How accurate do you think the calories burned readout is on gym equipment?

Options
2»

Replies

  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,390 Member
    Options
    Azdak wrote: »
    robertw486 wrote: »
    I think it would vary quite a bit from machine to machine, as well as by brand of machine and the formulas they use, as well as the number of inputs it has.

    My personal opinion is that a decent machine should have a much more accurate number than a stand alone HRM or any other calculator. Why? The machine has more inputs to calculate with. It knows all variations in pace over total time regardless. They also have a lot of inputs unique to that machine type, like an elliptical having ramp/resistance inputs.

    On a bike or elliptical, stide or stroke length of the pedals is a known to the machine. As such there is little room for error if the machine tracks pace. On a treadmill, the user can alter those things, so differences in efficiency at different strides and paces are more possible.

    While it is true that machines can measure actual workload with good accuracy, that workload then has to be translated into an estimated oxygen cost/calorie burn, and THAT'S where the inaccuracy occurs. Most machines use algorithms that are either only rough estimates, or are borrowed from another related activity. In order to accurately estimate calories, a company would have to develop their own machine-specific algorithms and then do validation studies for each type of equipment. Realistically, that rarely happens.

    Precor does just that due to the movement specifics of the machines. They use models from the American College of Sports medicine for some machines, then on others use unique formulas due to the details of the machine design.

    And while I completely agree that any model is less accurate without oxygen related testing, no standard formula that I know of accounts for that. So I'd still tend to think the more inputs the better. Naturally there will be variance depending on user variables not punched in and/or accounted for, but that happens with any other formula or HRM as well.

    Really without VO2 max testing and such, nothing is more than a decent estimate based on whatever formula they think works, and they all have error.

    tomatoey wrote: »
    gia07 wrote: »
    . At first I used apps and calculators online to help me figure it out and take a range and thank goodness I only ate back a small portion of my exercise calories.

    I did exactly this, using the TDEE method -just kept steady intake at 1900-2100 (using measuring cups [!!]). It got me from 178 lbs to 124 lbs. If you are able to do 30-45 minutes of vigorous cardio every other day, or 45-60 minutes of moderate cardio most days, the heart rate monitor and machine numbers don't matter all that much.


    I lost quite a few pounds biking and not even logging calories. Though I did use an app to track miles and estimated calories, I just used the common sense method of move more and eat less. I joined MFP mostly to keep a better grip on the nutrition side of things as my workouts got longer over time. I still don't weigh any food, and have had no problem keeping the pounds going down.

    So there are loads of ways to do it that work.

Categories