Soooo...why does MFP overestimate calories burned? (if that's even true)

Options
2»

Replies

  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Options
    The only time I used a HRM on the treadmill, my HRM number was actually 20% higher than what the machine told me!

    So I don't really know what to think anymore.

    But I compared my stationary bike and my HRM and it was 100% on point. So that gives me about 250 calories an hour (and it's some pretty good effort for me)... so when I see people logging 1000 calories for one hour of bike... yeah, I don't quite believe it. Sorry!

    What makes me roll my eyes is 300 calories burned in one hour of yoga...

    Either way, this is why I switched to TDEE. My activity is pretty much the same from one week to another anyway.
    3dogsrunning wrote: »
    You may find this blog helpful
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/estimating-calories-activity-databases-198041

    MFP uses the Compendium of Physical Activities as many sources do.

    Peronally, I hate the MFP database bashing. Is it perfect? No. It is useful if used with common sense. Some entries will be better than others.



    There is not perfect way (outside of a lab) to know calories burned. Every method has it's strengths and weaknesses.

    Super useful article. Thank you!
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,863 Member
    Options
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    I figured it was the same reasons cardio machines over-estimate for people--because the burns are often based on a lbf, muscular (I.e. In shape) 20-something male. Even when adjusted for sex, age, weight, that basis can still make them off. Especially if there's no hrm input to determine actual intensity.

    Whenever I compare machine calories burned to my hrm calories burned, it's about 200-250 less for an hour on a Pre-Cor for the hrm. If I input into MFP, I have to lower the time I worked out to get the hrm calories out number, because for me, MFP over-estimates. I'm a small female.

    If someone is bigger, 250-300, I'd guess they may be burning more than the machine norm.

    The programming required for automatic customization of calories burned for each member based on their stats might not be feasible for a free site.

    Adding just for clarity: The free version of MFP does adjust the exercise calories based on your bodyweight. I'm only slightly joking when I say it's dispiriting how many fewer calories I get for a spin class as a l'il ol' lady vs. when I was a fat ol' lady - it's like 380 calories per hour now (120 pounds) vs. 580 per hour a year ago (183 pounds). Just doesn't seem fair! ;-)

    My heart rate monitor puts me in the same ballpark before and after, BTW.
  • 85Cardinals
    85Cardinals Posts: 733 Member
    edited April 2016
    Options
    I'm suspicious by nature, not quite paranoid but close. I'm not saying the calories burns are necessarily wrong, just color me skeptical.

    Also I've never witnessed the type of scenario that's described in the original post, where someone is mocked like that. Most everybody here is pretty nice imo.
  • Budjola
    Budjola Posts: 148 Member
    Options
    rule #1 when in doubt log larger portion in mfp
  • MsBuzzkillington
    MsBuzzkillington Posts: 171 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    What makes me roll my eyes is 300 calories burned in one hour of yoga...

    I have had a couple yoga classes where I ended up slightly out of breath and sweating/hot. Sometimes yoga can be intense. It's not just "la de da da deee, I am going to reach for my toes and breathe slowly."

    Not saying I burned 300 calories but it IS possible to get a really good work out from yoga.
  • ElizabethOakes2
    ElizabethOakes2 Posts: 1,038 Member
    Options
    Pretty much what everyone else said- It comes down to personal metabolism, fitness level, etc. What I burn on a 1 hour walk won't be the same as what someone else burns. I took to wearing my hrm for nearly everything for a couple weeks, and now I have a pretty good idea of how much I burn doing what. Some of MFPs estimates are crazy, sometimes they're spot on. I just eat back half of what MFP says and that generally works for me. :)
  • dutchandkiwi
    dutchandkiwi Posts: 1,389 Member
    Options
    Generally I find it does not overestimate much - I check against my fitbit and find them usually within 5-10% of eachother which considering both are estimates quite good. In fact my fitbit usually gives me more calories burned than MFP. But it is important that you then have your weight set to the correct levels.

    Having said that some of the database entries state things like vigerous effort, or fast or rather subjective descriptions and that makes it harder to interpret. I tend to go for the lowest ones there. I am careful with eatig those calories back but not because I think it is overestimating, but also because that way I also catch underlogging on the food side a bit.

    Also I do think that if the food database has some varied and wildly inaccurate entries, that would also a possiblity in the excersise database. So I try to keep mindful of that. So far it has served me well and I fully intent to keep going the way I am
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    MsBuzzkillington wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    What makes me roll my eyes is 300 calories burned in one hour of yoga...

    I have had a couple yoga classes where I ended up slightly out of breath and sweating/hot. Sometimes yoga can be intense. It's not just "la de da da deee, I am going to reach for my toes and breathe slowly."

    Not saying I burned 300 calories but it IS possible to get a really good work out from yoga.

