Your Applewatch, FitBit, Polar… SUCK for Tracking Calorie Burn
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- New Study Discussed:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Systematic reviews:
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
REPS-Research Explained in Practical Summaries
biolayne.com/r...
Get my new nutrition coaching app, Carbon Diet Coach: onelink.to/9h4d62
My research based supplements: www.outworknutr...
Get my books on how to lose fat: www.biolaynesto...
Take my online course "The Science of Nutrition": chfi.click/lay...
Get Custom Workouts by me for $12.99/month: www.biolayne.co...
/ laynenorton
/ biolayne
/ biolayne
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA Finals D3 | Fall | รู้ผลทีมแชมป์ พร้อมตั๋วสู่ PMGC](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7NxsN0Ch6vk/mqdefault.jpg)
Well that study didn't test my Garmin watch, so I'm going to assume it's 100% accurate. Now, what should I have to eat back the 900 calories I burned walking from my car? 😅
Heck yeah I got a Garmin and I found I need to eat like an extra 2000 calories a day just to make up from all the exercise of my office job.
🤣
😂😂😂😂
Probably wise to carry a Costco size jar of peanut butter with you to make sure you don’t accidentally slip into a deficit
Snickers and cream puffs bruh
My fitbit said i burned 4k calories in 3minuites and im chosing to believe that thats my truth
😂
if it actually said 4 kcal not 4000 Cal, then it’s probably true. kcal and Cal go hand in hand. just a messed up unit nomenclature. you can google
@@das_sar im just joking
For me, the best part of Apple Watch in terms of fitness is not the calorie tracker (god knows it sucks), but the fact it constantly annoys me into taking a walk or doing additional physical activity. Also gamification with the “rings” is nice.
I think its actually pretty accurate if you keep weighing your self daily
You just turned me off buying one 😂
Certain activities are tracked more accurately than others. Walking and running are pretty accurate on the Apple watch. Other activities, like weight training are wildly out. I always subtract 50% from my weights workouts. Overall it is still useful to track calories expended on a smartwatch not for the accuracy but more for seeing trends in personal activity levels.
how much it shows you burn during the weight training? I had my SE 2 today for the first time and it showed that I burned about 200kcal in 1 hour, seems reasonable
@@fullalbums5675my se 2 doesn’t have a huge difference tbh, all I’m doing is walking and it seems to be only 10-20 calories off
How do you suggest we estimate daily calorie expenditure? Any tricks or hacks to at least get a “reasonable” number? Maybe a follow-up video for this?
The way I did it was first finding my maintenance calories. 2400 calories was accurate enough for my age weight height. Then I used my watch to calculate duration and avg heart rate. It’s all about patterns and sticking to one specific pattern. If I was to keep my heart rate at 155-161 for 60 minutes I would burn right around 100 calories every 10 minutes. If my heart rate was around 110-130 it would be far less around 30-40 calories per 10 minutes. Weigh yourself consistently at the same time everyday. Track your water intake as well, that’s a big fluctuation of weight on and weight off. Based on sweat and peeing it out. Very tedious, but after the first 8-12 weeks of tracking calories and workouts. It becomes second nature. I’ve been tracking my calorie intake and calorie expenditure based on my heart rate and duration for the past 156+ weeks.
My Fitbit estimates my daily calorie burn at almost exactly what the Carbon app estimates my current maintenance at. I absolutely love it. I do t use it to calculate my calories but as a great tool to motivate me to increase my NEAT.
Consciously induced neat is actually just exercise.
...Okay cool. So how do we accurately track it?
Use a calorie calculator online, then weigh yourself every day to make sure you're losing/gaining weight at the rate the calculator showed, and if you're not, adjust accordingly, with the fact that 1lb of fat is about 3,500 hundred calories in mind.
What I prefer to use the 'metrics' in the watch, is often like how we talk about bodyfat percentage tests. None of them are truly accurate, but if you are consistently trending your numbers up, you are in fact being more active. So even if 10k steps on my Apple Watch is actually 6k, 6k is still more than the 3k* average I used to have.
