How do I verify the numbers on my treadmill?

Kev_22

I walk everyday on a treadmill (and throw in some jogging as well). I'll program in my weight and set it to burn 600 calories (4% incline and 3.5mph speed) and I go until it's done... typically 65-70 minutes. Is there any way I can verify I'm actually burning the 600 calories?

bobbijodmb

a heart rate monitor would help

HikerRR50

Consult a magic 8 ball

Kev_22

a heart rate monitor would help

It's typically around 115-120 (155 while jogging) but I don't constantly watch it.

Commander_Keen

You would have to get/use HRM.

Savyna

Like Bobbijo said a heart rate monitor is better for being more accurate.

Kev_22

Consult a magic 8 ball

The magic 8 ball says "Without a doubt" *I want to believe*

journey_man

How about the built in HRMs that sense thru the handles, are they accurate for measuring heart rate at least?

Kev_22

How about the built in HRMs that sense thru the handles, are they accurate for measuring heart rate at least?

I believe they are, but I'd have to verify.

MoreBean13

Treadmills are actually one of the most accurate calorie counting tools, assuming you've input your weight, you're not holding on to the machine, and that the belt speeds are tuned correctly. There's not as much variation in calories burned for walking/running person-to-person as people might think- unless you're like wildly flailing your arms the whole time or something. The science of walking/running has been studied for decades, and it's a pretty standard work over distance formula. I would just trust the treadmill. It's at least (if not MORE) accurate than HRMs for this particular activity (because work/distance is better standardized than the correlation between a person's Heart Rate and calories- which depends heavily on accuracy in knowing your VO2max, which most people don't)

ETA:typo

Krista916

HRM! Treadmill is pretty close, but still off for actual calories burned when I run. My co-worker got a HRM for Christmas and was really disappointed because the machines said way more then what she actually burned.

mccindy72

I walk everyday on a treadmill (and throw in some jogging as well). I'll program in my weight and set it to burn 600 calories (4% incline and 3.5mph speed) and I go until it's done... typically 65-70 minutes. Is there any way I can verify I'm actually burning the 600 calories?

A heart rate monitor will be more accurate than the machine. Also don't forget that no matter what method you use, you need to subtract the calories your body would have naturally burned anyway, to get your net calories. Otherwise you are counting those calories as being burned twice, and the results wil be inaccurate.

cwolfman13

It's all an estimate, even a HRM...and if you have any kind of heart issues like high blood pressure or a higher than average resting HR then your numbers from a HRM are going to be off even further. You're never going to be able to determine if you truly burned exactly 600 calories...and really, there is not need to. If you are utilizing the MFP method and eating back exercise calories then just be conservative with your approach and deduct 20-30% or so for estimation error. Personally, I prefer the TDEE method where you just account for some estimation of your exercise by time and intensity rather than trying to nail down some exact burn.

Mr_Knight

Since you're primarily walking, an HRM isn't likely to give you an accurate reading.

4 miles of walking will net you a burn of -> 0.3 * body weight in pounds * miles walked

So in your case

1.2 * body weight in pounds

The 4% incline adds a small amount, but only a small amount, as the first 2% of that incline basically compensates for being on a treadmill.

xvintagepearls

Never ever trust the machine, even if you enter your weight, because they're usually very wrong. A HRM will verify the amount of calories that you're actually burning. I can predict from the info that you provided that you're probably burning 1/2 of that (roughly 300 cals).

bwogilvie

How about the built in HRMs that sense thru the handles, are they accurate for measuring heart rate at least?

I was at the gym last week using an exercise bike that senses heart rate through the handles, and also wearing my heart rate monitor with a chest strap. The two numbers were usually within 2-3 bpm. Sometimes the machine was higher than my HRM, sometimes lower. I wasn't systematically comparing the two, though, just glancing every few minutes.

MoreBean13

Never ever trust the machine, even if you enter your weight, because they're usually very wrong. A HRM will verify the amount of calories that you're actually burning. I can predict from the info that you provided that you're probably burning 1/2 of that (roughly 300 cals).

Treadmills aren't "usually" wrong though.

Your argument is pretty valid for ellipticals or arc machines, but treadmills shouldn't be lumped in with all gym machines. For that matter, neither should stationary bikes.

ryry_

Never ever trust the machine, even if you enter your weight, because they're usually very wrong. A HRM will verify the amount of calories that you're actually burning. I can predict from the info that you provided that you're probably burning 1/2 of that (roughly 300 cals).

Treadmills aren't "usually" wrong though.

Your argument is pretty valid for ellipticals or arc machines, but treadmills shouldn't be lumped in with all gym machines. For that matter, neither should stationary bikes.

Just curious. Are the formulas being used in treadmills derived from people running on actual treadmills or on paved roads? I only ask because my perceived effort is much higher on a paved road rather than a treadmill given equal speeds.

