Microsoft Band vs Fitbit Charge HR

I took my Microsoft Band 1 to the Microsoft Store today for a replacement..the band was breaking apart from the screen.  This is actually my second replacement...the first watch wouldn't charge (I may have written about that here...it was replaced the week before my Half Marathon).  They didn't have any in stock because they mainly only sell the new Microsoft Band 2 now so I have to wait up to a week for my new one.  With my running lately I almost can't stand the thought of not being able to track my runs with its GPS...I want to do 10 miles tomorrow so it's a bummer for sure...but my husband gave me his Fitbit Charge HR to use until I get my replacement (he doesn't actually find it useful and has been wanting to stop using it for a while now).  He's also letting me take his iPhone for the run, so I'm going to download Strava and login to track the GPS that way.  The Fitbit is really just to help me track everything else this week.  Steps, etc.  I usually don't care this much about all the calories burned or steps taken but 1.) my Microsoft Band is seemingly underestimating everything, which pisses me off and 2.) I've started using CalorieCount.com again to track my daily intake and I'm getting really into it so I want an accurate calorie expenditure to calculate the deficit.  

So I'm kind of excited about the idea of seeing a different number of daily burned calories.  I really think there'll be a large discrepancy between my Microsoft Band and this Fitbit.  I just can't imagine that I only burn 1580 on an inactive day when "inactive" for me still entails chasing the kids, picking up, running up and down steps, helping a toddler go potty, etc.  I do sit a lot, but I'm definitely not sedentary.  And on "active" days I run between 45 minutes and 1.5 hours..I also weight lift...shouldn't the combo of those two things make me burn more on an "inactive" day? 

These are all things I wrote about in the last post.  Just still super annoyed.

In other, more embarrassing news...yesterday I went for a run and had to walk around 1.5 miles from home bc of stomach cramps....I ran within 10 minutes of eating lunch, which is usually not an issue for me, but I think the cheesy/spicy/citrus of the velveeta cheesy skillet meal I reheated from dinner the night before (yea) began to scream in protest while it shook around in my stomach for 20 minutes straight.  I was ready to die when I finally made it home, then woke up ready to die again last night at 2 AM.  Then I couldn't fall back to sleep so I was up until 4:30.  I really hope all goes well tomorrow with the long run.  I'm not on a timeline or anything though so if it doesn't all go well, it's not like I can't take a few weeks to build it back up again, or even one week.

That's the news for now...I'll be back to report my opinion of the Fitbit Charge HR...I'd much rather use the Surge bc it also has GPS but they never came out with a color other than black...so I ended up with the Microsoft Band...and next will be the Garmin Vivoactiv HR...super excited for that to be released!

Exercise and the Microsoft Band (first version)

First off, let's recap the last post...I was feeling horribly lonesome.  Since that evening (where I definitely hit my mental capacity for rock bottom), I've been feeling a lot more positive.  Getting into facebook groups that relate to me and my interests has helped and I'm setting up a few meet and greets with others in this area so hopefully that works out (no matter how apprehensive I am about them!).

This post is going to be more about where I'm at physically, instead of emotionally, at this point in my life.  This past Sunday I ran 9 miles without needing to stop to walk...just to see if I could.  I've been pushing my distance further over the past several weeks, not needing to walk during a run for over a month (I think) except for once when I ran the day after a snowstorm and got stuck in an area where I could choose between mud and snow, so I chose to walk until I got back to sidewalk.

Then on Tuesday, I ran 3.7 miles, finishing off the run with hill repeats (for the first time in my life) at the end of the run.  Basically you run up a hill faster than normal, then walk or slowly jog back down, then run fast up.  I chose to walk down but I ran up that hill as fast as I could, three times in a row.

Today, even though I almost couldn't find time to fit it in, and it was cold and snowing out, and I forgot ear muffs or a hat even though I know my ears get really painful when I run in the cold...I still ran 2 miles on the track at the gym, which was my goal (didn't have much time before having to get the kids from daycare).  I was so proud of myself!

Unfortunately, it was too cold for my watch to get a reading on my heart rate (the underwhelming Microsoft Band...that'll be a post on its own, maybe combined with a post on the even more underwhelming Android phone I have)...GPS worked though and I did the 2 miles in just under 20 minutes.  9:55 mile avg pace...super exciting bc I'm usually between a 10:30 and 11 minute pace.

The reason I'm disgruntled with the watch: it has been underestimating my daily burn by a lot.  After this run, I'm certain of it, because even though it tracked my pace and the amount of steps I took for that run, it calculated that I only burned 100 calories.  I know it had to have at least been double that amount.  So this has to mean that it was wrong on all of those days where it said I burned 1500 total even after cleaning the house, bathing the children, running up and down the steps to my office all day...not to mention the fact that I weight lift and exercise regularly, which should help me burn more all the time, right? Muscle burns calories faster...or so I've read in every single fitness and nutrition magazine.

Another, more undeniable reason I know my watch has been significantly under-calculating my calorie burn is the fact that I've been tracking my intake since Sunday.  I've dropped a few pounds already which is probably not true weight-loss but I can feel/see a difference.  The deficit according to the watch was not significant but I think the true calorie burn this week was a lot higher.  For instance, on Sunday, even after running 9 miles and burning 1,000 calories...and spending 3 hours that morning cleaning my house...and bathing the kids...and taking the girls for a walk...my f**ing watch calculated 2,400 total for the whole day.  That's 1,400 if I didn't run 9 miles...so 1400 calories burned all day...for breathing and cleaning and walking and playing with the kids and basically being really active all day.  What the hell am I supposed to eat?  According to this watch I'd basically have to starve myself to lose weight.  Such bullshit.

Okay, so this post turned into an 'underwhelming watch' post after all.  Guess I'll change the title.  And I'll stop here and head to bed...after some Facebook scrolling and new watch browsing.