Calories burned is bogus

[aardvarkie]

I typically do 30 minutes of crossfit with a trainer then 30 minutes of strength training on my own twice a week and will burn 600 calories for the hour. All I look at are calories burned during a 60 minute workout and I feel the band gives a good estimate of this regardless of what type of exercise it is. It's better than guessing which I did before, myfitnesspal gives you 126 calories burned for 30 minutes of strength training and the band gives me 200-300. By the time I do my lifting my heart rate is pretty elevated from the crossfit training which helps me get a better burn from lifitng. I don't care how or why or even if muscle burns more calories, the band is way to simple to get that complicated and isn't going to even take that into consideration. It's just doing a simple calorie burn based on heart rate. If your heart rate doesn't go up much during your strength training then you won't get much of a calorie burn from the band. More in the range of what myfitnesspal would give you for doing it.

Over the last 6 months of using it I've got a good feel for the calories I'm buring in a month and have adjusted my calorie intake to match it. Before it was more of a guess. I've also been able to get my resting heart rate, its in the low 50's most mornings when I wake up and usually about 46 while I sleep, which I never knew before. I also monitor my heart rate during my cardio routine so that I can maintain it in the range I want and I like having the timer for runs on the track. Was it worth $200 to get that info? I think so.

 

[Bryon Burns]

Most of you didn't pay attention during general biology did you? Calorie burn in fitness accessories with HR sensors is estimated by heart rate based on pulmonary function, that is how much oxygen you're inhaling. However, since everyone's efficiency at O2 absorption is different they generalize even further by age, weight, etc. However the band has something most fitness accessories do not have, and that's temperature monitoring during a workout. Heat is a byproduct of the fat/glucose + O2 reaction during atp synthesis, yanno that thing that powers our cells. By measuring the heat rise and heart rate, you get a even more accurate measure of calorie burn than straight heart rate. If the band had an oximeter, it'd be perfect (they probably could have put one in at the cost of major battery drain). Overall the calorie burn on my workouts had been pretty accurate and I sometimes train with a fingertip pulse oximeter, the numbers are pretty close.

 

[Jazmac]

Laughing out loud at the "science" of proving calorie burn on the Band is bogus. Man, that is a good one.

 

[jmerrey]

I'm not sure of the science, but I know for a fact I didn't burn 600+ calories on a two mile leisurely bike ride.

 

[DroidUser42]

I'm not sure of the science, but I know for a fact I didn't burn 600+ calories on a two mile leisurely bike ride.

What was your HR readings for that ride? Bogus HR => Bogus calories.

 

[jmerrey]

 

[DroidUser42]

Oh, it's breaking this down by fats and carbs? I didn't notice that before. I wonder what the math is behind that?

 

[Stockmoose16]

//images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/05/12/4a0dc5fb66aa452445a4e31f836b87c1.png

32 mins at a 142 HR... Hard to believe that's 600+ cals. I just did an hour at 155 and got 620. How much do you weigh?

 

[jmerrey]

195.

There is no way that it's 600+ calories burned. I'm having a hard time buying the heart rate as well. My boys are 7 and 9, and just learning to ride. It was quite a leisurely pace. Something is way off on how the band/app calculates. I had another ride with similar results a few days later, so it's not a one time mistake or fluke.

 

[teemulehtinen]

Aadvarkie, Gadgettrans:

All I can say to this, after almost 30 years of lifting: if your heart rate doesn't get much elevated at your normal weight training session and you don't pant after your squats, deadlifts, pulldowns or even bicep curls, I think you are probably doing something wrong (or at least lifting way too light). A 45 minute session I usually do burns, on basis of the band information, some 630-800 calories. My average heart rate is around 140 and peaks after heavy sets at 170 or above. I have no idea how you guys are training and sitting around... ;-)

​And then there are of course the other metabolic advantages that you mentioned. Apart from the recovery consumption which can last up to 36-48 hours post exercise, I think the key for me has been the increased basal metabolic rate advantage from lean muscle mass (every extra kg of lean muscle increases this burn even if moderately). Unfortunately the band doesn't differentiate between the fat and muscle tissue. It just asks for your weight at the initial set up. Someone weighing 90kg with 10% fat has a different basal rate than someone with 25% fat. Perhaps it would have been too much to ask. Of course, we can fix the basal rate ourselves as A has done

 

[gyhor]

Hmmm....are the exercise calories only the 'exercise' calories or do they include also the normal metabolism?

 

[Tyler Patterson]

I am having the same issue, but I think I see yours. If you look at the heart rate it starts out high, and then goes to an ending rate of unreadable. So it more than likely calculated your burn at the last known heart rate. Probably had your wrist bent a lot. However mine is just about as ludicrous.

 

[Tyler Patterson]

Here is my evidence. I have been doing this same walk at a faster pace for nearly a year, every dog gone day. If this burn were accurate I would have lost a hundred pounds by now. Even if you deduct my bmr of 81 calories per hour (band number) it is high.

 

[gadgetrants]

Thanks Tyler -- definitely anomalous data! Any chance you can pull up the HR x time (or is it distance) chart and post that?

I have to say I'm skeptical about your "Ending HR" theory -- I seem to remember several of my runs and walks ending that way and I haven't seen crazy calorie data like you're reporting.

-Matt

 

[Tyler Patterson]

Here is my evidence. I have been doing this same walk at a faster pace for nearly a year, every dog gone day. If this burn were accurate I would have lost a hundred pounds by now. Even if you deduct my bmr of 81 calories per hour (band number) it is high. View attachment 104529

 

[gadgetrants]

Tyler I don't think it's fair to increase your post count by posting the same thing twice. Also, see if you can get your pictures rotated -- I have a crick in my neck. :grin:

-Matt

 

[Cotswolds]

Tyler, unless you're accurately counting your caloric intake you can't make that claim. Most people eat back the calories they burn if they aren't keeping careful count because cardio makes you hungry.

 

[EMitchell]

I realized last night that my band battery was just about out, so I plugged it in overnight. When I got up this morning, I put it on, made coffee and had breakfast. The calorie counter was already at 640 calories, even though I had only worn it for about 15 minutes with very little exercise. I then played about 2 hours of high energy tennis singles, and after playing, the calorie count was at about 1,050. Definitely not accurately computing the calories burned. Throughout the rest of the day, it's bumped up to 2370, with just normal activities, nothing strenuous.

 

[CliveSinclair]

I realized last night that my band battery was just about out, so I plugged it in overnight. When I got up this morning, I put it on, made coffee and had breakfast. The calorie counter was already at 640 calories, even though I had only worn it for about 15 minutes with very little exercise. I then played about 2 hours of high energy tennis singles, and after playing, the calorie count was at about 1,050. Definitely not accurately computing the calories burned. Throughout the rest of the day, it's bumped up to 2370, with just normal activities, nothing strenuous.

The 640 kcal was your estimated burn since midnight (even if you don't wear for sleep), plus you small amount while making coffee.... We burn energy sleeping, the metrics are estimated using your height, weight, age.

 

[EMitchell]

The 640 kcal was your estimated burn since midnight (even if you don't wear for sleep), plus you small amount while making coffee.... We burn energy sleeping, the metrics are estimated using your height, weight, age.

Ok, that makes sense, although I'm surprised it calculates calories burned even when not wearing the band.