Same methodology with the Move ring. I don't count the calorie number to prove that I burned a number of calories, I use it note that I have been more active than my original baseline. Doing this also eliminates the mentality of using the number to guess how much more I could eat and still stay in a deficit.
The only metric I do not care for is the exercise ring, since that drastically increases the Move ring's number when you start an exercise on the Watch. Having said that, walking at a decent pace seems to trigger it naturally, but doesn't drastically effect the Move ring.
All in all, track calories, use the watch to motivate you to move more. Or don't use it. It's pretty much just an expensive toy anyways.
They are actually pretty accurate in counting your steps though. Am sure even Mr.Nortan here would agree to that
@@Tusharhol Interesting, I heard otherwise, but now I'm wondering if that is old information.
@@coletcyre it depends on the device. Fitbits ive had are garbage , counting every hadshake as a step , some amazfit sucked , counted driving as steps . So far , apple watch is the most accurate, barely few extra steps while driving (less than a hundred per day) , zero from handshakes.
@@FitFatFit Only issue still is drumming. For me
I have a Fitbit Charge5 and understand it may not be super accurate but it has adequate precision for me, so from day to day the “extra” burn is pretty good (EA). To test this out, I’m recording its TDEE, Carbon’s calorie intake, weight, and my PBF. So far the calorie deficit predicted weight loss and measured weight loss are within ~.5 lbs (4 lb predicted, 4.5 measured over a 3 week period).
I found it a lot more accurate to track my caloric intake as closely as I can, and then compare that to my average weight throughout the week. Adjust as necessary
Because it's the right way
Tracking your calorie output is delusional. There is a very big margin of error. It's best to only track intake,if you're getting leaner good if you're not eat lesser calories
@@awemanyfit how so?
@@rderree Because it is not accurate at all. Did you watch the video?
@@sideshowblob just shut up, you can subtract the inaccuracy percentage to the displayed number of burned calories
Option #3- people are underestimating their calories by an average of 40% according to research. 40% of total daily consumption is WAY more impactful than 40% of a 60min cardio session.
They are not accurate but mine is very consistent, which provides an accuracy of its own given that I compare it against a TDEE spreadsheet. My fitbit weekly average is around 500 calories over this number with only minor variations because my weekly activity level doesn't fluctuate that much (routine).
All activity trackers are useful as a fixed point to judge your relative activity level and maintain that goal IE 8-10k steps a day.
This. So much this.
Agreed!
Same here! My Garmin Vivoactive 4 was very consistent tracking calories burned over a 2 week timespan. Not exactly correct, but consistent nearly every time. So I just used that number as a starting point and knew to keep my real calories 600-700 less than the Garmin calories throughout the week and I’d hit my fat loss target every time.
i use fitbit from 4 years non and i realized that the best way to track calories out is not using any preset expecially for the weights because it oversteem a lot if you want to use the "weights" preset consider a 20/25% less in your daily calories tracked. it is accurate for walking and everydays activities.
For 2 years I used my garmin Vivoactive 4 to track my calorie expenditure. I found that while it may not have been accurate, it was very consistent throughout that entire time.
In the beginning I just monitored my intake with a food scale and weight every day and adjusted food intake weekly.
If I actually only burned 2000 instead of 2500, I would notice this on the weight scale in a week or two and adjust accordingly. Then I knew that to burn 1lb my daily intake needed to average roughly 600-800 less per day for a week.
I lost like 20-25lbs in that two year timespan doing this. It didn’t matter that the actual calorie burn amount was wrong on a day to day basis. For what I did, it was just very consistent especially. Especially the two week averages. They were always spot on.
I lost 27 pounds in two months and that’s slow u can lose that in a month eating healthy doing CrossFit
@@whyworkwhenicanrap6830 wow! Nice work man!
My Garmin is fairly accurate, I've lost 15 pounds using it alongside Chronometer for calorie tracking. The Garmin actually shows less energy burn than my Strava app (which is paired to a Polar chest strap). I thinking maybe people don't properly configure/update their profile settings (Hight, Weight, Age, etc)
So would this mean that the watches are actually REALLY good for bulking?
What is the best way to track how many calaroies we burn after an activity?
