|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
"Prisoner at War" wrote in
oups.com: For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... Don't rely on what your heart rate is supposed to be w/ regard to your age. Just because you are 35 doesn't mean your maximum heart rate is the same as the typical 35 y.o. I'm 40 and have at least a 205 bpm HR max. (as indicated in the final sprint of a 10K race in Nov.) which is 20 bpm higher than what I'm "supposed" to have. Find a means of testing your HR max. so that you can determine the appropriate target ranges for you. mike -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
"Prisoner at War" wrote in message oups.com... For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... The heart rate is likely to be ECG based, and thus quite accurate. The calorie counter is guessing based on anything you tell the machine when you get on (age, weight etc). Skippy E&OE |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
"Prisoner at War" wrote in message oups.com... For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... For the average population probably and there in lies the rub. I suspect you are way above average. Do it for yourself not for a machine. Feel good and you will look good. You asked the wrong question here cause everybody stepped in it couple months ago with a calorie to heartrate question and the answer is NO. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
"Prisoner at War" wrote I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? Probably not very. 850 calories is what a 155# guy would burn running 8 miles or so. Can you run 8 miles in 40 minutes (5:00/mile pace)? Do you run at all? That would be national class talent. That's the kind of output you're talking here... The heart rate is probably more accurate than the calorie count. If the heartrate backs off when you slow down, and increases gradually throughout the session as you get fatigued, and keep pushing, that's a sign that both your heart and the monitor are working properly. There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too... Go out and see how far you can run in 40 minutes. Multiply each mile by the calories per mile given by the following calculator and see what you get. Here's a calorie calculator for running: http://www.stevenscreek.com/goodies/calories.shtml -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
In article .com,
Prisoner at War wrote: For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). Not very accurate there. But not to worry. It'll be accurate in a relative sense. If you go and do what it says was 1500 calories, you probably burned off twice as many as if it said 750. How many that was ... don't really know. There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... See my page on heart rate training (though oriented to runners, the effort levels carry across aerobic activities fairly well) http://www.radix.net/~bobg/run/hr.html The target range was computed based on your age, and some assumptions of where you want to be exercising. But all estimators have a 10+ beat per minute standard error. Consequently, my observed maximum heart rate is a good 15 beats per minute higher than the 220-age estimator would suggest. Further, if the targeting from the machine didn't ask about your resting heart rate, you can, again, be comfortable far above the level a simpler estimate would say. Again, see my page for a little calculator and verbal descriptions of effort levels. Heart rate reserve seems to work much better for people. (No, no advertising or the like. Just that I wrote a fair amount into the page, and don't want to retype it all.) -- Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links. Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
How Accurate Are Those Monitors, Anyway?
Mike R. wrote:
"Prisoner at War" wrote in oups.com: For immediate release from Ye Olde Rambling Question Dep't.: I'm on some elliptical at the gym, have been doing it 40 minutes three times a week, each session the machine read-out claims I've lost ~850-900 calories (range due to variable intensity)...how accurate is that? I find it hard that with 40 minutes of sweat I've burned that many calories. It doesn't feel too hard, relatively speaking (though I do Level 15 out of 20 available, with 20 as the hardest). There's also the heart rate monitor that has me at the upper celing of my target heart range (which is supposed to be ~142-157 for a 35 y.o.) for almost all 40 minutes, which I find incredible, too...I definitely look like I'm fit -- Greco-Roman statue and all -- but it all feels much easier than I'd expected (though there is surely a psychological component involved, and I've learned fairly well to tune out unpleasantries like fatigue, etc.), so I'm wondering whether such devices are trustworthy...how are such numbers calculated, anyway? On this elliptical, the target heart rate seems to come from sensors in the handles.... Don't rely on what your heart rate is supposed to be w/ regard to your age. Just because you are 35 doesn't mean your maximum heart rate is the same as the typical 35 y.o. I'm 40 and have at least a 205 bpm HR max. (as indicated in the final sprint of a 10K race in Nov.) which is 20 bpm higher than what I'm "supposed" to have. Find a means of testing your HR max. so that you can determine the appropriate target ranges for you. mike Mike pretty well has the answer. If you are 35 and only working out to the extent of 142-157 then you AREN'T trying hard enough. 165 is my average rate sustained for about an hour at a time, and geesh, I know people get tired of me saying it, but I'm 58 and 165 feels good. Sweaty but good as in feeling alive. Don't believe what a generic machine says or even the 225 minus age, or whatever you go by. Those are just generalizations and probably the middle 50% of the bell curve. Mike is 40 and has a max of 205, me, 58 and about 185, both outside what the books tell you. Greco-Roman statue huh? Snicker. What's your middle name? Narcissus? Bill Baka |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Are tyre pump pressure gauges accurate or not? | gkmac | Unicycling | 8 | October 3rd 06 10:16 PM |
Test for synthetic testosterone accurate | Joe King | Racing | 3 | August 13th 06 06:21 AM |
Accurate calibration of cycle computers/cyclometers | Dex | Recumbent Biking | 16 | August 2nd 05 07:09 PM |
Accurate Odometer | Lloyd Hanning | Techniques | 38 | February 14th 05 07:37 PM |
Most accurate altimeter -- w/ exportable elevation profiles | Matt O'Toole | Techniques | 21 | February 10th 05 06:49 PM |