Do you think the calories burned is accurate?

[WendyB]

For certain activities?  No I find it about 15% off my HRM

[Colinm39]

I have used the original Classic and currently using the Ultra and One and have found while walking at a moderate speed, just below brisk speed my two heart rate monitors are within about 5 calories of the Fitbits over 30 minutes. When I get up to brisk walking speed, 4+ mph the HRM are 20-30% higher. Exertion is not Fitbit's forte. To get that extra calorie burn with speed I walk gradients.

[Mary]

For most of 2010 I wore it and tracked my caloric intake.  My deficit based on the Fitbit implied I'd lose about 35 lbs.  I lost about 35 lbs.  So for me, it's accurate.  

The one activity I knew was over-counted was rebounding (jumping on a mini-tramp).  But I knew that because obviously if my body was moving that much on flat, hard ground, I'd be more active than on the tramp.  

A heart rate monitor is just another estimator device.  It's probably better but it's not actually reading your real calorie burn.  They can be misled, too.

[CMeyer2001]

It's not going to be as accurate as a heart rate monitor, as it is an estimate based off of your personal stats, activity, and perceived exertion. I think it does well as an estimate and motivator.

[LilBudyWizer]

I don't put a lot of faith in heart rate monitors. Most of things with heart rate estimate my two hour walks at like 1200 calories and 600 is far more reasonable. I find the Fitbit overestimates for me by about 250 calories per day. That seems to be all in the BMR since it doesn't really how active I am. If Fitbit tells me I'm running a 750 calories daily deficit then I'll lose abou a pound a week.

Really though the question can't be answer broadly. People vary too much. It can be spot on for some people and significiantly off for others. People can vary by 25% in just the effciency of the muscles, i.e. how many calories go to actually doing work and how much just generates heat. It's sort of like how accurately can you guess someone's height based upon their gender and race. You would be close with a lot of people, but way off for some. The body just doesn't work that exactly. Even for an individual it can vary over time.

[Mary]

LilBudy- Did you ever try to tweak your Fitbit BMR estimate by changing your age or height in the settings?  I always figured I'd try that, if needed.  

[Colinm39]

Last year I thought my weight loss and the resulting BMR was why my Premium Account has odd results on the Calorie Burn and I used the following calculator to test my assumptions. By adjusting the variuos settings I found that wasnt the problem but Fitbit themselves. Others have tried to get their BMR to match one that they have had tested under medical supervision. I have never seen any results. The link here is the same one that Fitbit use and is within 4 calories of my Fitbit BMR.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/tools/bmr-calculator

[kpolninja]

Is the fitbit 15% lower than actual calories or higher?  (P.S. I'm in Sac too!)

[Mary]

It's not 15% lower or higher.  You have to determine how accurate it is for you.  

[SunsetRunner]

Who knows which is accurate but I have found that by walking on a level pavement my two Fitbits and two HRM's walking at a moderate to brisk pace give me readings so close to the Fitbit's that I accept the Fitbit's data.

The minute I change to walking gradients and/or laps of our grassed sports oval, both of the HRM's register 15-20% more calories. If I extend that to interval walking and stair walking that increases to about 30% more HRM calories.

I have calibrated all devices and on the Fitbit Ultra and One they are within 4-8 steps on a 5000 step walk and both HRM's are within 5 calories.

The final umpire is my general health and weight and I'm now only 10lb from my ideal weight. I lost 35lb since Fitbit over 2 years. Deliberately slow and steady.

[Colinm39]

I apologise the last thread was from my testing account and should have been from Colinm39 not CFM2

[LilBudyWizer]

No, I never tried changing settings to get it to be accurate. Since it seems to be a fixed 250 calories over it isn't really necessary. Just end the day with 250 more calories to go and I'm fine. I gave up on the whole weight loss thing. I just hate tracking my food. I would be better off 20 pounds lighter. I know what I have to do though, drink more water and less Mt Dew. Food isn't really my problem, it's drinking calories. It's a really stupid idea and really bad nutrition.

[ZacB]

I'm guessing it is close for walking. I set my walking/running stride length, and it gives comparable results to runkeeper when I run at the calibrated pace. If I go faster/sprint, it gives a low calorie burn, and if I go slower, it probably gives an inflated value. A heartrate monitor will give better accuracy, though I'm not sure how you calibrate HR-> calories because someone with a high VO2MAX will burn more calories at a given heartrate than someone with a low VO2MAX.

[WendyB]

That's why I changed my VO2 in my HRM so it was more accurate.

[Mary]

I know what you mean, LilBudy.  I hate tracking food, too.  It's just unnatural.  

Diet Mt. Dew ain't bad.  

[Polariser]

No!

I did an hour of housework and walked 4.27 miles at 3mph++ (0vertaking everyone else) = 8900 Steps and I get a "reward" of 42 calories in MyFitnessPal... 

Not only that but for the app says I walked for 5 Active minutes... 

Really that little for so much effort? I am thinking of going back to RunKeeper or Runtastic Pedometer... at least it was accurate and more motivating that the Fitbit. 

[Colinm39]

Many of us are finding we need to walk @ 4.2+mph to get any form of Very Active Minutes but Fitbit are addressing that and probably call it Active Minutes which is the total of Moderate and VAM

[Mary]

Polariser- That 'reward' in MyFitnessPal is the amount your Fitbit says you burned over what MFP expects you to burn, minus your MFP weight loss goal deficit, I think.  Your Fitbit might be acting up, or your MFP settings might be fairly aggressive, or both.  

I did get 19 'very active minutes' from a leisurely dog walk today, probably 3mph.  So yours might be having issues.  Is it a Flex, Force or One?  

[Polariser]

Ah... today was my lucky day! I got more active minutes! 

I used to use Runtastic (Pedometer Pro and the Pro GPS Apps) on my phone but hated the battery drain... So Fitbit Flex seemed the best solution. It worked fine for the first couple of weeks... and it has been well looked after.

The step count seems accurate so the device itself is probably working okay....

However, the Distance, Calories Burnt and Very Active Minutes are calculated on FitBits servers so maybe their calculations are wrong for my account.

I tried a comparison today with Runtastic, Runtastic Pedometer and Fitbit - the results all vary but especially the Runtastic App (working on GPS) versus the Fitbit Flex and Runtastic Pedometer (which gave quite close results)..

Perhaps all of them are just an approximation? I read somewhere that you have to use a heart rate monitor to get the true calorie burn

Fitbit: 6,899 Steps, 3.3 Miles, 393 Calories, 33 Active minutes

Runtastic Pedometer: 7,169 Steps, 3.76 Miles, 401 Calories

Runtastic GPS:  3.91 Miles, 667 Calories, (4MPH)