Does myfitnesspal factor gender in "calories burned" from exercise?
dritta81
Posts: 3 Member
Do the calorie estimates for exercise on myfitnesspal factor in gender? Or are they based on the [male] estimates from the past (and therefore wrong for all women using the app)?
I know that treadmills use data based on a 150lb man, so they are always an over-estimate for women. I am wondering if myfitnesspal has corrected this error, or if they are using the same biased data as everyone else.
If the latter, then it would be wonderful to see myfitnesspal lead the way in including women in their underlying data and design in the future!
I know that treadmills use data based on a 150lb man, so they are always an over-estimate for women. I am wondering if myfitnesspal has corrected this error, or if they are using the same biased data as everyone else.
If the latter, then it would be wonderful to see myfitnesspal lead the way in including women in their underlying data and design in the future!
2
Replies
-
It's based on weight, but I don't think gender enters in. I assume a 120 lb. male would burn the same calories as a 120 lb. female since the formula is weight x distance x .63. I have actually found MFP to be pretty accurate. I eat back 100% of my walking and running calories and have been able to maintain my weight for 5+ years. When I was trying to lose weight, i did the same and had the results I expected.9
-
Calories burned is based on weight and the workload (for cardio). There is no gender difference (there might be a small difference because of the difference in muscle mass, but it is so small it is not worth measuring).
Devices like heart rate monitors and activity trackers might use gender as a factor, but that is a math issue with their algorithms, not a physiological one.9 -
All users will find better accuracy in using these general estimations as a baseline and adjusting per their observed intake and rate of weight gain/loss, regardless of gender.
Discrepancy for size will have a much larger delta than the metabolic nuances of gender. Comparing hypothetical males with the same size difference shown in the infographics included would also result in a discrepancy.
7 -
Why would it? It takes the same energy to move X lbs X distance regardless of gender. You may get paid less for doing the same work as a man, but it's equal calories for equal work.21
-
Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
A simple google search will bring up this information. (for example, https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/metabolism/art-20046508)
So, all the replies above claiming that it doesn't make a difference are objectively, scientifically wrong. They are also not answering my question.
Does myfitnesspal factor in gender differences in their calorie estimates for exercise, or are they basing those estimates on the [male-based] data from the past? If they are basing those estimates on male data, then I, as a woman, need to subtract 10-30% of the calories from EVERY EXERCISE in order to accurately track my calories for the day. As an active woman, that is a big impact for my planning. It also means that it takes me longer to accurately track my calories, as I have to do math in my head for every exercise I log.
That is why I am asking the question. I want to be relatively accurate in my estimates, and having every exercise 10-30% over on the calorie count is a significant barrier to being accurate.7 -
Does myfitnesspal factor in gender differences in their calorie estimates for exercise, or are they basing those estimates on the [male-based] data from the past? If they are basing those estimates on male data, then I, as a woman, need to subtract 10-30% of the calories from EVERY EXERCISE in order to accurately track my calories for the day.
I see you're new here to the forums. Welcome. MFP does not factor in gender when determining calorie burn during exercise. Everyone has a slightly different metabolism. It would be impossible to create a program that fits every person and their individual metabolism variances. Many people, women included, have found long-term success following the program as designed. Try the program as it is for one month and analyze whether you need to adjust.14 -
Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
A simple google search will bring up this information. (for example, https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/metabolism/art-20046508)
So, all the replies above claiming that it doesn't make a difference are objectively, scientifically wrong. They are also not answering my question.
Does myfitnesspal factor in gender differences in their calorie estimates for exercise, or are they basing those estimates on the [male-based] data from the past? If they are basing those estimates on male data, then I, as a woman, need to subtract 10-30% of the calories from EVERY EXERCISE in order to accurately track my calories for the day. As an active woman, that is a big impact for my planning. It also means that it takes me longer to accurately track my calories, as I have to do math in my head for every exercise I log.
That is why I am asking the question. I want to be relatively accurate in my estimates, and having every exercise 10-30% over on the calorie count is a significant barrier to being accurate.
That doesn't mention anything about men burning more calories with a specific exercise than a female of the same weight doing the same exercise. It only mentions basal calories...which is different.
Any calorie burn you get from here or anywhere else is going to be an estimate. The best thing to do is monitor your progress and make adjustments per your real world results.10 -
I want to be relatively accurate in my estimates, and having every exercise 10-30% over on the calorie count is a significant barrier to being accurate.
If the goal is accuracy using the MFP model every user should do their due diligence in examining their own data and adjust accordingly, regardless of gender. This isn't strictly a gender bias problem, it's fundamentally that metabolic rates aren't one-size-fits-all propositions.15 -
Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
It would impact the gross calorie burns but that's not what you want to estimate for exercise - you want to estimate the net calorie burns. The calories burned over and above the calorie burn you would have had if you hadn't exercised for that time period.
