exercise calories accuracy

AspenDan

I don't own a fitbit or anything. I usually use a stationary recumbent gym bike for half an hour and have just been logging "bicylcling, 12-14mph, moderate" because that's about how fast the machine says I averaged. But there's also a "stationary bike" which is more accurate in terms of the type of machine...but it has more vague intensity terms like "light effort" or "moderate effort" ...Any recommendations on how I should start logging my cardio that is more accurate?

larose1978

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/larose1978

AspenDan

Sincere response here...how is this relevant to my question?

Faithful_Chosen

danieltsmoke wrote: »

Sincere response here...how is this relevant to my question?

It definitely isn't.

Aaaanyway, calorie burn on any device differs per person. Most of the time, the machines can't be adjusted for weight, age, height, etc. and thus give a generalized number. They also don't take into account standing up or weight training while cycling. A heartrate monitor is a much more accurate way to measure calorie burn. If you have one of those, work out a set amount of times for a set amount of minutes (for example: 30 minutes x a few days) and note down the calorie burn. Put the 30 minutes into the various categories in MFP and see which calorie burn outcome is closest to your average burn. Adjust once you really start loosing weight as that will affect your burn (the less you weigh, the less you burn, generally speaking). It's not perfect, but it'll work--or just use the read-out of your monitor instead if you have long term access to it.

Good luck!

AspenDan

Well the machine tracks my heart rate, weight, and age...but it also gives far lower numbers than the MFP generalized calculators. Also, using my average heart rate in online calories by heart rate calculators, I get much higher calories burned than the machine says...so it's difficult to have any real idea.