Are the calories burned wrong?

Options
2

Replies

  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    Options
    What I believe is that most people are just guessing and when they see a large calorie burn they assume it is wrong. I have yet to see anyone who has compared the calorie burns on MFP to the results from indirect calorimeter results.
  • TheEats
    TheEats Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    I find that compared with exercise equipment, MFP typically overestimates by a third. The same goes for fairly high intensity aerobic exercises, when I use a HRM. Everything else, like pilates, it is at least double what it should be. I adjust the number before I log it, since I do not want inflated deficits when I look at my weekly numbers.
  • acpgee
    acpgee Posts: 7,720 Member
    Options
    I use a HRM for steady state cardio. For a typical workout of 65 minutes on the elliptical targeting a heart rate of 130-140, the HRM says I burn around 500. The machine (which knows my weight) says around 750. MFP database says 926.
  • pinkteapot3
    pinkteapot3 Posts: 157 Member
    Options
    I'll be the lone dissenter on this topic, yet again.

    I find the estimates spot on for both running and cycling. They tie up with my HRM calculated cals, and I've lost 11lbs in 8 weeks with a goal of 1lb per week loss and eating back ALL of my exercise cals.

    I don't believe that ALL exercise cals are overstated and it irritates me when people claim that none of them are reliable.

    What I always say is that exercise MUST be measured as accurately as food. You weigh your food to the nearest gram. You need to know exactly how many minutes you did cardio for, and at what speed. I use GPS apps that record my runs and bike rides, so I accurately know my average speed. I do think there's an element of some people over-estimating the exercise they do, just as some people under-estimate what they're eating.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    pinkteapot3 wrote: »
    I'll be the lone dissenter on this topic, yet again.

    I find the estimates spot on for both running and cycling. They tie up with my HRM calculated cals, and I've lost 11lbs in 8 weeks with a goal of 1lb per week loss and eating back ALL of my exercise cals.

    I don't believe that ALL exercise cals are overstated and it irritates me when people claim that none of them are reliable.

    What I always say is that exercise MUST be measured as accurately as food. You weigh your food to the nearest gram. You need to know exactly how many minutes you did cardio for, and at what speed. I use GPS apps that record my runs and bike rides, so I accurately know my average speed. I do think there's an element of some people over-estimating the exercise they do, just as some people under-estimate what they're eating.

    you must be the average person then .. because in any bell curve there's a group that are spot on .. although your stats say otherwise to be honest - you've roughly undereaten by about 180 calories a day over those 8 weeks as you're losing at a greater weight.. although then again water weight has to be accounted for

    on MFP many people find the burns ridiculous .. I'm one of those .. I always just ruled of thumb it that if I'm using MFP I'll generally eat back 50-75% ... I do trust my fitbit / HRM give or take about 100 calories per day.

    it's all just estimates .. we yearn for a mathematical accuracy but it doesn't work like that

    always best to judge over time by actual weight lost and adjust from there
  • scottacular
    scottacular Posts: 597 Member
    Options
    midpath wrote: »
    It says I'm burning 800 calories by doing 60 minutes of circuit training but idk if I believe that. I'm 5'10" and 229 lbs,

    I've seen some extremely high numbers for things posted on MFP before for what seems like relatively moderate exercise. I'd not take that as being accurate at all. Half of that would seem more realistic. If you're eating back exercise calories, start on the lower end of the calorie range and see how it affects your weight. No negative, eat a bit more next time and so on. Trial and error this.
  • pinkteapot3
    pinkteapot3 Posts: 157 Member
    Options
    I know that everyone's different - I do appreciate that. But newbies see these threads and assume they should start off by only eating half their exercise cals back. They need to know that's not necessarily correct. If I only ate half my exercise cals, I'd feel very hungry and would probably give up with the programme.

    Personally, if people are comfortable that they're logging food accurately, I think they should start by eating back their exercise cals and then eat fewer if they don't lose weight.

