Are calorie data incorrect?

[heeemz]

Noticed big difference between calorie data by cardio equipment and IONIC, IONIC shows almost double calorie burnt vs. shown by cardio devices. Something surely seems incorrect. See pics below. 

[heeemz]

See another comparison on Gym Bike (Spinning)

[SunsetRunner]

Cardio equipment usually estimates ( and in my case overestimates ) calories burnt. Unless it takes in account your age, weight, HR etc. the numbers you see are just made for some imaginary person. It doesn't make Ionic accurate but for sure more accurate than generic cardio equipment.

[DavideFitbit]

Hello @heeemz, thanks for your inquiry. And also thanks for your help with this @SunsetRunner. 

It is not always recommended to make a comparison between data of two different devices (heart rate monitor, calorie or step counter), because the algorithms used and how data is measure is not always the same. 

The heart rate information influences in the amount of calories burned. To make sure it will give accurate readings, wrist placement is very important, please check this post to check the correct wrist placement and also check this helpful article for more details on this.

Additionally, just take a look at your personal settings once again to make sure they're all correct. You may also find more useful information on how burned calories are measured here: How does Fitbit estimate how many calories I've burned?

I hope this helps. 

[SunsetRunner]

@DavideFitbit true, however, I trust more devices that actually take correct readings and in this case, I believe HR is the crucial thing. Incorrect HR - less correct calories. If being in the middle of intense exercise suddenly Fitbit shows my normal resting heart rate and many times shows nothing ( two dashes ), then, of course, it's far from being accurate compared to the device which actually does a correct measurement ( in this case I use chest strap as a reference ). Number of calories due to differences in algorithms may be different, I don't argue about that. What I compare is potential inaccuracy due to wrong readings of one of the crucial parameter. This can compare to other devices.

"The heart rate information influences in the amount of calories burned" - this is exactly the problem. As I said, if I see no HR at all for the longer period of time during the workout or it's for sure incorrect ( 60bpm during intense exercise, I think I should faint if it was true 😉 ) it indicates that calories burnt are incorrect, too.

[DavideFitbit]

Hello, thanks for all this information @SunsetRunner. I'm sure this will be useful for other users as well. 

Heart rate reading varies depending on several factors like movement, temperature, humidity, stress level, physical body position, caffeine intake, and medication.

Fitbit states that though they've found that PurePulse provides better overall heart rate tracking than cardio machines or chest straps, since it tracks your heart rate day and night, wrist placement during certain vigorous exercise is important.

In any case, it would be useful to give a try to the steps mentioned here and check if you see any difference in accuracy. 

I hope this helps. 

[SunsetRunner]

@DavideFitbit "PurePulse provides better overall heart rate tracking than cardio machines or chest straps" - that's rather a PureLie. We are discussing workouts not overall all-day tracking. Chest-strap doesn't show crazy readings, doesn't miss any readings and at the end, I can even count how many sets of each exercise I had just by looking at the graph. Fitbit readings are usually a mess in my case. I know it depends on the movement and positioning but I'm not going to be fixing it being in the middle of the exercise or stop doing exercise because it's not good for Fitbit brilliant PurePulse. That's why I use chest strap which provides readings regardless of the factors you mentioned. The only activity that HR is quite accurate is a steady-pace treadmill run.

[DavideFitbit]

Hello, thanks for your comments and feedback about the accuracy of the Fitbit heart rate monitor @SunsetRunner.  Fitbit continuously works to improve the quality of products and services, and all this information is useful to our team of developers. Thanks again for taking the time to share your experience. 

[SunsetRunner]

@DavideFitbit this is another lie because this isn't a software issue and is not really fixable. If it could be fixed by any software update it would be already done. Optical sensors have their flaws and the best solution would be allowing syncing with better sensors like chest straps. For me, this would be the best solution - all day tracking using Fitbit sensor, workouts - chest strap and everything synced with the single app. Sounds reasonable, but as long as Fitbit doesn't have own chest strap device such thing won't happen. Looking at unsolved issues I think the developers will work on yet another new Fitbit model rather than try to fix existing issues for existing customers.

Today, I did a small comparison during a single workout involving rowing, weight training and short treadmill run on cooldown.

From the top graph you can see 4x1km on rowing, then 1x2km. Then spikes of weight training ( you can count easily how many sets I performed ) and longer, stable heart-rate is 10 minutes run with pace 4:30 on the treadmill. What can you say from the bottom graph about the workout? Can you see what I just described? It's exactly the mess I mentioned. This makes calories burned estimated by the watch a bit question mark. I understand using different algorithms and if input data is correct I don't see the problem that chest strap will come up with a different value than the watch. It's normal, it's just an estimate. However, if the crucial data is so wrong then I will have to stick with overriding my logged sessions with what PolarBeat/Flow registers as I simply don't trust Ionic as a fitness tracking device. Step counter, all-day HR, even walking is ok, I find the tracking good enough but exercising with variadic intensity - Ionic can't handle that.

I don't think there is much sense in discussing that but please, refrain from statements which are simply not true ( maybe on purpose, maybe just because of lack of tech knowledge ). PurePulse is nowhere near in terms of accuracy compared to chest straps using ECG monitoring.