    I've been in yoga classes that felt like being on a treadmill. In one she kept repeating this flow sequence and wouldn't let up. I wouldn't have trouble believing 300 calories in a class like that. And overall I've been to maybe two "easy stretching" yoga classes and they bored me to tears. For the most part, that stuff's hard!
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Options
    I've never logged exercise on mfp. So i just did a little test and mfp gave me 20 calories less than my fitbit..
  • anonymouslyours
    anonymouslyours Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    If you TL;DR my post, here's a fantastic recommended website that shows you additional calories burned by any activity, vs. total calories burned (these include calories burned at rest ie. calories your body burns just being alive). I've linked to my example of walking:calorielab.com/burned/?mo=ac&ac=17190&ti=Walking%2C+3.0+mph%2C+level%2C+moderate+pace%2C+firm+surface&q=&wt=145&un=lb&kg=66

    Okay, so you are correct in saying that MFP exaggerates calories burned. I just realized this harsh reality last week, and I have been corroborated by my friend who is a trainer, my internet research, but mainly by the nutrition class I'm taking that made me understand this. What MFP is telling you when you enter an activity is the total number of calories burned during an activity, instead of the ADDITIONAL calories burned. For example, I weigh 145 pounds, and when I walk for thirty minutes at 3mph, I burn a total of 109 calories- this the same number that MFP gives me, give or take a few cals, and it is misleading. The real number of additional calories I've burnt is only 76. My total calories burnt INCLUDES my calories burnt at rest. Calories burnt at rest shouldn't count because they have already been factored into our total goal number of calories for the day.
    My friend told me that exercise machines and fitbits do the same thing- they all measure total calorie loss rather than the additional calories you've burnt doing the exercise. This is totally frustrating and disappointing to me. I've been informed that the best weight loss strategy counts only additional calories burned, but at the same time, the lowered numbers feel so discouraging to me. I'm not sure why MFP, other similar sites, and exercise machines are programmed this way, because it feels misleading- not only that, but people wouldn't get the results they wanted- wouldn't a more accurate model be better for business?
    But at least I finally understand why my weightloss has been slower than intended. I've lost 9 pounds while using this website for 1 year and 8 months, when I should have met my total goal of 15 months ago. I rarely go over my calorie limit by more than 50 calories, but I tend to meet my daily limit every day. It's very rare for me to be more than 50 calories under my limit. Now I realize that I need to be probably 100 calories under most days because I've been counting too many extra calories! This will make things more complicated when I'm filling out my day here. I really wish MFP had an option where you could choose to record only additional calories rather than total so I could get a better picture of how many fewer cals I shoud be eating.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    ElizabethOakes2 wrote: »
    Pretty much what everyone else said- It comes down to personal metabolism, fitness level, etc. What I burn on a 1 hour walk won't be the same as what someone else burns. I took to wearing my hrm for nearly everything for a couple weeks, and now I have a pretty good idea of how much I burn doing what. Some of MFPs estimates are crazy, sometimes they're spot on. I just eat back half of what MFP says and that generally works for me. :)

    But the thing is, someone who weighs the same and walks the same speed would burn pretty much the same.


    If you read the link above it does help you figure out which exercises would be more likely to be accurate and which ones are probably way off.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    I used to log my exercise here when I first started.

    As soon as I started using a food scale and logging my exercise here I lost the 1lb a week I wanted (based on intake and burn)...so they have been accurate for me...

    However that being said they are an estimate. I will recommend eating back 50-75% if people ask as most have the mindset that "no I can't eat them back I will ruin all my hard work" and because most don't use a food scale.
  • haviegirl
    haviegirl Posts: 230 Member
    Options
    myszka0611 wrote: »
    I've read multiple threads where a delighted So-and-So would say "I exercised an extra X number of minutes, and was under my calorie goal, so I treated myself to <insert yummy thing here>, woo-hoo!" , only to see later in the thread some Debbie Downer piping in with, "Well, you KNOW that MFP overestimates calories burned, don't you, so I want you to know that you just totally ruined the three years you've been dieting because of that <insert yummy thing here> you ate. You only should have eaten 1/2 of it, you fool, or maybe just inhaled the aroma. Goodness, EVERYONE on here knows that but you, apparently". And then storms off in a huff...

    I think this is funny. Thanks for the smile!
  • jellio98
    jellio98 Posts: 24 Member
    Options
    Regardless of the accuracy of the exercise database, mentally it is sometimes easier to believe the exercise estimate is off rather than the food logging.
  • frankiesgirlie
    frankiesgirlie Posts: 669 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    The only time I used a HRM on the treadmill, my HRM number was actually 20% higher than what the machine told me!

    So I don't really know what to think anymore.

    But I compared my stationary bike and my HRM and it was 100% on point. So that gives me about 250 calories an hour (and it's some pretty good effort for me)... so when I see people logging 1000 calories for one hour of bike... yeah, I don't quite believe it. Sorry!

    What makes me roll my eyes is 300 calories burned in one hour of yoga



    That's a generalization. If you've never done intense yoga, then you wouldn't know.
    I do HIIT with body weight exercises with either no rests or 10 second rests. So I know what a sweat dripping workout is like.
    I also do yoga from time to time and there are stretchy feel nice and calm workouts, and then there are advanced "hold position" sweat dripping workouts. I'm not saying I burned 300 calories in an hour, but I could see how a bigger person could.

Categories