Calories Burned - Who to believe?
Options
bdgfn
Posts: 7,719 Member
How do you log your calories burned during exercise? I have noticed a huge difference between what MFP defaults to with calories burned versus what a cardio machine indicates. For example, according to MFP, 30 minutes on the elliptical will burn 581 calories, and does not take into account my weight, level of effort, etc, while the elliptical itself showed that I burned 342 calories during that 30 minute time frame based on the weight I entered, and I assume takes into consideration the level of effort I am putting in, i.e. the RPMs and the Level I enter. I have been using this number as opposed to what MFP shows. Yes, it is a smaller number, but I feel it may be more accurate. Thanks for your input.
0
Replies
-
Neither is going to be entirely accurate since ellipticals aren't all too accurate either. I agree with your approach of erroring on the side of the lower number. Just remember that the goal is not to be exact but directionally correct.0
-
I do not trust them. Strava tells me a 6k run burns 700 cals, the treadmill tells me 400 cals and I settle for about 200 cals that I can eat0
-
Get yourself a heart rate monitor like a polar watch or something way more accurate0
-
MFP estimates are all over the place. As for the machines, it depends on the machine. Many of them will give you gross calorie burn even if the inputs and algorithms are solid, so that is a factor as well.
Some machines will give MET values, mile equivalents, or other values you can use to check calorie burns.
But for reference on the elliptical we own, to burn 1100+ per hour would be in the range of 8-9 mile equivalent in an hour, if not a little more. That's based on my current size of 180 lbs.0 -
Thanks, guys. Much appreciated.0
-
The only way I log my exercise is through my heart rate monitor. I actually realised I was eating too little, because the machines at the gym had me at, lets say, a 200 calorie burn on the bike, when in fact, it was 400. At the end the gym session, Id think I'd burnt 400, when in fact it was 800, and my body wasn't being supplied with enough energy to keep up.0
-
Not really weighing in on your question exactly, but MFP does take into consideration your weight - it just doesn't require you to input it each time, but you've already told MFP how much you weigh.0
-
MFP _does_, for most categories of exercise, consider your most recent check-in weight/mass as a determinant of exercise calories burned.0
-
Not really weighing in on your question exactly, but MFP does take into consideration your weight - it just doesn't require you to input it each time, but you've already told MFP how much you weigh.Arsenal1919 wrote: »MFP _does_, for most categories of exercise, consider your most recent check-in weight/mass as a determinant of exercise calories burned.
Thank you both. I should have realized that. Still, MFP can't have any idea how much effort is being put in. If I am only doing, say 40RPM on Level 1, I won't be working as hard as if I were doing 60RPM on Level 10.0 -
ZombieLauren wrote: »The only way I log my exercise is through my heart rate monitor. I actually realised I was eating too little, because the machines at the gym had me at, lets say, a 200 calorie burn on the bike, when in fact, it was 400. At the end the gym session, Id think I'd burnt 400, when in fact it was 800, and my body wasn't being supplied with enough energy to keep up.
So I guess I will be getting a heart rate monitor soon.
0 -
the compendium for physical activities is the main base from which most exercise cals burned are tabulated from.
gym machines only as accurate as data inputted.
mfp estimates fairly good overall imo.
runners use a cal calculator from runners world etc.
swimmers use swimcalculator.com.
rowers use conceptc2.com for very specific info.
HRM will be a useful tool on your journey,but its widely accepted that it work best for steady state cardio only.
a higher end polar/garmin watch with chest strap might be a wise investment too,especially if you start swimming/triathlon.
dcrainmaker has loads of evaluations/reviews to choose from.
happy googling!0 -
I have has this question as well. My treadmill tells me when i run 2 miles (at 4.4mph, sweating, breathing hard, much effort) I've burned 400 cal. When I put that into MFP, it's only about 160 cal. But it also only gives the option of walking at a very very brisk pace at 4.5 mph, when i was actually jogging/running at that speed.0
-
ZombieLauren wrote: »The only way I log my exercise is through my heart rate monitor. I actually realised I was eating too little, because the machines at the gym had me at, lets say, a 200 calorie burn on the bike, when in fact, it was 400. At the end the gym session, Id think I'd burnt 400, when in fact it was 800, and my body wasn't being supplied with enough energy to keep up.