So outside of using like your app, tdee calculator etc, I’m assuming the best way to determine if you are actually burning enough calories compared to what you are eating, is to just weigh and pay attention to body composition?
Yup. Plug into the calculator, which will probably be close-ish, and adjust calories up or down based on what the scale says week to week to week. Ignore daily fluctuations-look at weekly averages
yes and just listen to the good old hunger feeling. If you know your own body it is super easy to stay in a constant deficit or surplus.
Weigh yourself daily, every morning when you wake. Track it and average it out over the week to see if you're gaining, maintaining or losing weight.
Yes.
I pay zero attention to calories burned. It's pretty much the same every day so I just adjust the food.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding or you misspoke, but you mention 1:12 that they underestimated expenditure? Wouldnt this imply they burned more than the watch predicted?
Yes, that's right.
I agree that smartwatches are shit for counting calories, but surely if it says you burned 500 and you actually burned 200, this is overestimating rather than underestimating?
They sometimes underestimate also
I use a 1700cal goal for each day. I don't write off any of it to walking or other activities; just my cycling which has watts within +-1%. Extremely accurate and so far over 4 months, the weight loss has been pinpoint accurate
Excuse me, what is “watts within+-1%” if you don’t mind explaining? I would love a good way to track as well.
At 1:10 you say the research said that watches UNDER-estimated calorie burn by 28-93%, but then you go on to say that when the watch says you burned 500, you only burned like 250. If the watch UNDER-estimated the burn, then, in fact, you would have burned closer to 1000 calories when your watch showed 500. You then go on to reference a newer study, but only mention the variance coefficient, but fail to mention if the watches mostly under- or over-estimate the burn. Most viewers will likely assume that the same under-estimation applies since you didn't specifically mention it. However, because you erroneously talk about how this under-estimation translates into LESS burn than the watch says, they will likely think that it also applies to the findings in the newer study.
So, the quality of this video is actually quite poor, because a critical part of your analysis is wrong. However, I would like to add that I do agree with your point that people not losing weight or even gaining weight when they believe they are in a deficit, are, in fact, not in a deficit, and that's because of the laws of thermodynamics.
For a better take on the accuracy of smart watches or calorie trackers, have a look at this video: th-cam.com/video/znc1g80FdVE/w-d-xo.html
Yeah, I caught that too. I would also like to know if there are user factors contributing to the errors as well. For example, if you lose weight and you do not update your weight profile then your device will calculate a erroneous calorie burn rate but it will be due to user error and not the fault of the device. It would also be interesting to see if there is a relationship between exercise intensity and the level of error. For example, I think that my HRM was very accurate in determining my basal metabolic rate but maybe not so much at the higher intensity levels. I would also be curious to know if there is an understatement of post-exercise calorie burn where the heart rate returns to normal but your exercise recovery is causing a somewhat higher calorie burn rate than the same heart rate with no preceding exercise.
I would add that my guess is that the bigger factor in people not losing the weight they think they should be losing is due to under estimating their calorie consumption and the overstatement of calories burned by a device is a much smaller contribution in the overwhelming numbe of cases.
If you are honest.....the watches work enough to track progress.
I definitely noticed this as well. When I entered my actual weight, my fitbit was like: "You burned 5000 calories", when there was no way. I found if I put my lean body mass as my weight, it is def a lot more accurate.
How can you calculate your lean body mass, I'm 175 cm, and my weight is 102.7 Kilos, I used a random calculator on google, its says my lean body mass is 66.7😂, is it correct?
If I’m on a machine, I give myself credit for half the calories it says I burned. If I’m out walking around, I go by mileage and my weight. I can double check this against a map too. If my weight goes up, it means I’m either miscalculating or feeding myself a line of b.s. Adjust and repeat as necessary.
Just throwing this out there regarding heart rate. I worked in a research lab at my university. We used polar for heart rate over apple, garmin, and fitbit. But we never used it by itself for calories. There are too many other factors.
Is there any way to estimate calories other than keeping track of your weight changes?
I always undercut any calorie burn a machine gave me by a further 30% to make sure I was in a deficit. If the goal was to burn 600, I'd go until it said i'd burned 780.