Kev_22

Yup, going to have to purchase a HRM to verify, from what you guys are saying I'm WAY off in my calorie burning. Anyone have any HRM recommendations? I'd like to use some sort of strap that can connect to my phone/ipad.

MoreBean13

Never ever trust the machine, even if you enter your weight, because they're usually very wrong. A HRM will verify the amount of calories that you're actually burning. I can predict from the info that you provided that you're probably burning 1/2 of that (roughly 300 cals).

Treadmills aren't "usually" wrong though.

Your argument is pretty valid for ellipticals or arc machines, but treadmills shouldn't be lumped in with all gym machines. For that matter, neither should stationary bikes.

Just curious. Are the formulas being used in treadmills derived from people running on actual treadmills or on paved roads? I only ask because my perceived effort is much higher on a paved road rather than a treadmill given equal speeds.

Running on an actual road is a little harder- even if it's perfectly flat, the movement of the belt gives a slight forward propulsion advantage that a road doesn't have- that's why if you're trying to emulate road conditions you're supposed to set the treadmill at a very small (~1%) gradient.

I'm PRETTY sure that the numbers come from treadmill studies- sports science labs at universities have been hooking people up and monitoring them on treadmills and bikes for decades, and there's very little difference treadmill to treadmill (maybe a slightly softer surface). Ellipticals, on the other hand, have wildly different movement patterns and ways to adjust the resistance (some change the angle, some use mechanical braking, etc) so two different machines have different calorie burns, so the calorie readout is "studied" by the manufacturer of that machine and there's almost no way to verify their data ("proprietary studies"). Add to the difference in movement that there is a demand for machines that get the highest burn for the least effort, so the machines sell better if the readout says a ton of calories and it feels easy (ahem....arc machines)..

Sorry for the novel, but that's basically why treadmills are trustworthy and ellipticals are liars.

Just_Scott

general rule of thumb whether walking or running--->100 calories for every mile. Next caller....

MrsJBro

Truly a heart rate monitor that also calculates calories would be your best bet. The Polar FT7 is pretty awesome, I just got a new one off Amazon, I think it was around $78. That'll give you the best idea of how many calories you are actually burning.

laural007

Invest in a HRM. I find I burn more calories then the treadmill states, however my heart rate is usually pretty accuate with the machine.

Timmmy40

Walking burn about 100 calories per mile. Running/jogging 100 - 150 calories per mile. Most if not all dreadmills I have been on over estimate calories burn. My hrm varies from day to day.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Kev_22

No one has asked yet if you're getting results?

In other words, if you're set to lose 1 lb per week, are you losing 1 lb per week?

if so, it doesn't matter how many cals you're burning. It's working.

True, it's hard to argue with the results I've had so far, I just always wondered if it was accurate.

ryry_

Never ever trust the machine, even if you enter your weight, because they're usually very wrong. A HRM will verify the amount of calories that you're actually burning. I can predict from the info that you provided that you're probably burning 1/2 of that (roughly 300 cals).

Treadmills aren't "usually" wrong though.

Your argument is pretty valid for ellipticals or arc machines, but treadmills shouldn't be lumped in with all gym machines. For that matter, neither should stationary bikes.

Just curious. Are the formulas being used in treadmills derived from people running on actual treadmills or on paved roads? I only ask because my perceived effort is much higher on a paved road rather than a treadmill given equal speeds.

Running on an actual road is a little harder- even if it's perfectly flat, the movement of the belt gives a slight forward propulsion advantage that a road doesn't have- that's why if you're trying to emulate road conditions you're supposed to set the treadmill at a very small (~1%) gradient.

I'm PRETTY sure that the numbers come from treadmill studies- sports science labs at universities have been hooking people up and monitoring them on treadmills and bikes for decades, and there's very little difference treadmill to treadmill (maybe a slightly softer surface). Ellipticals, on the other hand, have wildly different movement patterns and ways to adjust the resistance (some change the angle, some use mechanical braking, etc) so two different machines have different calorie burns, so the calorie readout is "studied" by the manufacturer of that machine and there's almost no way to verify their data ("proprietary studies"). Add to the difference in movement that there is a demand for machines that get the highest burn for the least effort, so the machines sell better if the readout says a ton of calories and it feels easy (ahem....arc machines)..

Sorry for the novel, but that's basically why treadmills are trustworthy and ellipticals are liars.

Good info to have.

And for everyone touting HR as the king of accuracy..."tread" lightly. I got one to try to find an accurate count. I was sure that the readout on the treadmill was inflated. Then my HR monitor started reading about 30% higher than treadmill #. Go figure.

TracyJo93

The calories my HRM says I burn and the number the treadmill gives me are usually off by maybe 2 calories. I'd trust the treadmill.