did you really burn that many calories?

missveeoh

This app tends to exaggerate calories burned during zumba and elliptical.
I plug in my weight into the elliptical machine and after an hour it usually says around 430 or so
But the app will say 670 per hour. I just change it since 400 seems more accurate. But Im still skeptical lol

KAS0917

I used a HRM for a while for all the different classes I do to get an idea of more accurate calories. 45 mins of spin for example burned off about 350 calories, yet I see people logging that as 500. A Zumba class, for an hour, burns off around 300 calories, but I've seen an hour of Zumba logged as 600. I guess if you're really overweight then it's possible.

When I use the gym I usually use the calorie burn the machines give me. When I used my HRM I actually found I was burning more calories on the treadmill and the cross trainer than the machine gave me.

I"m not sure how you classify 'really overweight.' If 30 pounds qualifies, then I own it. But those spin class and zumba numbers would be VERY low for me. If I'm going to haul my butt to the gym it's so I can sweat my butt off for 60 minutes, and I wouldn't do it for a 300 calorie burn. My FT4 gives me anywhere from 600-900 for an hour of spin or zumba. But like I said, I bust my butt to earn that. If I didn't give 100% effort, I could certainly burn less. Not all spin or zumba classes are the same either. An endurance spin class burns less than a speed or hills class. A hip-hop focused Zumba class burns more than Aqua Zumba or one more based on Latin moves class - at least for me.

And a heart rate monitor based on your own body stats will always be more accurate than a machine at the gym that doesn't know anything about you.

timesinfinityplus2

I use a Bodymedia device. Sometimes I burn 400 calories during an hour long workout, sometimes I burn 700 calories during an hour long workout. I am 6'4" and (currently) 281 pounds. I started at 337 pounds and I eat until I am at a 1000-1500 calorie deficit each day. I have lost weight every week except one (which I stayed the same weight). So I am pretty sure people CAN burn 700 calories in an hour.

Now, if you're using MFP or other methods to determine, it is all a guess. Get a Bodymedia. My wife and I have been using them religiously while logging our food here and we've both lost weight steadily each week.

spottedkathy

I don't worry too much if other people want to delude themselves about their exercise. Just sit back and wait for their post saying they're doing everything right but they aren't losing any weight. Most often those who post those huge burns are only looking for a way to justify overeating.

Agree 100%

KANGOOJUMPS

nope,,, i burn over 1000 a day

kjoy_

MFP says that for my 5k time i burned 400 calories. wore a HRM for my first official race and only burned 244 for the 5k. MFP greatly inflates calories for my height/weight at least

heybales

MFP says that for my 5k time i burned 400 calories. wore a HRM for my first official race and only burned 244 for the 5k. MFP greatly inflates calories for my height/weight at least

And be aware a poorly setup HRM or one without the options or good formula's can vastly under-estimate your calorie burn too. Actually for women, even if setup with a good one.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/459580-polar-hrm-calorie-burn-estimate-accuracy-study

But you can test it.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

grggmrtn

Btw, I burn 100 cal running a km (not a mile), and I burn about 500 cals per hour doing other activities (weights, for example), according to my HRM.

There's another inaccuracy being recorded. A HRM is not meant for weights and will give over inflated numbers. Once again don't care but people get hung up on what their HRM is recording as being the gospel truth when in reality HRM's have very limited use as a measure of calorie burn. The can totally give a false sense of of how great you're doing if used incorrectly.

Not really a false sense of how great I'm doing at all - I'm not logging my calories during my lifts to eat them BACK, I'm doing it to benchmark myself. I don't have a fitbit or fuelband, but I DO have an iPhone and a BT HRM. I work with what I got. Gospel truth? I doubt it can be found in ANY piece of technology, which are based on algorythms and estimates, while the body, and FOOD is MUCH more complicated. It's all to be taken with a healthy grain of salt.

The numbers may be overinflated, but they're overinflated in a consistent way - my burns on DL day are a lot better than OHP day...