I use my smartwatch to atleast have a basis for numbers.Though the numbers may be inconsistent.. atleast I can consider the numbers inconsistently consistent.😆. Concistency is key😆
Same here. Works well!
Using TDEE + Cals from steps + 250 Cals from gym has been working for me to maintain my weight for months so... Yeah. I only count my "formal step count" meaning when Im literally going from A to B, I never count in house activity, I just round that up to 250 cals a day.
BMR: 1850
Daily house: 250
7k-13k steps: 500-750
Gym: 250
Total: Min. 2650 Max. 3100 depends on steps.
More steps, more carbs for dinner, less steps, less carbs for dinner. Simple as that.
Why don't you count in house activity? Does walking around the house burn less calories?
I really didn't need this video because if I point out to my girlfriend one more time that her apple watch is wrong I'm going to need a new one.
My Galaxy watch 4 will tell me what I'm thinking about, but if you think It can track energy expenditure you've bumped your head. It told me I'm 11.5% body fat also, which is only about 13% off to be fair. Haha
I'm doing research into this. I tested my fitbit's accuracy and it seemed to underestimate the calories I actually burned. I lost 2.67lbs the week I tested it. I know that it takes -3500 calories to burn 1lb of fat. So to estimate the actual number of calories I burned and to compare it to the calories that the fitbit said that I burned I multiplied 2.67 by 3500 which is 9345 calories. I added up all of the calories consumed and calories burned according to my fitbit and I subtracted the calories burned from the calories I ate and the number I was left with was around -7000. The estimated calories burned from the fitbit data was 2000 calories different than the expected number which was 9345. So It's not very accurate as said in the video. I'm a bit unsure how good my testing method was because I have no way to reliably know how much of the weight lost was actually fat or how much might have been water or whatever. I'm looking for a more reliable way to track calorie expenditure.
That’s a problem but what’s the solution?
i have Apple Watch serie s6 so if I calculate 25% od x amount of calories I burned, and then subtract that number my result will be more accurate ? ( For example I burned 1350 kcal, 25% of 1350 kcal is 337,5, 1350 -337.5 =1012.5 kcal
all wearables are wrong, but some are helpful!
I’ve never thought it was 100% accurate. I think of it as more of relative gauge
Apple Watch is definitely not accurate. One day my resting energy is 1330cal on a rest day, next day I move more and run errands and that day it’s 921cal.. it’s not even a rough estimate, but it’s good to use to the workout app to measure distance and time your workouts.
I did exactly this and lost 40lbs in 5months. It is the bottom line for me. The psychological part is another problem. Motivation is key.
I used Polar arm band. Also I changed my diet to everything I ate was cooked by me and like 5 percent carbs. I was achieving 6,000 weekly caloric deficits.
When I used YUR with a heart rate monitor to track my workouts in VR games I lost weight according to the 7700kcal/kg formula to what I thought was a worthwhile degree of accuracy. I haven't found other exercise calorie trackers to be usefully accurate, but I also don't enjoy other forms of cardio enough to burn >1000 kcal/day doing them for weeks on end so I haven't tried many.
I use a wrist activity tracker and I track my calories consumed. But I don't try to balance them to each other. I use the activity tracking as a relative measure - am I more or less active? I weigh myself daily - same time every day - but I don't stress about an individual day's weight. I watch my weight as a trend and if the trend isn't going the way I want I adjust some combination of activity and calories. For me, this approach works and I find value in the data from the wrist tracker as part of my toolkit.
I followed my Fitbit's calorie recommendations and cut from 95kg to 85kg similarly to if I estimated and tracked manually. Your mileage may vary ofc, 15-25% coefficient of variation means you can fall anywhere on the range. Some will fall closer to the prediction of the Fitbit while some will fall toward the ends of the range.
To be honest, 15-25% of isn’t that bad. If one tracked their weight at maintenance and tried burning said calories through set time and duration and see how much they lose, they can reverse engineer it to get a better measurement of how much it was off by and go from there.
@@thehylander266 Yep definitely. For me it gave me almost the same number as the MyFitnessPal estimate based on age/height/weight/activity level. I was always able to bulk and cut well following that.
