless it seems really off to me.

    The other piece of information I picked up is they are not accurate below 60% max heart rate so they may not be useful for weight training or a slow recovery walk depending on how strong your cardiovascular system is.
  • kmayne
    kmayne Posts: 82 Member
    Bump
  • lizsmith1976
    lizsmith1976 Posts: 497 Member
    OP, I think you missed the point of that article. I does not say (in any way) that the actual calories burned is 75% of the output shown on the HRM. It says that they are 75% accurate. That could mean many things.
  • skylark94
    skylark94 Posts: 2,036 Member
    I set mine up using the suggestions in this thread.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/548645-setup-polar-hrm-for-more-accurate-calorie-burn-for-known-bmr?hl=heybales+HRM

    Using those calculations, I have set mine for age 34, even though I am 36. I get a slightly lower number than I used to, and I feel it is better suited to my actual fitness level.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    OP, I think you missed the point of that article. I does not say (in any way) that the actual calories burned is 75% of the output shown on the HRM. It says that they are 75% accurate. That could mean many things.
    I think it means that 75% of the calories can be accounted for based on the inputs into the HRM, the other 25% are estimated making the cals burned fairly accurate.
  • gsager
    gsager Posts: 977 Member
    Depends on what kind you have. Most of them are accurate.
    Well according to her research they are not.
    Yall need to quit it.
  • tryinghard71
    tryinghard71 Posts: 593
    Bump
  • T_Marie4
    T_Marie4 Posts: 104 Member
    Sorry I should have included the kind I have - I am using a Polar FT4, I wet the straps prior to use and compare my HR with the readout to make sure it's accurate (not every time, of course, but upon initial use and I've only had it <week.) I appreciate the comments posted, as of now I'm just reporting as the HRM reads out. I do have my personal info inserted accurately, though I did change my target HR zone range manually b/c I thought its calculations based on my info was too low, setting it based off of several website calculations, can't remember what the formula was called, and it should have been higher. Other than that, no other changes have been made.
  • mommacuddy
    mommacuddy Posts: 1
    I workout Twice a day and I use my HRM during those times, I found out using some formula on that same site (livestrong) that my monitor is very accurate and my treadmill reads an almost identical heart rate as my monitor so I know its not off. I do insanity which is cardio and muscle building so I make sure I am eating enough to fuel my body but I am also not eating all the calories left in the remaining column I would be stuffed. You can always check your pulse the old fashion way to make sure the monitor is reading right but they are all pretty accurate.

    Best of Luck
This discussion has been closed.

Categories