machine calories v MFP

helse

Do you guys input the calories burned according to what the machine calculates or go with what MFP gives when you input time of workout?

Kristinemomof3

Heart rate monitor, I would go with MFP over a machine, at least it has your height & weight entered.

IsaackGMOON

Get yourself a Heart Rate Monitor (HRM) if it's a viable option.

Relatively, they're a lot more accurate than MFP for steady rate cardiovascular exercise. If it's not an option, go with MFP's calorie burns.

helse

Thank you.

charcar55

MFP's calories burned seems to be way more than what the machine says. 30 min on elliptical cross trainer (for me) is roughly around 230 calories and MFP says it's 345. That's a significant difference. See following text from article:

"The other issue is that, even if you did nothing, your body would be burning calories. For example, a 10 st person just lying watching TV for an hour will burn about 70 calories. But exercise machines show you the total number of calories burnt — what your body is expending on its own and the extra you’re burning while doing exercise.
The rowing machine may tell you you’ve burned 250 calories for an hour’s work, but you’ve actually ‘earned’ only a 180-calorie reward.
So if you reward your 20-minute run (218 calories expended, but actually only 148 extra calories) with a latte (180 calories), you’re, in fact, taking on more calories than if you hadn’t exercised.
Multiply that on a weekly basis, and you can see how things get difficult.

dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3133633/How-exercise-make-pile-pounds-keeping-fit-not-getting-slimmer-surprising-reasons-why.html

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3133633/How-exercise-make-pile-pounds-keeping-fit-not-getting-slimmer-surprising-reasons-why.html#ixzz3drF7eMER
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook