Stationary Bike

aberdeen40

I do 30 minutes medium tension peddling an average of 23mph is that considered moderate?

PAV8888

For the purpose of the effectiveness of the exercise and whether it "counts" towards your weekly moderate exercise count?
For the purpose of counting net additional calories for the exercise?

sijomial

Stationary bikes don't move!
That 23mph is just make believe and only an indication useful for comparing the effort of YOUR rides on THAT bike.
It can't be used as a comparison to actually travelling outside on a real bike at 23mph either.

Medium tension also doesn't mean much universally, different bikes have very different ranges of resistance.

In reality the moderate part of the description is your personal intensity level (how hard it feels to you) and that also has very varied relationship to calories. e.g. my moderate intensity might well be twice the calories of someone else's and a pro cyclist's moderate would be double the calories of my effort.

Don't suppose your stationary bike displays average power output? (In watts typically.)

pridesabtch

sijomial has it right. The speed on a stationary bike means almost nothing unless you can see wattage.

If I were you I'd use my heart rate to decide what the intensity is. Or even perceived exertion. Perceived exertion is just what it sounds like. Low effort you can easily chat. Moderate effort you can talk but not chat, you are cardiovascularly limited. Intense effort you can only get a few breathy words.

Good luck

AnnPT77

If the point of asking whether it's "moderate" is to pick the right MFP exercise to log, I think there are some considerations.

First, you want to be using the "Stationary bike" ones, not the "Bicycling" ones. (I'd infer that you are, if I'm right about the genesis of your question.)

Second, all of the cycling (bike or stationary) estimates are a little on the iffy side, for various theoretical reasons. (METS - the research-based method MFP uses - is not great for estimating seated stationary cycling because it's not very body weight influenced, the MFP entries that involve subjective assessment (like "moderate") are squishy for any/all activities, etc.).

For that reason, my suggestion would be to start out logging stationary biking as "Stationary bike, general" or no more than "Stationary bike, moderate", because the more intense estimates are more likely to be over-stated IMO. (I say this based on comparison to both watts & fitness tracker estimates in my personal case, though personal experience also varies between people.) This is absolutely about approximations, and tradeoffs between the frustration of slow loss (if exercise calories are overestimated) and the health risk of fast loss (if exercise calories are underestimated).

I'm 100% a believer in logging and eating back exercise (have been doing it, successfully, for nearly 7 years now). Usually, I wouldn't suggest risking low-balling the exercise estimate, which might happen with the advice I gave above. In the case of stationary cycling for normal, short times (half hour to hour a few times a week), I think the risk of guessing a little low is not creating a health risk for the month or so it'll take you to see how your overall calorie estimating picture is working out.