Recumbent bike

2»

Replies

  • phred_52
    phred_52 Posts: 189 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    phred_52 wrote: »
    If I understand this correctly...there is "Nothing" that will ever give 100% accurate calories burned. Meaning "all" sites just need to do away with calories burned calculators. Regardless of what excercise is done.

    I get that right?

    I'm assuming you're being facetious, but just in case - no that's not what anyone said. In a nutshell what people are saying is that you should take calorie estimates from some devices and/or websites with a larger grain of salt than others.
    I really need to learn the emoticons...it was meant as you said. Reckon' I need to keep my wacky sense of humor away..(grin)

    I've never taken such numbers to be accurate. I will say, the calories burned number on recumbent bike sure does look good...600+, 1hr...I'm just being funny with that comment. If I did, I would subtract 20-25%.

    The "only" numbers I care about are: beginning weight...goal weight...and number of months I want for reaching goal.
  • Bry_Fitness70
    Bry_Fitness70 Posts: 2,480 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    phred_52 wrote: »
    If I understand this correctly...there is "Nothing" that will ever give 100% accurate calories burned. Meaning "all" sites just need to do away with calories burned calculators. Regardless of what excercise is done.

    I get that right?

    That's ridiculous.
    It would be dumb to think 100% accuracy is a requirement, just like food logging which can't be 100% accurate either.

    Should I log all my fresh produce as zero calories due to the natural variance between varieties and ripeness means I can't be 100% accurate?

    Reasonable is good enough for purpose on both sides of the CI/CO equation.

    Agreed, too many people allow the concept of "perfect" to impair the application of "good" or "adequate"

Categories