My Fitness Pal OVER-estimating calories burned?

Sassy_xo

Does anyone else feel like MFP really overestimates the number of calories you burn exercising and being active? I see people post things like "180 for half an hour of cleaning" and that sort of thing, and I wonder if this is accurate? Compared to what cardio machines at the gym tell me when I enter my weight, MFP tells me alot more calories were burned than the machine. I ordered a FitBit, so I will be interested what it shows when I get it. I just wondered what you all think about this and what you think is the most accurate way to log calories burned?

Sued0nim

Cut them in half is the standard advice

isulo_kura

They're all estimates based on averages. For some things they seem to be more consistent than others. Personally I think they're running estimate seems pretty accurate. Even a HRM or a fitbit are not perfect. Take these estimates and adjust if necessary

mccindy72

always. If you want accuracy in your calorie burn, get a good HRM with a chest strap. Otherwise, you are not going to have much accuracy, if you are depending on machinery or MFP.

JessieLMay

I think some things are over like the cleaning, however, I have noticed that what mfp has is consistant with what I get from heart rate.

rayw89

Personally I've never used what MFP tallies for me. I also don't trust what the machine in the gym tells me. Typically I take what the equipment tells me(such as treadmill, eliptical) and subtract atleast 100 calories from what it says, and then manually enter it in to MFP. I also don't track things like cleaning, or casual walks, but that's just me.

aaliceinw

I've found the HRM is really the most accurate and if I enter the exercise manually on MFP it tends to calculate about 20% more calories.

Terryb99

I look at it as a benchmark, something to show day to day consistency, or not.
Kind of like your bathroom scale. Is it truly accurate? It does not really matter, as long as you use the same scale each time. It will show you whether you are gong up or down.
I use a HRM to plug in my exercise routine calories burned. My Fitbit adds some activity, or calories burned. An average guy burns 2000 calories just getting out of bed and moving thru a day. So if I use those numbers, plus my HRM reading, MFP seems close enough for me to keep track of my activity and net calories.

brianpperkins

Most calculators, machines, and HRMs report gross, not net, calories burned. HRMs are only close to accurate for a limited number of activities.

Mr_Knight

Terryb99 wrote: »

I look at it as a benchmark, something to show day to day consistency, or not.
Kind of like your bathroom scale. Is it truly accurate? It does not really matter, as long as you use the same scale each time.

HRMs don't work that way - heck, they'll give you different numbers for the same level of exertion depending on the temperature outside!

Use with caution....

blankiefinder

I don't log calories for cleaning, and usually log 1 calorie for strength training. For other cardio, I log the lower of my HRM / MFP / machine reading, and then eat back no more than 50%.

999tigger

I thought HRMs were to measure heart rate in steady state cardio and that calorie burns are extrapolation off a formula which cna be way out if used incorrectly or for the wrong form of exercise?

People often overestimate their own effort on MFP as well.

Oldbitcollector

I've always suspected that MFP is over estimating my cardio calorie counts, but being that it doesn't tally my strength training exercises, I've declared it a wash since the pounds are coming off.

milaxx

I honestly only log it for record keeping purposes. I do think it estimate high, but I usually don't factor the calories burned into my diet anyway. I just like being able to log that I worked out for _____amount of time. I know their are other apps that likely could be more accurate, but I like having everything in one spot.

GBO323

I stopped logging exercise in MFP. The reason is when you add it in, MFP gives you immediate credit for it..and accuracy of what it gives you is questionable. With a tracking device like FitBit, you don't get exercise credit until you've burned a certain amount of calories for the day to warrant getting extra. While I use my Moto360 to track steps for my daily 10,000, I don't sync devices to MFP anymore. It was a yo-yo effect for me.

tigerblue

MFP is pretty close to what my HRM gave me, when I was using it. At least for running and other cardio. But neither of them subtracts the calories that you would be burning in that time if you were not exercising. And those are already counted in your goal. For me, I figure I would be burning about 1 calorie per minute just sitting(I'm pretty small so that is conservative) so MFP exercise estimation minus the number of minutes exercised gets it in the ball park. After that you just have to adjust based on weight loss/gain results.

numinousnymph

yes MFP always shows way over what i burn/would burn. i use a Polar FT4 HRM with a chest strap, and even then i always subtract 75 cals from the total after a workout, just to adjust for any error the HRM has inherent in it. for cardio machines -- i only use ones that i can enter my weight in, and when i do enter my weight i put it in 15 lbs lighter than i really am, and then i HALVE the final calorie count the machine says -- and by that point it's closer to what my HRM says. call me overly-cautious or paranoid, but i do not want to end up gaining weight 'cause of errors like that!!

tigerblue

999tigger wrote: »

People often overestimate their own effort on MFP as well.