If you assume a significant difference in body composition for equal weight men and women running the same distance yes their gross calories would be slightly different. But their net calories burned would not have any significant gender impact - it's the physics of mass moved over distance.21 -
Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
It would impact the gross calorie burns but that's not what you want to estimate for exercise - you want to estimate the net calorie burns. The calories burned over and above the calorie burn you would have had if you hadn't exercised for that time period.
If you assume a significant difference in body composition for equal weight men and women running the same distance yes their gross calories would be slightly different. But their net calories burned would not have any significant gender impact - it's the physics of mass moved over distance.
Tricksy Hobbit!
7 -
Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
A simple google search will bring up this information. (for example, https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/metabolism/art-20046508)
So, all the replies above claiming that it doesn't make a difference are objectively, scientifically wrong. They are also not answering my question.
Does myfitnesspal factor in gender differences in their calorie estimates for exercise, or are they basing those estimates on the [male-based] data from the past? If they are basing those estimates on male data, then I, as a woman, need to subtract 10-30% of the calories from EVERY EXERCISE in order to accurately track my calories for the day. As an active woman, that is a big impact for my planning. It also means that it takes me longer to accurately track my calories, as I have to do math in my head for every exercise I log.
That is why I am asking the question. I want to be relatively accurate in my estimates, and having every exercise 10-30% over on the calorie count is a significant barrier to being accurate.
A simple Google search will bring up a lot of things, like which aliens built the pyramids. That isn't the same thing as that being an objective fact. Your link doesn't even seem to one that has this 10-30% difference you're claiming.
Regardless, what most people are trying to get across is that the numbers from MFP are estimates to begin with. Someone who's practiced at an exercise will also burn less calories. MFP never asks your experience level, so clearly it can't be taking that into account.
I'd have to see what research you're using for the numbers, but I'd honestly guess the differences between women and men would come from exercise estimates that include the basal component - a difference that tends to stem from men at the same weight tending to have more muscle mass and less fat mass than women, as muscle uses more energy.14 -
Your own article states exactly why the other posters are correct to say that gender is irrelevant. 🙄 Muscle mass isn’t some magical property that only men have. A man and woman of the same stats burn calories at the same rate.
As for MFP, it is to weight loss what pharmacy BP checkers are the heart health: A static formula that is used to spit out generalized information that is going to change as you gain or lose weight. If you want a tailored experience that accounts for individual factors like fat % and muscle mass you have to consult a doctor, not a free journaling website where every user relies on trial-and-error.13 -
So, all the replies above claiming that it doesn't make a difference are objectively, scientifically wrong.
Cool the jets. There are a lot of knowledgeable people here and we're typically helpful.
I won't rehash what others have said regarding scientific evidence. What I will add is that weight loss is largely determined in the kitchen, not at the gym. If your goal is weight loss you are picking apart the minutia (exercise calories) and may be better focused on intake (weighing foods).
9 -
Gender is not irrelevant. I realize that muscle mass is not some magical man-thing. And I know how physics works.
I also know that ALL estimates of calories burned are ESTIMATES. Duh. And now I know that ALL estimates on this platform are based on men, and not on women. Yes, they are still estimates. And they are estimates that fail to account for half of the population. That means for ALL women on this platform, the estimates are less good than for ALL of the men. And yes, I believe that is a problem.
Male bodies are not the default. Men's data is not "good enough" for women, especially when it is falsely presented as "neutral". My source for the "10-30%" statistic is the book "Invisible Women: Data bias in a world designed for men", which has sources, but also does not go in depth about the specific numbers because (surprise!) those numbers are very hard to find unless you are a fitness researcher or a multi-million dollar fitness platform that has the resources to search them out.
My question was asking "how good is this data for the average women?" and it has been answered. The answer is: not very good at all. Thanks to everyone for the patronizing and mansplaining along the way.7 -
Gender is not irrelevant. I realize that muscle mass is not some magical man-thing. And I know how physics works.
I also know that ALL estimates of calories burned are ESTIMATES. Duh. And now I know that ALL estimates on this platform are based on men, and not on women. Yes, they are still estimates. And they are estimates that fail to account for half of the population. That means for ALL women on this platform, the estimates are less good than for ALL of the men. And yes, I believe that is a problem.
Male bodies are not the default. Men's data is not "good enough" for women, especially when it is falsely presented as "neutral". My source for the "10-30%" statistic is the book "Invisible Women: Data bias in a world designed for men", which has sources, but also does not go in depth about the specific numbers because (surprise!) those numbers are very hard to find unless you are a fitness researcher or a multi-million dollar fitness platform that has the resources to search them out.
My question was asking "how good is this data for the average women?" and it has been answered. The answer is: not very good at all. Thanks to everyone for the patronizing and mansplaining along the way.
If you get on a bike with a power meter and you put out the same wattage as I do you're going to burn less calories than me because I'm a guy? Funny...16 -
My question was asking "how good is this data for the average women?" and it has been answered. The answer is: not very good at all. Thanks to everyone for the patronizing and mansplaining along the way.