So are you going to tell us what to use to track the calories that are being burned?
I halve the number Fitbit says I'm over my BMR especially if I'm like weight training. It works pretty well, for things that involve the GPS and not just heart rate the device is more reasonable.
So then how do we keep track of the calories we burn?
I heard that these devices are crap for tracking calories, but much better at tracking your daily step count.
Brilliant content Layne as always.. Making my way through all your videos!
If the watch, exercise equipment, and online calculations are all so grossly inaccurate, what should people do to measure their energy expenditure? Kind of a flippant response to a real issue
This is why I don’t add my workout calories to my calorie counter apps in order to increase my allotment for the day. I go more by “am I starving and sluggish” or “do I feel full and satiated” and take any and all calorie trackers with a huge grain of salt. That said, if I consistently get 300 calories burned in one session for the same exercise and duration, then I at least know I can use my Apple Watch to gauge my intensity and progress. Still on Apple Watch Series 4 and not getting a newer one til this technology improves significantly
Layne, I kinda like your smart-assery. But you could easily provide a bit of instruction here, too. Tell people to track their estimated intake, the estimated calories burned from the wearable to get an idea of the estimated TDEE. Then comparing TDEE to weight loss or gain over a given period will give them some sense of the accuracy of the device as it pertains to the individual. It is true that these devices suck. But we can make them suck less.
Also, people tend to underestimate consumption. And not count oil, butter or other stuff they cook with or put on top
My watch says I burned 1400cal today I’m assuming based on steps but MyFitnessPal says same number steps but only 300cal burned
I love when people on Reddit post about being in a calorie deficit and still gaining weight, then randos start diagnosing them with thyroid issues or PCOS. The possibility of incorrect counting greatly outweigh the possibility of a Reddit rando properly giving a medical diagnosis
My watch gets pretty close on tracking my average day. But if i do cardio I definitely don't take calories burned to heart. Seems it overestimates.
Doesnt underestimating means that the tracker tracks less calories than you actually burn?
Telling people that a 15%-25% error rate makes their device unusable is like someone saying protein has a high TEF so you can't count your food inputs either. Protein has a roughly 30% TEF, why is that not similarly problematic Layne? We need to empower people and help them use the readily available tools to meet their goals. Here's how to use smart trackers to get accurate results.
Measure your food intake and energy expenditure (using these error prone devices) meticulously for 3 weeks. Take your 5-7 day avg weight and compare it to what you think you should be losing (use a 3500 kcal lb and compare that to your calculated deficit). There will be an error in both your inputs (from things like TEF) and your outputs (limitations of smart tracker tech) but those errors should smooth out with time. Using your average weights and your average calculated deficit you can determine the average error margin. You then use this to adjust your energy needs as appropriate and you can still use your watch. Its just an extra step. In this case you will be attributing the error from inputs (TEF etc) to your output measuring device, but for the purpose of predicting weightloss this should be fine if your macros stay fairly similar.
My Fitbit Versa 3 has an average error of 10%-13% so I just add this to my deficit needs and I make sure I move just a little more or eat a little less to meet my weightloss goals. Works like a charm and makes losing weight simple math.
My Fitbit tends to drastically *underestimate* how many calories I burn.
It consistently estimates that I burn 2800 calories a day. The reality is closer to 3200.
I'm guessing I'm in the minority.
Wait if it under reported calories burned wouldn’t it mean you burned more than what it says you did?
With how expensive some of these products are, you'd think they'd have to test the accuracy of them and disclosure that in the paperwork. I wouldn't expect them to know your burn rate with a high degree of accuracy because that's going to vary person to person. I would however expect them to track your heart rate and steps with a high degree of accuracy. If they can't do those things, they shouldn't be allowed to be sold.
Ok so online calculators don’t work and smartwatches don’t work… HOW DO I CALCULATE MY MAINTENANCE ??? All of these videos are saying this is bad for calculating your calories and this is bad for calculating your calories… then what do I use if everything is so off the number?