NOLA_Meg

NO. I don't really trust the calorie burns that are listed on here. It says for me an hour of Zumba is 800 calories, uhh I'm sweaty but I doubt I've burned close to that. This is why I try not to eat back my exercise calories, otherwise I do believe I would be going over what I'm supposed to eat!

I've logged 800 calories doing Zumba according to my HRM. It just depends on the person....

supremelady

Nothing is wrong with MFP calories burned numbers. I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who have only used those numbers and have lost weight. I have compared MFP calories burned to other online calculators and there is no real big difference. In fact sometime MFP numbers are lower.

Like i said before threads like these and post that say the numbers are overestimated can confuse somebody who is new or somebody with limited resources.

RunFarLiveHappy

Everyone knows they can change the number of calories burned on MFP right? Lol. I've just read a bunch of comments about thinking the estimate is too high but also not wanting to cheat themselves on the time they spent. That's totally fine, just change the number of calories burned and leave the time accurate...

Sizethree4Ever

According to my treadmill, I burned 905 calories is 97 minutes, I walked 4.85 miles on 10-incline and 3 MPH.
I think it probably overestimate by 300 calories.
I am 45 yrs old, 140-lbs and 5`0 Ft.
I am thinking to buy a Body media or an HRM to figure this out.

sa11yjane

I always drop at least 50% of the calories that they give on here as they are always double what the pedometer on my bike says!

heybales

According to my treadmill, I burned 905 calories is 97 minutes, I walked 4.85 miles on 10-incline and 3 MPH.
I think it probably overestimate by 300 calories.
I am 45 yrs old, 140-lbs and 5`0 Ft.
I am thinking to buy a Body media or an HRM to figure this out.

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html

Actually, that is pretty close, 800 calories. Of course as your incline goes up much beyond 4%, so does personal efficiency or inefficiency of walking that steep, so the more accurate formulas may be off just as much as a HRM is off.

Of course, 800 is gross burn, what a HRM or machine or MFP table would show too.
For Net burn, minus what you would have burned resting during that time anyway, only 700 calories to log and eat back.

Notice in the study how accurate the formulas are for 2-4 mph walking, and running 5-6.3 mph, level.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

Sizethree4Ever

According to my treadmill, I burned 905 calories is 97 minutes, I walked 4.85 miles on 10-incline and 3 MPH.
I think it probably overestimate by 300 calories.
I am 45 yrs old, 140-lbs and 5`0 Ft.
I am thinking to buy a Body media or an HRM to figure this out.

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html

Actually, that is pretty close, 800 calories. Of course as your incline goes up much beyond 4%, so does personal efficiency or inefficiency of walking that steep, so the more accurate formulas may be off just as much as a HRM is off.

Of course, 800 is gross burn, what a HRM or machine or MFP table would show too.
For Net burn, minus what you would have burned resting during that time anyway, only 700 calories to log and eat back.

Notice in the study how accurate the formulas are for 2-4 mph walking, and running 5-6.3 mph, level.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

Thanks for your help!

supermodelchic

they go in and change it manually..

fit4justme

I don't worry about what other people are doing.....I worry about myself.

DancingDreams1234

I don't go by what M.F.P says with the calories that you burn when working out. I'm fairly active, so I set my activity level to the correct option and it's like the calories that you would typically burn are already in the calories M.F.P sets for you to eat daily. So if I do exercise or anything I just set the calorie to one.

ren_ascent

I burned eleventy million eating pie

What kind of pie??

EddieHaskell97

It seems to be a teensy bit high for walking at 4.0 - 4.5 mph for my heigh / weight.

For mowing the lawn it's ridiculously high.

Still, I like seeing it, and trying to reconcile the different numbers between it and MapMyRun, etc...

wjack459

i use allsportgps on my iphone and i found that mypal just add a zero on the end so i just chose the lessor of two evil!!!!!!! sometimes i know i burned more but i just like to chose the lessor so that i "work" harder!!!!!!! try www.healthstatus.com/calculate//cbc it gives calories burnt on all things lol

wjack459

plus you got to make sure that you put the correct information ( like height,weight, how active and how many days)

JackieLivingHealthy

I never count "cleaning" as an exercise. That's silly to me;

RockinTerri

I don't have an HRM (as of yet, anyway), but if I think that calories seem high, I check other charts. And I do utilize the calories on my gym equipment (typically I find the calories on MFP to be about 25%-30% higher than my gym equipment).

