Accuracy of Polar "calories burned" study: in plain english

[maillotpois]

And how do they hold the handles on the rowing machine with their tiny little paws?

And their stumpy little legs would never reach the pedals of an exercise bike. Maybe they just go around in those hamster wheels?

[Veronica]

So you're telling me I didn't really burn 10,611 calories on Saturday, that it was really only 9337? (I have been tested. )
Oh no, I guess I need to lay of the Klondikes.

V.

[Dianyla]

(I have been tested. )

Oohh, really? Wherehowmuch?

[Veronica]

UC Davis. It was about 300 dollars for body fat, lactate threshhold and VO2 max. It was a very interesting group of tests. It was almost three years ago and I want to go back and do it again.

OwnCal predicts my VO2 max to be 51. Testing showed it to be 41.

V.

[SnappyPix]

OwnCal predicts my VO2 max to be 51. Testing showed it to be 41.

I'm very dubious about Polar's fit-test and VO2 max calculations. I've got the Polar F11 and the fit-test can vary over quite a large range for me - anything between 43 and 59, for example. 59 puts me in the elite group for my age. I don't think so!!
Interestingly, if I take the test under "ideal" conditions - ie rested, caffeine/alcohol free, no distractions, etc. the result is typically lower.
If I take the test when I've had my first cup of tea and/or have had a couple of glasses of wine the night before, the results are higher.
As I understand, the test is based not just on the resting heart rate, but on heart rate variability for the duration of the test (along with gender, height, weight, etc). A faster, more erratic resting heart rate puts me in a fitter VO2 category.