Significant increase in calories burnt after 15.10 update

Also been wondering why I'm suddenly burning so much more doing the same routines as before??

Really unreliable (and annoying). Not sure what readings can be trusted on Garmin 935 anymore since last year’s shutdown. Today’s walk 10 miles double the distance of yesterday at a faster pace, but same calories!!!

No device can measure calories burned. It’s always a calculation based on averages and statistics, corrected with guestimates for your weight and heartbeat. Algorithms have bugs and biases.

Stop looking at calories burned. Just use a scale once a week and keep track of your weight that way. If you gain weight you eat to much or workout to less. If you loose weight you eat to less for the amount of workout you do.

(And stop trying to keep track of your calories intake with apps. People tend to over estimate the amount of calories they burn during workout and under estimate the amount of calories they eat, of forget the little snacks they eat between meals. Just use a proven method by measuring your weight)

Yes, I know. Statistics and data are nice to look at and collect. And I know you bought an expensive watch and you expect it to be correct. Fine with me, but if you want to track your weight don’t use guestimates.

I understand what you're saying but if I'm dropping 350$ for a watch that's designed to 'help' track this sort of thing then it better work. Perhaps an apple watch would be more up your alley. 

All modern devices are full of BS functions like sleeptracking, stress and blood oxygen meters. Adding more features to a device sells a device. Pure marketing

I understand you’re angry/disappointed because you paid good money for some not very accurate functions. Garmin and other manufacturers covered their ****** by disclaiming poor results for these kind of functions.

My 935 is 4 years old and the basics I use still work. I know I don’t need to upgrade to a 945 because I only get more bs functions that hardly work or are not very useful..

Elbo said:

Just use a scale once a week and keep track of your weight that way. If you gain weight you eat to much or workout to less.

Muscle weighs more than fat.  If you're working on building muscle mass you can easily increase your body weight and become more fit and defined.  This clearly isn't a case of eating too much or not working out enough.

Elbo said:

If you loose weight you eat to less for the amount of workout you do

You have to have balance, therefore you need to track calories.  About 14 years back I decided to try P90X because I became overweight following a back injury.  I was eating roughly 2500 calories a day, but living the life of a coach potato.  Because of the work involved with the program, I upped my calorie intake to about 3100 calories daily and lost 32 lbs in the 90 days.  Had I stayed on 2500 calories daily, I would have most likely burnt out and wouldn't have completed the program.

Elbo said:

Just use a proven method by measuring your weight

The scale just tells you where you're at weight wise, but not necessarily the reason why.  Here's the flaw when you say it's a proven method by measuring your weight.  You have a man who weighs in at 175 lbs and a month later he weighs in at 180 lbs.  That's what the scale is telling us.  According to you, he's eaten too much for the work he put forward.  Or, did he drop 2 inches off his waist size and put on 5 lbs of lean muscle because of the proper calorie intake vs. work performed?  The scale can also deceive people.  Expert say you need to burn 3500 calories for a pound of fat.  If you're on a 2000 calorie diet and want to lose a 1/2 lb a day you'd have to burn 3750 calories a day.  I can consume those 2000 calories, perform a 1000 calorie burn HIIT workout and have a shortcoming of 750 calories for the day.  But due to water loss from my workout, the scale is telling me I doubled my goal with a 1 lb loss in weight.  I wouldn't know this was the case if I wasn't tracking calories.  I agree counting calories with a wrist worn device can be difficult, but tracking the calories and what and when you eat is extremely important when trying to lose, maintain or gain weight along with the workouts being performed.

You spend 350 bucks on an inaccurate watch. Sure you could spend 50 or so on a scale that can measure body composition.

Yes, the scale is also not very accurate, but if you gain eight and drop bodyfat percentage, you’re good to go. If you gain weight and increase bosyfat, you have to adjust jour plan (if your plan is to gain lean mussle). The exact numbers are not that important. Unless you’re a professional bosybuilder. In that case you have a team of professionals around you and other means to measure bodyfat and calorie intake 

Elbo said:

You spend 350 bucks on an inaccurate watch

We understand that caloric burn is an estimation.  It's an estimation based on science nonetheless. We both know for this too work on a wrist worn device, the oHRM must work well too.  This is obviously not the case for everyone because of the many factors to great to list here that one can experience.  So, we can't say we spend "X" dollars on an inaccurate device because the degree of accuracy depends on the individual.

