Calories Burned

catsbfit

Hi Guys, so MFP says ive burned 140 calories by doing 3.3 mile walk 1h and 11 mins walk is this correct? As ive also have an app called pacer that tracks your steps and that says ive burned 249 calories. Im 5ft 4 5 ish and i weigh 11stone 6lbs which one is correct? And do i need to eat these calories too? Thanks

MeanderingMammal

For walking, estimate per mile is 0.3 x body weight in pounds. So 0.3x160 per mile. Pace isn't all that important.

So about 140 calories is about right.

farsteve

I have always figured that one mile (either walking or running) is generally about 100 calories. Not sure where I came up with this but to me it seemed about right. While you seem to be a smaller person, I think that 140 calories is too little for 3.3 miles and the 249 calories seems more reasonable since 349/3.3 = 75.45 calories per mile. And as always, YMMV.

MeanderingMammal

farsteve wrote: »

either walking or running) is generally about 100 calories..

Running is a very inefficient movement compared to walking. The modifier for running, using the same research that indicates 0.3 for walking is 0.6. So running a mile burns twice the energy of walking it.

farsteve

Maybe I should have said "100 calories per mile for my weight" but

https://www.verywellfit.com/walking-calories-burned-by-miles-3887154

seems to support the 75 calories per mile.

MeanderingMammal

farsteve wrote: »

Maybe I should have said "100 calories per mile for my weight".

The material point I was responding to was the suggestion that walking and running burn the same amount of energy

TeaBea

catzzm9768 wrote: »

Hi Guys, so MFP says ive burned 140 calories by doing 3.3 mile walk 1h and 11 mins walk is this correct? As ive also have an app called pacer that tracks your steps and that says ive burned 249 calories. Im 5ft 4 5 ish and i weigh 11stone 6lbs which one is correct? And do i need to eat these calories too? Thanks

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1

JetJaguar

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

farsteve wrote: »

Maybe I should have said "100 calories per mile for my weight".

The material point I was responding to was the suggestion that walking and running burn the same amount of energy

But that's per mile. Running burns calories faster, but you also take less time to complete the same distance, so it sort of washes out in the end.

(Strictly speaking, running does burn a little more per mile, but your weight and the terrain are bigger factors than pace. But for a rough, rule-of-thumb sanity check, it's close enough.)

WinoGelato

catzzm9768 wrote: »

Hi Guys, so MFP says ive burned 140 calories by doing 3.3 mile walk 1h and 11 mins walk is this correct? As ive also have an app called pacer that tracks your steps and that says ive burned 249 calories. Im 5ft 4 5 ish and i weigh 11stone 6lbs which one is correct? And do i need to eat these calories too? Thanks

Personally, I would split the difference for now - log 200 calories and go with that.

Yes, you are meant to eat back those calories - MFP calculates a NEAT calorie target for you, meaning exercise isn't included, when you do exercise you should log and eat back at least a percentage of those calories. Going with a mid-range estimate and being consistent for a period of 4-6 weeks will give you a good idea if that number is accurate for you or not.

The thing about MFP, activity trackers, TDEE Calculators, formulas, etc - is they are all based on estimates derived from populations studies. For some people they are spot on, for some people they are too high or too low. That doesn't mean they aren't valuable though - it's more about consistency than accuracy. Pick an approach, stick with it, monitor and adjust after a sufficient period of time (to account for natural monthly fluctuations). Focus on logging your calorie intake as accurately and honestly as possible as well - ideally using a food scale. This is where you have more control over the numbers, only your body really knows how many calories it burned on the walk...

Read the stickied Most Helpful Forum Posts at the top of the Getting Started section for other good tips and advice.

MeanderingMammal

JetJaguar wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

farsteve wrote: »

Maybe I should have said "100 calories per mile for my weight".

The material point I was responding to was the suggestion that walking and running burn the same amount of energy

But that's per mile. Running burns calories faster, but you also take less time to complete the same distance, so it sort of washes out in the end.

Yes. Running burns twice as much energy per mile as walking. You could look at it as burning that energy in significantly less time, or you could look at it as the ability to burn significantly more energy in the time available.

So for the originator, she'll burn around 50 calories per mile walking. She'll burn about 100 calories per mile running. From a personal perspective, I could burn 300 calories in about 25 minutes, or 150 calories in about 45 minutes. I'm marginally heavier than the originator, but I'm also an experienced runner, I would be surprised if running that three miles is an option at the moment.

sijomial

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

For walking, estimate per mile is 0.3 x body weight in pounds. So 0.3x160 per mile. Pace isn't all that important.

So about 140 calories is about right.

Agreed.

That formula give net calories too so yes you can/should be eating them all back as your daily calorie goal is + exercise calories.
Your app might be estimating your gross calories not net.