Gym calories vs MFP calories

Dannigreen31
Dannigreen31 Posts: 557 Member
edited December 1 in Fitness and Exercise
They are so different! Which one is accurate?
Let's say I do 30 mins on elliptical and at the gym it says I burn 300 but then I log it on here it says 400!
I'm guessing I go with the gym result??

Replies

  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    The only thing about MFP's calories I've been able to test objectively against an actual measured calorie burn is road cycling. MFP is about 2x too high for the data I fed it.
  • SonicKrunch
    SonicKrunch Posts: 192 Member
    I'd say go with about 1/2 what any of them say if you are planning on eating those calories back. If not, then it really doesn't matter anyhow.
  • xmichaelyx
    xmichaelyx Posts: 883 Member
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    They are so different! Which one is accurate?

    Neither are remotely accurate; don't eat back your calories.

  • Dannigreen31
    Dannigreen31 Posts: 557 Member
    SonicKrunch wrote: »
    I'd say go with about 1/2 what any of them say if you are planning on eating those calories back. If not, then it really doesn't matter anyhow.

    I don't eat my calories back so I guess it's not a huge deal but I'd still like to know my burn
  • Dannigreen31
    Dannigreen31 Posts: 557 Member
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    They are so different! Which one is accurate?

    Neither are remotely accurate; don't eat back your calories.

    Thankyou. No I don't eat them back..always thought that kind of defeats the object !
  • SonicKrunch
    SonicKrunch Posts: 192 Member
    I understand the frustration but it's almost impossible to tell. I usually track using the MFP number, however if I do 60 minutes on a machine i edit the number to be half what it tells me anyhow. Each person is different, i don't know how the MFP app calculates the burnt calories. At least at the gym you can enter your weight, but it doesn't ask your height or age so it can't truly know either.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • jmt08c
    jmt08c Posts: 343 Member
    I generally use 100 calories per 30 minutes of activity as a baseline for calories burned. 2 hours of gym time=400 calories.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Dannigreen31
    Dannigreen31 Posts: 557 Member
    GuitarJerry wrote: »
    The other way, is to set your calories manually, and never change them. Monitor the result you get. If you are losing at a solid rate, maybe 1 lb per week, stay there. If you gain a little, drop calories. Just keep playing with it. Eventually you find your calories, given all your normal activity, that put you where you want to be. It takes a while, and you have to be really patient, because you have to give it a few weeks before you make changes. Your body has to settle into it. But, by far, that's usually the most successful way I've found. Just make very slight changes every few weeks until you find the sweet spot. It's called the TDEE method. Many people prefer this method because everyday, you know how much to eat, and you don't have to futz with how much you burn doing things.

    Yeh I totally understand what this site's about and eating back some of your calories etc but obv I'm being impatient and trying to lose quicker ( bad I know before a lecture ) so atm I wasn't eating them back. I only have 10 pounds to lose. Thanks for the advise
  • eandasher
    eandasher Posts: 25 Member
    I just go by mfp, neither the gym nor mfp uses your age, sex, height, weight, bmi, heartrate over time, hydration at time of exercise, elevation, blah blah blah... Just choose one for me its mfp, because I can enter multiple types of workouts. I use the reports / charts at the end of the week to review the week. I see where I can improve, and ask myself why this day I didn't do more or how I can improve the calories burned trend over all. Thinking about the types of workouts I do, amount of time I spend, etc... You want your calories to trend slowly downward toward your goal weight / intake. You also want your calories burned to trend upward (However this will get harder over time as you get closer toward your goals) This again will also vary from person to person I am assume your goal is weight loss. However that is foolish of me, consider your own goals and how best to use the tools you have be they at the gym, online, or at home writing things down. :smile:
  • SonicKrunch
    SonicKrunch Posts: 192 Member
    GuitarJerry wrote: »
    Not eating your calories back is not understanding how this site works. It's not a good idea at all. In fact, it could have the opposite result that you want. There have been a billion posts about it so feel free to search and read rather than me say what they already have said a billion times.

    Actually the issue here is that MFP is highly inaccurate for exercise. With food you can be almost 100% sure what macros you are getting with what you eat, but not for work outs. You could eat back all these fake calories and never lose weight. I do agree with seeing what your results are and adjusting, but the calories burned number is not coming from community input but some terrible algorithm.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Rabid_Hamster
    Rabid_Hamster Posts: 338 Member
    edited May 2016
    GuitarJerry wrote: »
    SonicKrunch wrote: »
    GuitarJerry wrote: »
    Not eating your calories back is not understanding how this site works. It's not a good idea at all. In fact, it could have the opposite result that you want. There have been a billion posts about it so feel free to search and read rather than me say what they already have said a billion times.

    Actually the issue here is that MFP is highly inaccurate for exercise. With food you can be almost 100% sure what macros you are getting with what you eat, but not for work outs. You could eat back all these fake calories and never lose weight. I do agree with seeing what your results are and adjusting, but the calories burned number is not coming from community input but some terrible algorithm.

    I find it equally as accurate as any HRM I've used. In fact, I got rid of mine because it was the same as MFP.

    I sold my POS fitbit after 3 months because I get better results just using the MFP database for calories burned.

    This is why your Fitbit wasn't so great. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/23/study-shows-fitbit-trackers-highly-inaccurate.html"]http://cnbc.com/2016/05/23/study-shows-fitbit-trackers-highly-inaccurate.html

    Whether using a heart rate monitor or MFP, they're based on an algorithm. My 2 cents: Use a heart rate monitor for the simple reason that the algorithm will factor in your age, sex, height, & weight. MFP uses a generalized formula that doesn't tailor to your specifics.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    Strain gauges beat the pants off HRMs, Fitbits, and algorithms for accuracy (of calories burned).
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    They are so different! Which one is accurate?

    Neither are remotely accurate; don't eat back your calories.

    Thankyou. No I don't eat them back..always thought that kind of defeats the object !

    MFP is designed for you to eat them back....it doesn't defeat the purpose actually at all.

    MFP exercise calories are based on "averages" and they worked great for me...

    Typically the average calorie burn for each mile is 100....that makes it easy.

    I walk typically a mile in 15mins so for me that would be 200 calories to eat.

    If I run it could be a 9min mile so that's 300+calories to eat.
  • charleycartee
    charleycartee Posts: 49 Member
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    dannijordan30 wrote: »
    They are so different! Which one is accurate?

    Neither are remotely accurate; don't eat back your calories.

    Thankyou. No I don't eat them back..always thought that kind of defeats the object !
    It really depends on how much you're exercising. At a certain point you really should be eating back SOME of them. Say, for example, on a backpacking trip where you might be burning 4000-6000 calories a day.


This discussion has been closed.

Categories