So I guess I will be getting a heart rate monitor soon.
Yeah, go get a HRM with a Chest Strap. I have both that and a FitBit Surge, and the Fitbit Surge isn't always that accurate either. Also, be prepared for a bit of sticker shock on the results. I always wish I burned what MFP told me I should....It's always overly high0 -
I have has this question as well. My treadmill tells me when i run 2 miles (at 4.4mph, sweating, breathing hard, much effort) I've burned 400 cal. When I put that into MFP, it's only about 160 cal. But it also only gives the option of walking at a very very brisk pace at 4.5 mph, when i was actually jogging/running at that speed.
You can check the mph by how long it took, did you run for about 22-28 minutes? Also walking at a high speed and running should be calculated differently. I think if i run 4.5mph for 25 minutes it's about 182 calories for me (5 ft 4 and 158 lbs) but when i put walking at 4 mph i get 1380 -
If you can't get a hrm immediately a good pedometer might temporarily work or even your phone to give you an idea. There's an app called runtastic that really helped me to have a good idea of my calorie burn when i walked, jogged or used a treadmill. I just had to figure out to determine the sensitivity it should respond to first, so i'd strap my phone to my ankle then jog while counting my steps, if it counted right i knew that sensitivity was okay, if not i adjusted. The strap things are also relatively inexpensive. I would use it for certain exercises though
0 -
Elliptical is a tough one. MFP can take your weight into account but not your fitness level.
I really doubt you can burn 581 in half an hour - that would take an elite level of fitness as well as being heavy.
Go with the elliptical, it may not be accurate (accuracy isn't really as important as consistency...) but at least the numbers will be in proportion to your effort.0 -
malcolmjcooper wrote: »Get yourself a heart rate monitor like a polar watch or something way more accurate
Not necessarily......many HRMs correlate heart rate & caloric expenditure when a linear correlation does not exist.
OP, you're right to be skeptical about burning 581 cal in half an hour. I'm not sure how this would translate to an elliptical but Runners World offers the following formulae for net calories expended walking and running:
Walking .30 x weight (in lbs) x distance (in miles)
Running .63 x weight (in lbs) x distance (in miles)0 -
I have has this question as well. My treadmill tells me when i run 2 miles (at 4.4mph, sweating, breathing hard, much effort) I've burned 400 cal. When I put that into MFP, it's only about 160 cal. But it also only gives the option of walking at a very very brisk pace at 4.5 mph, when i was actually jogging/running at that speed.
I'm about 160lbs and with both running and walking distance and bodyweight are the big determinants, not pace. For me I'll burn about 50-60 cals per mile walking and about 100 cals per mile running.
Having glanced at our profile you're probably about 300-350 for2 miles of running.0 -
ZombieLauren wrote: »The only way I log my exercise is through my heart rate monitor. I actually realised I was eating too little, because the machines at the gym had me at, lets say, a 200 calorie burn on the bike, when in fact, it was 400. At the end the gym session, Id think I'd burnt 400, when in fact it was 800, and my body wasn't being supplied with enough energy to keep up.
So I guess I will be getting a heart rate monitor soon.
HRMs have only limited accuracy, so I would make sure you have the right expectations.0 -
BrianSharpe wrote: »malcolmjcooper wrote: »Get yourself a heart rate monitor like a polar watch or something way more accurate
...Runners World offers the following formulae for net calories expended walking and running:
Walking .30 x weight (in lbs) x distance (in miles)
Running .63 x weight (in lbs) x distance (in miles)
Excellent, thank you! I'm not a runner, but I will start using the Walking formula!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions