How many calories actually burned?

Options
ajc109
ajc109 Posts: 11 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
When inputting my cardio exercise (using a stationary bike) I always use the numbers it says on the little screen on my bike. So today, I did 43 mins and the bike said I burned 250 cals. Is this correct or is MFP calculations? According to MFP 43 mins of cardio burned almost 500 cals... Which is correct?

The bike said I did 16.72km going at around 22 speed. I'm 201lbs and 5'3".

Replies

  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    The rule of thumb is that you're probably not burning as much as the machine is telling you without being hooked up to a mask, ecg, and a computer with someone reading results. Though, between the choices, select the lower value.
  • slimdownt
    slimdownt Posts: 105 Member
    Options
    cw93e732hhgb.jpg
  • carolyn000000
    carolyn000000 Posts: 179 Member
    Options
    If you are eating back your exercise calories and are losing weight, the amount you burn is probably accurate. If you are not losing weight, try eating back only half. If that does not work, don't eat them back at all. It takes a little patience to figure it all out. If I eat back a little less than I supposedly burn I will lose weight. If I didn't, I would be starving all the time, and I would not be successful at losing weight.
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,676 Member
    Options
    I burn about 325 in an hour on the bike, so your number is probably pretty close. I eat back all my calories and it works for me. Weight doesn't matter for a bike, since you aren't actually having to move your weight, as you do when walking and running.
  • StatChicBayes
    StatChicBayes Posts: 361 Member
    Options
    look at the study from Harvard - https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet-and-weight-loss/calories-burned-in-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities

    looks like your bike's reading is closer than MFP (I burn about 300-350 calories in an hour for really intense cycle sessions tracked by my apple watch. It is usually lower than all of the machines though)
  • nighthawk584
    nighthawk584 Posts: 1,996 Member
    edited October 2019
    Options
    Through trial and error, I am still losing weight eating back most my calories from exercise from MFP figures. Although a lot of the time I only eat 1/2 of them back unless really hungry. On average I am losing 1-2 lbs per week even after a 72 lb weight drop.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    The machine's estimate sounds perfectly reasonable and reasonable is good enough for purpose so suggest you use it without applying any random adjustment.

    The machine's estimate could be correct, it could be low, it could be high.
    If your bike uses the power you produce (in watts typically) to estimate calories it could be a very accurate and also a net calorie estimate.

    Things to note about stationary cycling in particular......
    • Your weight isn't relevant as it's a non-weight bearing exercise (which messes up the MyFitnessPal estimate which uses METS). Don't use it as it isn't taking the real factors into consideration (your power, fitness and effort level).
    • Your speed isn't a speed that comparable to cycling outdoors (your real speed is zero when stationary.

    My opinion is that the MFP estimate would only be possible for a petite female cyclist of a very extraordinary level of fitness. As a male and very fit regular cyclist I could hit 500cals in 43 minutes but would have to be trying hard. Of the possible results of high/low/correct estimates the overwhelming probability is that it's too high.


    PS
    Rules of thumb and taking off random percentages based on guesswork are not ways to make estimates better - just smaller.
  • neugebauer52
    neugebauer52 Posts: 1,120 Member
    Options
    With MFP and members input there is so much to learn and to understand which I incorporate in my weight loss journey. Thank you!

Categories