exercise calories calculation
lexylondon
Posts: 89 Member
Just wondering if when this app calculates the exercise calories burnt it considers your height weight and age, as does other sites like fit day, or is it a generic average estimate?
0
Replies
-
It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.
It's so interesting that I read this advice all over the boards here, and yet MFP hasn't adjusted the overestimated calorie burns for their exercises. Wouldn't it be nice if we could rely more on this number? I know it is an estimate, but it's kind of sad that I can't rely AT ALL on any device I use to tell me how many calories I am burning. Not MFP, not any of the machines at the gym, not fitbit...
I read from one person in another discussion that a certain Heart Rate Monitor from Garmin gave very good estimates - but it was something like $200-$300 and I just signed up for a trainer at the gym - I can't afford to splurge for another device as well...
0 -
Yes it does, but like other's say- beware their counts. I cut them in half for most exercises.0
-
It's all an estimate.....and YES, coming from a 31 year old male, that has lost 104 lbs now and counting, over the course of 3+ years.....I will say the calorie burn IS calculated based on your "stats" - being that, a 298 lb 30 year old does not burn the same amount of calories as a 179 lb 31 year old
It's actually funny, cause when I first started my "journey" I had MFP posting my cardio logs to facebook, so to this day I see all of "this day last year" posts of me burning 500+ calories during a 45 minute cardio session :P Now, I'm lucky to burn 200 calories haha. 0 -
The MFP estimates are about double what the gym cardio equipment says I burn, so cutting MFP's numbers in half seems reasonable!0
-
I go with half as well.0
-
Wow half is a pretty big discrepency! I use the gym equipment to give me an estimate for most things but have been using mfp for my walk, so I'll cut that in half. I also don't put in calories burnt for the weights I do at the gym, 1. Because I have no idea what it would be, and 2. As it gives me a bit of a buffer, how much, I do not know. .0
-
First I used MFP, or used the data off cardio machines, then got a HRM. The difference is quite staggering. Both overestimated considerably.
Also most people log their gross calories burned not their net calories. For most people that's about a 25% difference.
0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.
It's so interesting that I read this advice all over the boards here, and yet MFP hasn't adjusted the overestimated calorie burns for their exercises. Wouldn't it be nice if we could rely more on this number? I know it is an estimate, but it's kind of sad that I can't rely AT ALL on any device I use to tell me how many calories I am burning. Not MFP, not any of the machines at the gym, not fitbit...
I read from one person in another discussion that a certain Heart Rate Monitor from Garmin gave very good estimates - but it was something like $200-$300 and I just signed up for a trainer at the gym - I can't afford to splurge for another device as well...
This. I just posted as I don't have one so I want to buy the best one there is and need to know. I don't understand the point of some of these fitness trackers that still don't calculate accurate calorie burn
0 -
As others have said, its a good idea to go with approx half the burn.0
-
shadow2soul wrote: »It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.
It's so interesting that I read this advice all over the boards here, and yet MFP hasn't adjusted the overestimated calorie burns for their exercises. Wouldn't it be nice if we could rely more on this number? I know it is an estimate, but it's kind of sad that I can't rely AT ALL on any device I use to tell me how many calories I am burning. Not MFP, not any of the machines at the gym, not fitbit...
I read from one person in another discussion that a certain Heart Rate Monitor from Garmin gave very good estimates - but it was something like $200-$300 and I just signed up for a trainer at the gym - I can't afford to splurge for another device as well...
This. I just posted as I don't have one so I want to buy the best one there is and need to know. I don't understand the point of some of these fitness trackers that still don't calculate accurate calorie burn
There isn't a device on the market yet that will be 100% accurate for anyone. The technology just isn't there yet.
I use Fitbit. The models without HR underestimated for me by about 200 calories per day on average. I used the Surge last year and it closed that 200 calorie gap. I'm now using the blaze which should give me the same results as the Surge.
0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »shadow2soul wrote: »It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.
It's so interesting that I read this advice all over the boards here, and yet MFP hasn't adjusted the overestimated calorie burns for their exercises. Wouldn't it be nice if we could rely more on this number? I know it is an estimate, but it's kind of sad that I can't rely AT ALL on any device I use to tell me how many calories I am burning. Not MFP, not any of the machines at the gym, not fitbit...
I read from one person in another discussion that a certain Heart Rate Monitor from Garmin gave very good estimates - but it was something like $200-$300 and I just signed up for a trainer at the gym - I can't afford to splurge for another device as well...
This. I just posted as I don't have one so I want to buy the best one there is and need to know. I don't understand the point of some of these fitness trackers that still don't calculate accurate calorie burn
There isn't a device on the market yet that will be 100% accurate for anyone. The technology just isn't there yet.
I use Fitbit. The models without HR underestimated for me by about 200 calories per day on average. I used the Surge last year and it closed that 200 calorie gap. I'm now using the blaze which should give me the same results as the Surge.
How do you know if a device is underestimating or overestimating?0 -
shadow2soul wrote: »shadow2soul wrote: »It considers your stats, but it's still an estimate and you could be burning more or less.
Typical recommendation is to cut MFP'S estimated exercise calorie burn in half and adjust up or down based on actual results.
It's so interesting that I read this advice all over the boards here, and yet MFP hasn't adjusted the overestimated calorie burns for their exercises. Wouldn't it be nice if we could rely more on this number? I know it is an estimate, but it's kind of sad that I can't rely AT ALL on any device I use to tell me how many calories I am burning. Not MFP, not any of the machines at the gym, not fitbit...
I read from one person in another discussion that a certain Heart Rate Monitor from Garmin gave very good estimates - but it was something like $200-$300 and I just signed up for a trainer at the gym - I can't afford to splurge for another device as well...
This. I just posted as I don't have one so I want to buy the best one there is and need to know. I don't understand the point of some of these fitness trackers that still don't calculate accurate calorie burn
There isn't a device on the market yet that will be 100% accurate for anyone. The technology just isn't there yet.
I use Fitbit. The models without HR underestimated for me by about 200 calories per day on average. I used the Surge last year and it closed that 200 calorie gap. I'm now using the blaze which should give me the same results as the Surge.
How do you know if a device is underestimating or overestimating?
By your rate of weight loss. If for example fitbit is showing a 1000 calorie deficit every day, this should mean that you'd be losing 2ish lbs per week, if you are losing more or less than this and you're 100% certain your food logging is on point, then you can look to your fitbit to see if it's over or underestimating.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions