criticaltodd

No idea. FYI, MFP often estimates below what my HRM tells me but I'm 6'2", 250 lbs.

This.

I'm not sure this is always true. Granted, everything is an estimate but, for example, my Polar watch/HRM have different profiles for different activities and sports, beyond pure steady-state cardio. I can't vouch for the absolute accuracy but the numbers compare well with what I get via other estimation tools.

It's my understanding that HIIT sessions should not be 40 minutes long. They're quick 100% intensity intervals followed by short rests. Tabata style HIIT are 20 seconds on, 10 seconds off, eight times for a total of four minutes. That' a just one version, of course, but the HIIT workouts that I've seen follow a similar…

I have a Polar watch and HRM and I love it. I don't always keep my phone on me when playing sports or exercising so using just an app is a no-go. Unfortunately, Polar's web service doesn't sync outside its own ecosystem so I either manually enter the data from Polar flow once I'm done (not a big deal really) or, if I am…

Not sure if it's on Android but Runmeter is very good if it's available.

Before buying, you'll probably want to decide if you want an HRM that uses Bluetooth, ANT+, or both. If you intend to use it with a smartphone app, you'll want Bluetooth. If you have a device already to synch with the HRM, you'll want to make sure the HRM is compatible.

I eat back my exercise calories but I also set my calorie goals so that they don't assume exercise in the calculation. As for MFP overestimating calories, I've found that often the calories estimated my MFP come in below what my HRM presents, sometimes by over 100 calories.

The higher end HRMs do offer some features but, depending on your use cases, you might not need them and a more reasonably priced one will do.

Sounds like a great goal to shoot for. I'd sign up and use the time until the race to prep. Not sure where you are but there may be trail runs in parks near you that you can use to build up to the race.

I've been eating back my exercise calories and been losing weight. Not sure if it matters, but when I calculated my caloric goals, I used the "sedentary" setting as my base. This way, I think, no exercise is included that I don't enter in myself from my actual workouts.

Is there a reason they both have to be on the same wrist?

I've got the Withings one as well and I love it. Had for a few years now and have absolutely no complaints.

Great post, OP. I will definitely revisit my logging practices and keep this post in mind.

Shake Shack is the best of the bunch. I wouldn't put Five Guys in the same category.

I would have figured you might have gotten that I wasn't being totally serious but no worries. You won't see my response anyway because I've been ignored.

That particular quote was, yeah, but I could have pulled ones from any number of threads. That was just the one that was there at that moment. I have no ire. To be fair to the paleo folks, there are scientific citations to be had if you go to the sources. Now, how those studies will shake out over time, I have no idea…

Very much though, to reiterate, I wasn't doubting or looking for evidence of CICO. More like: is it possible some engines like a higher mix of ethanol than others or, maybe better: do all the engines of a certain make and model react exactly the same to different fuel mixes or could there be some perceptible differences in…

Pretty much, though I wonder (purely academically), if what some of these people feel is the symptom of a condition that just hasn't been described yet? In other words, is someone going to publish a study next year saying that certain populations react differently to X, Y, and Z? (Thereafter to be alternately refuted and…

I'm not confused about it but I do wonder about the variance within our parameters. It would be similar to if I was looking into engines for a specific model car (and I know very little about cars so I apologize in advance for the analogy). All the engines are built to be within certain tolerances and, because of that,…

Really? I'm pouncing on people?

No, I'm not. Sorry to all if I haven't been clear enough but that's not it. And it's not about calories in versus calories out. I was more driving at this: Person A says that they do better with less/more/no carbs/protein/fat. Person B says Person A is doing it wrong, hooray science. Is Person A just doing it wrong? What…

Thanks for the long response. Now, what if someone has a condition that throws the energy equation out of balance, but it's simply not severe enough to call attention to itself? What if someone's energy equation isn't massively out of balance but only a bit out of whack?

Fair enough. Of course, I'm not questioning "CICO".

But what about variance within those "basic parameters"? I think the "same for me as for you" idea would say that there isn't any, outside what we already know about metabolism, and diabetes. Is this correct?

What this is in reference to? I'm not talking about feelings. I'm talking about science. I just want to see it, not see discussion about it. I find it funny that there's this underlying tone that I must be butthurt to be asking questions and looking for answers. Or that I don't respect science. Or I must have dumb, poorly…

Thermodynamics itself might be basic, in and of itself, but there's a few steps between ingestion of a food item and its reduction to a basic unit of energy.

Let's go with thermodynamics. Is the theory that, outside of known conditions like diabetes, that the efficacy of diet, etc. comes down only to thermodynamics and nothing else? So that, two people, A and B, neither suffering from any diabetes or similar conditions, should, on the same diet and regimen, perform exactly the…

Is that a bad thing? I would hope that someone's views would evolve as their understanding increases. To my mind, it would be much worse if he just refused to consider amending his ideas in the face of convincing opposing evidence.

My sister loves Five Guys but I'm not as much of a fan. I forget which magazine it was in but, in it, Five Guys was rated the least healthy of all the fast food and fast-food-like burgers. Just FYI.