I set my ring goals inflated high to compensate for the calorie inaccuracy. So my move ring is 1250 calories/day and if I meet that, then I know I’m in a deficit.
My new itech shows me burning about 200 calories when walking about a mile and a half.
I've suspected that for years. Thank you for the video.
So I get it but in year 2022 - are you saying there is no accurate way for us to track our input and output of energy!? That’s really sad - what’s the solution?
I have a Fitbit. Most days it tells me I've burnt somewhere between 2500 and 3000 calories. I know i eat around 2000/2300 calories a day and I've been maintaining my current weight for some time now. So i guesstimate that my watch is probably over by about 700 to 1000 calories a day.
I don’t use my Fitbit for calorie expenditure estimates. It’s sleep tracking has been a game changer for me. I count my steps and sleep time. Does the job perfectly for me. Even if it may be inaccurate, consistently inconsistent is still consistent.
@@bonkersdonkers7381 i mainly use it for steps myself and also time workouts/ stopwatch. IDK i like the thing myself
People who constantly post pictures of their smart watches showing “how many calories they’ve burned” -
🤡
Hello Layne. I really love your content about fat loss and different caveats that may come with it especially the stuff like metabolic adaptation and NEAT. Can you do a video about lipedema some day? I would really appreciate that since I have seen multiple people suffering from this.
How should we accurately track calories then? (Those burned during exercise)
he means the tracker overestimated rather than underestimated calorie expenditure right?
Yep I definitely fell into this trap. It’s been a bumpy road with some relapses but I’m down 10kg in 6 months and I got about 10kg to go.
Ya just because you burn calories doesn’t mean you’ll lose weight… You have to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight. Pretty simple
I use an Apple Watch to track my steps. I don’t track any of my training so it doesn’t bullshit me with unrealistic calories.
The most accurate calorie tracker is the scales. Which is something I very badly don't want to be true, because it's still vague as fuck and takes at least weeks of weighing yourself and tracking your food to really get any accurate sense of what your caloric balance is.
But, well, what are you gonna do. That's how it is
You mean I didn't burn 800 kCal with my whole hour lifting a few weights?! Lol my dumbass Galaxy watch says I've done 300 steps after making a coffee these things suck ass
I'm a runner. Now matter what my watch said I burned I always go off of 110 calories burned per 1 mile run...
Does this seem accurate? I'm 160 lbs.
i base my caloric deficit on my food diary in myfitness pal. I've just always assumed my fitbit overestimates calories, the wearables always have.
I love videos that complain nothing you’re doing works and offers no solution.
A few years ago, I experimented having myfitnesspal linked with my heart rate monitors and I was gaining weight way too fast 😂😢. Great video!
My Garmin seems reasonably accurate in terms of measuring calories burned in activity, but the estimation of BMR is a little bit high (I believe my BMR is 200 calories lower than the usual equations).
Absolute truth. These watches are not at all accurate for calorie burn. My Fitbit sense is slightly better than the Blaze was, but still wildly inaccurate. My estimates are to subtract 500 from whatever total daily number they're showing. Many times, I thought I was in deficit when in reality it was maintenance.
So,,,,,,,,, how can you accurately check it then?!
He didnt finish by offering info on what is an accurate way to messure. Dont slam a measuring device without offeting a better alternative.
My fitbit doesn't even capture my heart rate half the time.
The reality is that it isn't possible to get a more accurate estimate sitting on your wrist with the data it has available. I walk 20-25k steps per day. Because I'm well adapted to that, I will actually burn less calories per step than someone who rarely walks. My stride length is also a factor, as is my heart efficiently, my body fat percentage, etc. As an absolute value they're a long way off because they can only use a model that they think averages well across a population. Which population? The general population, or a population of fitness enthusiasts? You get my point... What it is good for is day-to-day variation. If I figure out what fitbit thinks I'm burning at maintenance (easily identified by using scales), then set that as my goal, it can then be used to see if I am under/over maintenance on a daily basis. It doesn't matter if the number comes up on the screen as 2800 (about right) 3500 or 4000. Once I know what number = maintenance for me while eating 2800 calories a day I can work with it. It's a tool. Using tools require intelligence.