As for the whole cleaning debate, I had been logging my cleaning (heavy cleaning, not picking up a few items or washing dishes), but then adjusted my calories up, so now only log when I'm cleaning the whole house, and just log a portion of that time. The same thing goes for food preparation - if I'm in the kitchen for several hours, I will log some of that, but if I'm just cutting up a few veggies I don't. I also have my activity level at sedentary (my job is a desk job, but my time off of work I am primarily on my feet doing something).

nyrina4life

I don't worry too much if other people want to delude themselves about their exercise. Just sit back and wait for their post saying they're doing everything right but they aren't losing any weight. Most often those who post those huge burns are only looking for a way to justify overeating.

Well, aren't you as sweet as pie. Most of us who earn big numbers also weigh quite a bit more than what the 'average' joe does who is listed to burn only 100 - 120 calories doing exercise x, y or z. You know?

I know my calories burnt can be off by up to 200 calories, but you know what? When I exercise I give it my all. I'm sweating my butt off, I'm sucking down water like no tomorrow, and my heart rate is usually anywhere from 157 - 166. I KNOW I burn a ton and it will change the smaller I get.

So I am not deluding myself of anything, and most others aren't either. They just assume a well known site like this would give some pretty accurate numbers. That's why they should frequent the forums to be educated on the fact that numbers are a bit off.

Also, when I used Anytime fitness and input my numbers the data is pretty close to this, but I know that when I'm done with an hour of elliptical, and thirty - forty of circuit I would burn close to 1,000 based on heart rate calculations (at that time) and even their site was 150 - 200 off.

beckyboop712

I saw a formula a year or so ago for runners on how many calories you burn when you run, based on a 10 minute mile. Basically it is:
body weight x .72 = calories burned. So for example, I weigh 215 lbs. If I ran a 10 minute mile, I would burn 154.8 calories per mile and would therefore burn 464.4 for 3 miles. While someone who weighs 135 lbs will only burn 97.2 calories per 10 minute mile. And if you are slower than 10 minutes per mile, you burn more per mile but not for 10 minutes whereas if you run faster than 10 minutes per mile, you don't burn as much per mile but you will burn more per 10 minutes.

I don't take MFP at it's word but since it's always fairly close to what the treadmill says (when I use one), I don't dismiss it completely.

But in terms of cleaning, No. I don't put it in. I did once or twice but felt silly doing so.

mom2dms

My calorie burn is always different than what MFP says…simply because I have a VERY low resting heart rate. What determines how many calories you burn is how hard your body has to work to do the exercise. So, as you lose weight, you will have to work harder to get those high calorie burns doing the same exercise.

Beautifulbridgittlee7

I can burn almost 400 calories running 3 miles( 100 to 120 calories), and I'm around 144. Anything that says you burned 1000 for a 3 mile run is ridiculous, unless your very heavy, but even someone who is 200 lbs would not burn that, maybe with running for 75 minutes possibly, heart rate monitors are better. Though I do have friend who weighs around 150 and she burns 630 in a 1 hour zumba fitness class.

sokkache

I usually look up the calories burned for a certain sport online so I don't just use what MFP says because MFP is very inflated (for me because I am not very heavy and I burn less calories anyways) so I just usually don't log in exercise but I do allow myself to overeat my "calorie limit" by 200-300 because I know I burn more than that when I work out.

bacamacho

I often burn over 1000 calories, but you might only see it for the "4 mile run" when it's actually a 4 mile run after a 2 hour mountain bike ride. I wear a heart rate monitor. I have my default setting for calorie burn goal at about 2000 a week for when I'm not training for a triathlon or a distance race. I log my exercise especially for those 1000+ days so that I eat at least some of the calories burned back that goes over my default amount.