    Or, at least, people who post to say "It's always wrong - eat back 50%" should at least caveat their comments by saying that some people find them wrong for them.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    pinkteapot3 wrote: »
    I'll be the lone dissenter on this topic, yet again.

    I find the estimates spot on for both running and cycling. They tie up with my HRM calculated cals, and I've lost 11lbs in 8 weeks with a goal of 1lb per week loss and eating back ALL of my exercise cals.

    I don't believe that ALL exercise cals are overstated and it irritates me when people claim that none of them are reliable.

    What I always say is that exercise MUST be measured as accurately as food. You weigh your food to the nearest gram. You need to know exactly how many minutes you did cardio for, and at what speed. I use GPS apps that record my runs and bike rides, so I accurately know my average speed. I do think there's an element of some people over-estimating the exercise they do, just as some people under-estimate what they're eating.

    Correct!
    But this is MFP where people tend to make blanket statements and talk in absolutes! :smile:

    Walking and running estimates should be pretty accurate.
    Quite a few others are based on very standard and tested formulas.
    For cycling I actually found some too low, some reasonable, some too high to be credible depending on speed selected when compared with my own numbers.

    On the other hand of the entries are fanciful and people can also over estimate their exercise intensity. A bit of common sense can go a long way.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    pinkteapot3 wrote: »
    I know that everyone's different - I do appreciate that. But newbies see these threads and assume they should start off by only eating half their exercise cals back. They need to know that's not necessarily correct. If I only ate half my exercise cals, I'd feel very hungry and would probably give up with the programme.

    Personally, if people are comfortable that they're logging food accurately, I think they should start by eating back their exercise cals and then eat fewer if they don't lose weight.

    Or, at least, people who post to say "It's always wrong - eat back 50%" should at least caveat their comments by saying that some people find them wrong for them.

    Yep fair enough

    But it's good starting advice as a rule of thumb .. and as people get more used to their new lifestyle and the impact on their own weight I would assume that they would make the decision for themselves as to eat back more .. if I'm losing more than I target to lose I get to eat more unless I'm comfortable with my rate of loss
  • DeadsAndDoritos
    DeadsAndDoritos Posts: 267 Member
    Options
    I don't find it to be that far off. For example, yesterday I did a 55 minute step aerobics class. MFP estimate: 545, HRM: 499. On Saturday I did 25 mins jogging at 5mph. MFP estimate: 233, HRM: 254.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    pinkteapot3 wrote: »
    I'll be the lone dissenter on this topic, yet again.

    I find the estimates spot on for both running and cycling. They tie up with my HRM calculated cals, and I've lost 11lbs in 8 weeks with a goal of 1lb per week loss and eating back ALL of my exercise cals.

    I don't believe that ALL exercise cals are overstated and it irritates me when people claim that none of them are reliable.

    What I always say is that exercise MUST be measured as accurately as food. You weigh your food to the nearest gram. You need to know exactly how many minutes you did cardio for, and at what speed. I use GPS apps that record my runs and bike rides, so I accurately know my average speed. I do think there's an element of some people over-estimating the exercise they do, just as some people under-estimate what they're eating.

    @pinkteapot3‌
    I agree with you. I do believe the OP's calorie estimate is overinflated in this case but I don't believe that all of the MFP entries are grossly exaggerated. Part of the problem, as I mentioned is it doesn't account for intensity. Also, I assume this workout video has a warm up and cool down as part of that 60 minutes, so you wouldn't be going at the same intensity for 60 minutes straight.
    Things like running and walking will be more accurate because they can account for intensity and are fairly well established in energy requirements.

    A lot of people base their beliefs that MFP is overinflated when compared to their HRM. They are assuming the HRM is the right number. It is not necessarily.
  • DawnieB1977
    DawnieB1977 Posts: 4,248 Member
    Options
    I do a HIIT circuits class. According to my friend's Fitbit charge HRM she burned 335 calories in 45 mins, so I suppose if it were an hour it would be 450 or so. That's a hardcore class. So yes, 800 calories is way too high.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    DawnieB1977 wrote: »
    I do a HIIT circuits class. According to my friend's Fitbit charge HRM she burned 335 calories in 45 mins, so I suppose if it were an hour it would be 450 or so. That's a hardcore class. So yes, 800 calories is way too high.