Elbo said:

If you gain weight and increase bosyfat, you have to adjust jour plan

I agree 100%, but doesn't this go against what you were saying earlier about not being concerned about tracking your calorie intake?  Surely you'd agree adjusting one's plan would include the workouts conducted, what is eaten, and how much (calories) is eaten?  Yes, tracking calories wouldn't be exact, but doing so on your watch, a 3rd party app, or even writing down in a journal is far better than not tracking at all and playing the guessing game. 

OHRM is measured, not based on statistics. For me, it works for resting heartrate (which is very useful) and doesn’t work for workouts, so I use a cheststrap. You are right that for others oHRM works pretty much all the time.

But calories burned is per definition inaccurate. Because it is based on statistics and not on an individual watch owner. Scientific? I don’t know. They can claim anything as scientific. 

My big problem with calories tracking is the human factor. People tend to underestimate the amount of food they eat or forget snacks.  Maybe if you measure everything you eat en be very precise you could track your calories (and assume information provided by the manufacturer is accurate). But then  it is so much easier to measure your own weight.

Not tracking your calories is better than not accurate tracking your calories. Making decisions on inaccurate data will not lead to desired result.

Using a scale circumvents those issues. Yes, a normal scale will not give you insight in mussle gain or fat loss. But neither will colories tracking.

All this is my opinion, and your welcome to not agree and do things otherwise. (And I enjoy a good discussion and I do admit I might be a bit to strong on my views sometimes)

Elbo said:

All this is my opinion, and your welcome to not agree and do things otherwise. (And I enjoy a good discussion and I do admit I might be a bit to strong on my views sometimes)

Thanks for adding that.  I was concern you may have thought I was coming across as someone looking to start an argument, which isn't the case.  I was just intrigued when I read your recommendation to disregard counting calories either on the watch or with an app.  

Elbo said:

Because it is based on statistics and not on an individual watch owner. Scientific? I don’t know. They can claim anything as scientific. 

I don't know your background.  My background on the subject isn't extensive and most of my education on the subject comes from my wife, reading and personal experience.  My wife works for a major hospital along side several doctors and dietitians.  Most recommend having their patients track their calorie intake for reasons such as pre-surgery, weight loss or weight gain.  They know far more than me and if they recommending doing so, I feel there has to be some benefit behind doing so.

Elbo said:

My big problem with calories tracking is the human factor. People tend to underestimate the amount of food they eat or forget snacks.

I don't know if this is or isn't the case.  When we say most, or the majority, we're speaking about 51% or higher.  I'm not aware of any polls, surveys, or studies that proves this.  They may exist, but I have no knowledge of any.  My personal experience tells me otherwise.  I know several people who track their calorie intake.  When they do so, it's very diligent to the point it's almost obsessive.  I can't say they represent the minority, average, or majority.  You may have experienced the opposite.

Elbo said:

Not tracking your calories is better than not accurate tracking your calories. Making decisions on inaccurate data will not lead to desired result.

This is where we'll respectfully disagree.  I acknowledge the process of tracking calories isn't going to be exact.  I agree with you when you say decisions based on inaccurate data will lead to undesirable results, but accuracy depends on the tools we're given and how we use them.  Garmin calculates your BMR based off your age, gender, height, weight, activity class and heart rate.  These are not exact, but the industry (watch manufacturer's, dietitians, medical personnel, fitness coaches, etc) all have their calculations which are fairly close to each other.  This is what I meant by science being involved.  Anyway, Garmin is using heart rate for calories burned during activities.  They can come pretty close estimating calories using a heart rate strap.  And even if Garmin's BMR is off for you, you can still adjust your calorie intake if you trust and find the readings from your strap to be consistent through trial and error.  When using the oHRM, all bets are off.  The oHRM may work great for me and terribly for you.  I think from our conversation that we both agree on the oHRM's accuracy.  Knowing this, I just thought your blanket statement about the accuracy and dismissing calorie tracking was a little careless for a lack of a better word, because for some the accuracy can be close and the individual can be very diligent when tracking the food they eat.  I appreciate the discussion and value your opinion even though I may disagree.  I hope there's no misunderstanding.  I've pointed out flaws with using a scale and counting calories.  I'm in no way dismissing the use of a scale, I'm saying it's better to use both in lieu of one or the other.