Forums >Suggestions and Feature Requests>Estimated calories vs. meassured calories
I have a Garmin GPS device that calculates the calories based on my heart rate. I assume that the people who design such devices know what they are doing.
And I have an ostrich farm I'd like to sell you.
Prince of Fatness
Excuse me, but I do know a bit about physics.
Yeah but what you don't know is how futile it is to argue with Trent.
Not at it at all.
I assume that the people who design such devices know what they are doing.
They do know what they are doing. They have a highly successful business with a market cap of $10.6 billion.
Among other things, their devices are pretty good at estimating your calories burned. And by "pretty good" I mean nearly as good as the 100 calories per mile rule of thumb that runners use (or whatever cyclists use.)
The Garmin people's device also can track your position on the earth's surface with a decent degree of accuracy by communicating with satellites in space and give you near real time read out of distance, pace and a bunch of other stuff. I mean the whole concept is mind blowing, really.
But they're just estimating calories burned like everyone else.
I don't disagree with your assertion that people should be able to choose whichever calorie estimate they want, but your steadfast insistence that Garmin's estimate is more accurate than anyone else's just doesn't hold up.
Runners run
Options,Account, Forums
Lol. You just proved yourself stupid. If I ride 50 km in a strong headwind, compared to a 50 km ride in no headwind, are you saying that this requires the same amount of work? Excuse me, but I do know a bit about physics.
Lol. You just proved yourself stupid.
If I ride 50 km in a strong headwind, compared to a 50 km ride in no headwind, are you saying that this requires the same amount of work? Excuse me, but I do know a bit about physics.
You're certainly correct here. Work is proportional to friction and to displacement (they sometimes write it as Fd), and obviously the higher headwind causes more friction.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
Now you're really sticking your neck out!
And if you don't believe that a higher heart rate for the same type of work (over the same distance) results in more calories burned, then you are more stupid than you are allowed to be. Besides, it is totally irrelevant what is right and what is wrong. My point is that I should be able to register my calories on this site, just as I am able to register all other types of data.
And if you don't believe that a higher heart rate for the same type of work (over the same distance) results in more calories burned, then you are more stupid than you are allowed to be.
Besides, it is totally irrelevant what is right and what is wrong. My point is that I should be able to register my calories on this site, just as I am able to register all other types of data.
To the first point: do you mean that you burn more calories per unit time or per unit distance at higher heart rate? Also, can't other factors impact heart rate? An estimation that includes heart rate could plausibly be slightly better than one that doen't but I don't have enough data on this to really comment because I've never done a real calorie measurement.
To your second point:yeah, I don't see a problem with being able to enter calories burned. Either way it's just a guess but I can put in any number I want for my weight, the temperature, my hear-rate the weather conditions etc in my log...I can even put in whatever distance or time I want. There isn't any particular reason that calories should be special since they really don't matter.
I just wouldn't put the numbers Garmin gives you up on a pedistal. You've probably noticed at races that your Garmin distance doesn't always match the wheel-measured race course distance. In that case, it is almost always the Garmin that is wrong.
I must be way off on this. I was always under the assumption that calories burned was a function of the amount of time and distance that one travels.
So, if you run faster, you're spending less time per mile; therefore you'll be burning roughly the same amount of calories as if you were running slower, but spending more time on your feet. Is that right?
There was a point in my life when I ran. Now, I just run.
We are always running for the thrill of it
Always pushing up the hill, searching for the thrill of it
I must be way off on this. I was always under the assumption that calories burned was a function of the amount of time and distance that one travels. So, if you run faster, you're spending less time per mile; therefore you'll be burning roughly the same amount of calories as if you were running slower, but spending more time on your feet. Is that right?
Friction doesn't affect the runner as much, because the feet aren't in contact with the ground most of the time, and the runner is going a lot slower.
Arrogant Bastard....Ale
Yes I do. Riding 50 km in a strong headwind makes the estimate from my heart rate much closer. The estimate from this site is at least 50% off in that case. The same goes for tailwind, then it is more than 50% off as well.
Do you ride uphill (or downhill) both ways too?
Just an FYI, you can't even enter calories manually probably because you are not measuring calorie burn. You can enter HR though and like you say distance, time, plus temperature etc.
Does the fancy GPS/HR monitor device ask you for your weight?
I am not caught up
So someone asked to have a box to check "Download calories from device" and an enhancement and we are bored enough to debate the accuracy of calorie counters / calculators
Am I cought up now?
I am fuller bodied than Dopplebock
I wish drinking beer burned a massive amount of calories - I could count it as a work out.
#artbydmcbride
I am not caught up So someone asked to have a box to check "Download calories from device" and an enhancement and we are bored enough to debate the accuracy of calorie counters / calculators Am I cought up now?
yes
Am I caught up now?
Not quite, you missed the part about Ternt being stoopid.
Friday came a day early
You need to store the beers further away.