Soo...what should we do? When I run hard for 30 minutes, I have to eat more or I will go to bed hungry, how do I estimate the calories burned?
yes.. i always tought that too.
So what would you suggest to be the best way to know your expenditure??
So how do i track down my calories ?
It’s also usually the expenditure you’re not measuring. 1 hour measured workout, 23 hours of assumption
I dont see how 15-25% is a huge problem. If u think you burnt 1000 but actually burnt 800, ur over estimating by 200. Most people eat 500-1000 under their daily burn, so they'd still lose weight despite this error.
One possible explanation (dont know this to be true but just hypothesizing) is that the devices are taking into account the calories burnt post-exercise and "pre-attributing" them to your workout.
Yeah my fitbit tells me that i, a 5.2 not muscular woman, should eat 3000 cal for my deficit .. while my walker says that i burned 15 cal after a 30 min jogg
I’m a truck driver and my Fitbit said I burned 5k calories sitting on my ass all day. It has to be accurate😂
You somewhat misquoted the first study.
When the watch underreports expenditure doesn't mean that you burn 260 when it says 500 but more than 500
I like the approach you took in questioning the validity of the trackers. One of the things I have read multiple times is that if I fast or diet for extended periods, my metabolism will SLOW. Why does my metabolism get to violate the laws of thermo-dynamics? It doesn't seem like a fair fight.
this is why I get so discouraged, what am I suppose to do
My watch said I burned 85 calories in a 30 minute intense stair master session. I am 5’7” 210 lbs. I was completely out of breath the whole time. Heart rate was about 170 bpm. I am burning this watch!
Hello Layne, do you agree that accurately tracking how many calories you burn through exercise is quite impossible, no matter what device you're using? If I understand correctly, the extra calories you burn through exercise is marginal to begin with, and is also offset during the rest of your day, where you then burn less. Would love for you to shed some light on this, since it seems to be an interesting topic lately and too much misinformation is going around.
what? That's ridicules... I can tell you 100% now that exercise will contribute to losing weight, given its meaningful exercuse and your In a deficeit. Thats like saying driving a car won't burn petrol. Lol.
@@SO-om2yy Well, you mention being in a deficit. That would basically be the only requirement to lose weight. I believe exercise for the sake of losing weight is overrated, BUT has other, far more important effects, which I will not go into detail right now. But to use your car metaphore: exercising would then be like driving a little bit faster for a relative short period of time, only to drive slightly (but significantly) slower for the rest of the drive. That gives a netto balance of 0. The body is far too complex to be saying it will use more energy in exercise and afterwards carry on like usual. There are more complex systemic demands.
You either burn more calories or consume less, it very simple, some people overcomplicate it. But weather you like exercise or not, it does burn calories and then what you do the rest of the day is up to you. Some people love exercising and it will energise them for the rest of the day, some people will sit on the couch... but for many people burning an extra 500 cal every morning adds up.... and it is the what gets them to a deficit.
@@SO-om2yy Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% pro exercising. It absolutely is valuable. I am only questioning the impact of exercise on the energy balance equation. It might not be so black and white where you can say you either burn 500 kcal or consume 500kcal less and have the same effect. That is not making it more complicated, it's actually important to understand if you want to set yourself up for success. I believe exercise is not as effective or efficient for weight loss as it is made out to be. Consuming less food would be the far better choice. Anyways, not going into a full discussion, because there are too many nuances and factors for a TH-cam comment box discussion. I again hope Layne could address this in a video, if he has not already. Would be interesting to watch, wouldn't you agree?
I wonder what needs to change to make them more accurate
COV of 20% is actually good enough for it to be useful, food labeling is also not accurate and it's still better than my guess
So what do we do instead to track energy expenditure (calories burned)?
My thoughts exactly. People ramble on about the unreliability of every single accessible calorie tracking tool but then how the hell do we track effectively without being 500 calories off.
If they under estimate doesn't it mean you're burning more than it says?
You say that study says underestimate but then you continue talking about overestimation. Whats correct now?
The abstract only states (multiple times) how accurate the apple watch measures heart rate but does not detail on what inacuracies where measured but only shows tolerance.