No kidding! I thought I was running 10 minute miles and really they were closer to 12 minute miles!

jke78

I've seen this topic several times and I'm still confused

numinousnymph

jke78 wrote: »

I've seen this topic several times and I'm still confused

what are you confused about?

yirara

I think it overwstimates. As I'm interested incals and duration I calculate net calories using METs and/or experience and then chose a random cardio activity that gives me the same number for the correct duration. That works for me. That I today logged a type of walking for 37 mins of circuit doesn't matter. I add a note of what I did and am happy my stats look ok.

musicandarts

It doesn't matter much. I use the calorie count from my treadmill as stated. Everything else, I discount a bit. Please remember that calorie estimates are always estimates. This applies to foods as well. You will lose weight even if you use MFP estimates.

Mr_Knight

musicandarts wrote: »

You will lose weight even if you use MFP estimates.

Unfortunately, that's just not the case. There are a LOT of people on MFP who are over-estimating their way right out of a deficit and into a surplus.

blankiefinder

yirara wrote: »

I think it overwstimates. As I'm interested incals and duration I calculate net calories using METs and/or experience and then chose a random cardio activity that gives me the same number for the correct duration. That works for me. That I today logged a type of walking for 37 mins of circuit doesn't matter. I add a note of what I did and am happy my stats look ok.

@yirara , why not enter the correct exercise but change the calories to the correct number? You don't have to use the default calorie burn.

OrangeBabelfish

HRM is good for steady cardio but if you're like me, with tachycardia, an HRM would also majorly overestimate my effort. Gym machines seem to be based on a 150lb average. I tend to just log it but not eat all the calories back. It may overestimate my running but I go crazy on the elliptical and MFP has that as a low burn. So swings and roundabouts. No one piece of equipment is infallible.

JennieMaeK

I don't have a heart rate monitor, yet, but I find the treadmill at my gym is way over what MFP says. I generally don't eat back my calories, so I'm not concerned about what it says. I've ordered a heart rate monitor so I'll see once I get that.

Terryb99

Mr_Knight wrote: »

HRMs don't work that way - heck, they'll give you different numbers for the same level of exertion depending on the temperature outside!
Use with caution....

I find my FT7 to be remarkably consistent. Number of minutes vs calories burned it reports

But heck, what do I know. I have only lost 9 pounds this month doing it the way I do.

I tried exercise only for the first 10 days this month. That was not doing it alone. So I logged back into MFP to log food, exercise, everything, and it is working.

Like I said it is a benchmark FOR ME. I am concentrating on calories in and calories out, based on MFP calculations from my food diary, Fitbit and FT7 inputs.

yirara

blankiefinder wrote: »

@yirara , why not enter the correct exercise but change the calories to the correct number? You don't have to use the default calorie burn.

Because then I have to do the sums each time as the duration differs greatly. As long as my weight stays the same I just enter the time in the appropriate walking type and get what I think is a good calorie estimate and the correct duration.

MKEgal

Yes, most machines, including MFP, overestimate calories burned.
And since most weight loss happens from controlling calories in, rather than burning them off,
it's better to ignore exercise calories anyway (at least most of the time; if you're really hungry
at the end of the day once in a while, have 1/3 to 1/2 of them for a snack).

Think of exercise as a bonus toward weight loss, and an improvement for your health overall.
(That's what my doctor* & dietician told me, and when I follow their advice I lose weight.)

*an endocrinologist specializing in weight loss issues

Asher_Ethan

I always underestimate what calories I've burned (if I ran for 2 hours I'll say I walked for 2 hours on MFP) and then I only eat half.

karenrich77

I only log mine for my own records, I cut the cal burn in half if necessary