    Unless you are the same height, weight and fitness her burn does not equal your burn

    But for me I would agree .. I get 350 for 45 minutes hard intensity gym workout incorporating steady-state cardio and HIIT and calisthenics / weights .. but then I don't eat it all because of the inaccuracies in the HRM formula against the type of workout I'm doing
  • DawnieB1977
    DawnieB1977 Posts: 4,248 Member
    Options
    That's why I wrote 'she burned'. She is shorter than I am, but we have roughly the same BMI and we're at the same level of fitness. I weigh more so maybe I burn more? Either way, I don't eat back exercise calories so it doesn't really matter in theory if I log 1000 calories lol.
  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    Options
    DawnieB1977 wrote: »
    That's why I wrote 'she burned'. She is shorter than I am, but we have roughly the same BMI and we're at the same level of fitness. I weigh more so maybe I burn more? Either way, I don't eat back exercise calories so it doesn't really matter in theory if I log 1000 calories lol.

    Actually, it could matter quite a bit. You can die from not eating enough.
  • DawnieB1977
    DawnieB1977 Posts: 4,248 Member
    Options
    I mean it doesn't matter what the number I log is as I don't eat them, so if it's really over it doesn't matter. I'm not actually burning 1000 calories. Believe me, if I actually burned that many through exercise I'd eat at least half then!

    I usually burn 300-350 for an exercise session (and I probably underestimate a bit) but I eat 1500-1600 calories per day, so don't worry, I'm not about to die through not eating enough :)
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    TimothyFish wrote: »
    DawnieB1977 wrote: »
    That's why I wrote 'she burned'. She is shorter than I am, but we have roughly the same BMI and we're at the same level of fitness. I weigh more so maybe I burn more? Either way, I don't eat back exercise calories so it doesn't really matter in theory if I log 1000 calories lol.

    Actually, it could matter quite a bit. You can die from not eating enough.

    Wut? TIL that if you don't log your burn you gonna be ded. :confounded:

    Many people here do not eat back their exercise calories because either there already included it in an activity level or, like me, work off a fixed TDEE method and only eat back exceptional burns...

    We aren't going to die from not eating enough.

    If you are working on a plan that doesn't include eating back calories, it doesn't matter if you log 1 or 1000 cals.
  • FatMoojor
    FatMoojor Posts: 483 Member
    Options
    I have found that the number from MFP to be quite a bit lower than my numbers from my HRM.

    Using the treadmill in the gym, set on 8kph and I run for 60 minutes. MFP puts that at about 650. But my HRM tracks that at 937.

    My heart rate and cadence from a treadmill run and a weekend outside run at equal.
  • esjones12
    esjones12 Posts: 1,363 Member
    Options
    I too find MFP and my HRM to be very similar on straight cardio. That is probably because you can say how fast you were going which will help calculate your intensity on MFP.

    The problem with the circuit training entry is that MFP can't measure your intensity. I actually use my HRM during circuit training and PT sessions and use 75% of those calories to eat back. I am still waiting for someone who says you can't use HRM for non steady state cardio to give me a formula/reference point that calculates in intensity. I would definitely be interested in checking it out.

    Eating back becomes more important the closer you are to goal weight and if you are doing a ton of exercise.

    All said and done it boils down to trail and error. If you are losing weight then keep logging exercise as you are. If you are tired/hungry then try eating more back and see if you still lose. If you aren't losing weight, then you are over estimating your burns. Assuming you are doing everything else correctly =]
  • julesxo
    julesxo Posts: 422 Member
    Options
    midpath wrote: »
    It says I'm burning 800 calories by doing 60 minutes of circuit training but idk if I believe that. I'm 5'10" and 229 lbs,



    For your height and weight that seems about right to me. Best way to know is to get a HRM. I found MFP underestimated calories burned in comparison.

Categories