So you came on a gender-indiscriminatory forum with a predetermined notion, and when responses didn't align with your beliefs, you held them and purport those that don't subscribe as patronizing and "mansplaining?"
You've received valid responses. What you choose to do is up to you. Best of luck.
23 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Do the MFP calorie estimates depend on what color clothes I'm wearing? I really don't want to get this wrong.
Only if you're wearing pink or blue.My question was asking "how good is this data for the average women?" and it has been answered. The answer is: not very good at all. Thanks to everyone for the patronizing and mansplaining along the way.
That's not actually the question I saw you ask, but I will say that I generally find the exercise estimates to be reasonable for me, as a woman. However, I am a little looser in my logging and expectations than others which will create some inherent bias.7 -
I'm female. Can I still make all the misogynistic jokes that won't go over well but are begging to be made?20
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »Gender is not irrelevant. I realize that muscle mass is not some magical man-thing. And I know how physics works.
I also know that ALL estimates of calories burned are ESTIMATES. Duh. And now I know that ALL estimates on this platform are based on men, and not on women. Yes, they are still estimates. And they are estimates that fail to account for half of the population. That means for ALL women on this platform, the estimates are less good than for ALL of the men. And yes, I believe that is a problem.
Male bodies are not the default. Men's data is not "good enough" for women, especially when it is falsely presented as "neutral". My source for the "10-30%" statistic is the book "Invisible Women: Data bias in a world designed for men", which has sources, but also does not go in depth about the specific numbers because (surprise!) those numbers are very hard to find unless you are a fitness researcher or a multi-million dollar fitness platform that has the resources to search them out.
My question was asking "how good is this data for the average women?" and it has been answered. The answer is: not very good at all. Thanks to everyone for the patronizing and mansplaining along the way.
If you get on a bike with a power meter and you put out the same wattage as I do you're going to burn less calories than me because I'm a guy? Funny...
It depends; are you going downhill fast?2 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Okay folks, I am not asking the question "Does gender matter for calorie estimates?" The answer to that has already been determined (YES IT DOES). The average body composition of men and women is different, and that impacts average calorie burn during exercise.
A simple google search will bring up this information. (for example, https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/metabolism/art-20046508)
So, all the replies above claiming that it doesn't make a difference are objectively, scientifically wrong. They are also not answering my question.
Does myfitnesspal factor in gender differences in their calorie estimates for exercise, or are they basing those estimates on the [male-based] data from the past? If they are basing those estimates on male data, then I, as a woman, need to subtract 10-30% of the calories from EVERY EXERCISE in order to accurately track my calories for the day. As an active woman, that is a big impact for my planning. It also means that it takes me longer to accurately track my calories, as I have to do math in my head for every exercise I log.
That is why I am asking the question. I want to be relatively accurate in my estimates, and having every exercise 10-30% over on the calorie count is a significant barrier to being accurate.
A simple Google search will bring up a lot of things, like which aliens built the pyramids. That isn't the same thing as that being an objective fact. Your link doesn't even seem to one that has this 10-30% difference you're claiming.
Regardless, what most people are trying to get across is that the numbers from MFP are estimates to begin with. Someone who's practiced at an exercise will also burn less calories. MFP never asks your experience level, so clearly it can't be taking that into account.
I'd have to see what research you're using for the numbers, but I'd honestly guess the differences between women and men would come from exercise estimates that include the basal component - a difference that tends to stem from men at the same weight tending to have more muscle mass and less fat mass than women, as muscle uses more energy.
The bolded isn't necessarily so, either, in my (very inexpert) understanding. The same work means the close to same calories, I believe, with some caveats. Some exercises (cycling, for example) have a very narrow range of efficiencies, as I understand it. Someone pedaling the same bike on the same route at a slow rate who's huffing and puffing is burning in the reasonable vicinity of the same calories as an experienced cyclist for whom it's super easy. It feels way easier to one vs. the other, and a heart rate monitor may (probably will) give a very different calorie estimate for each (lower for the fit person), but the work is the work, +/- a fairly narrow efficiency range.
Other things can have a wider variation in efficiency (with skill vs. the lack thereof), but I'm not sure the efficiency always affects the calorie burn in the way it might seem, and it will matter what's doing the estimating (an exercise machine, for good or ill; a METS-based estimating method like the one under the covers at MFP; a basic heart rate monitor (which will be able to estimate some activities more closely than others, but quite a margin); a fitness tracker that knows what exercise your doing, so has at least the potential to shift methods to use one that's likely to be the best fit for that particular activity; . . . .)
OP, I believe MFP is using the METS-based exercise estimating method, which has its own limitations, as does any method. There are various places where you can learn more about how METS-based exercise calorie estimation works, one of which is here:
https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/
8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 899 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions