confused about how many calories i've burnt

pinky6767

Ok, so i went for a walk today in the freezing windy weather with my dog. I brought my phone to track my distance and speed. The app is called sports tracker. I takes into account my age, weight, distance, speed and has a gps to track where i go. Now i checked it when i got home today and it said i burnt 166 calories. But, when i went on here to say that i walked , it said i burnt more like 80 carlories. Which one will be more accurate ? which should i count on ? Thanks for the help

AllanMisner

Both are just estimates. The phone is probably closer to right (since it had a lot more data for the calculation), but is still an estimate. Depending on what your goals are (lose weight), I'd be conservative, but not overly so. Remember that what you get for calories you eat is an estimate, what you get for calories burned is an estimate. Don't kill yourself trying to do exact math for something that is anything but.

BrianSharpe

Here's a formula to help you sanity check the numbers (as suggested by Runners World)

.30 x your weight in lbs x distance in miles

Don't be surprised if the number is on the low side as this formula calculates the net calories expended (ie additional calories expended as a result of the exercise - many calculators give the gross calories expended which include BMR, effectively double counting calories you would have expended lying in bed)

_Calypso_

The best way to track your calorie burn is to get a heart rate monitor.

But until then aim on the lower end so you don't over eat.

erickirb

The best way to track your calorie burn is to get a heart rate monitor.

But until then aim on the lower end so you don't over eat.

Only if doing steady state cardio with an elevated HR, otherwise, wildly inaccurate, and would tend to overestimate.

_Calypso_

Here's a formula to help you sanity check the numbers (as suggested by Runners World)

.30 x your weight in lbs x distance in miles

Don't be surprised if the number is on the low side as this formula calculates the net calories expended (ie additional calories expended as a result of the exercise - many calculators give the gross calories expended which include BMR, effectively double counting calories you would have expended lying in bed)

Unless a person is walking at a slow pace .0mph then this formula is way off.
I ran 4.35 miles this morning and my HRM said 477 cal burn. By this formula it was only 190 cal burn. Even based on my previous "walk" enteries a 4.35 mile walk would put me around 240 cal burn.

I agree to aim on the low side when not wearing a HRM, but this forumla seems off.

_Calypso_

The best way to track your calorie burn is to get a heart rate monitor.

But until then aim on the lower end so you don't over eat.

Only if doing steady state cardio with an elevated HR, otherwise, wildly inaccurate, and would tend to overestimate.

Agree a HRM is accurate for steady state cardio. Walking is cardio. Granted slow pace would be a much lower burn. However, walking dogs in the freezing cold would probably elevate most HRs.

pinky6767

Thank you sooo much guys !! you guys are awesome! if you can recommend a good monitor and where do you get those bands that strap to your arm that count steps, calories,amount of sleep, and so on. I think its also probably smart like you said to go by the lower amounts of calories, so i don't falsey believe i can go ahead and eat more . I had one of the arm bands awhile back when i joined jenny craig. It was awesome, but then they wanted me to pay monthly to get my readings on line. Is that a normal thing? I just didn't want to get scammed ! thanks so much guys !! xoxox

pinky6767

so, i looked around and found out its called the body media arm band. I also located one and i'm purchasing it today ! i'll keep you posted on my progress. If anyone has one of these or knows someone who uses it. They use them on the biggest loser. So, i'm hoping to become a big loser too. heeheee

pinky6767

ohhh and jillian michaels is the spokesperson for the bodymedia arm band