Don't believe estimated calorie burn

ashlando

You can't put too much stock into calorie estimates. They definitely help in trying to gauge how much you should be eating daily to achieve your weight loss goals, but they are not exact.

I've been using MFP for 6+ months and have had great success with tracking food intake and calorie expenditure as it relates to my weight loss. Use the calorie tracker loosely and with a grain of salt.

I use the Nike Fuelband to help me track my overall energy expenditure throughout the day and it helps me to know where I am at for the day and if I should move more. I really like it and highly recommend it to anyone who wants a little more of a push to stay consistently active.

WalkingAlong

A rough estimate of what you burn is your body weight in pounds for every 30 minutes of exercise. If you weigh 120, then maybe 240 an hour for (harder than walking 3.5mph) exercise. If you weigh 300, maybe 600 an hour.

Nope. I weigh 145 and I can run 6.5-7 miles in an hour. 290 calories is WAY off. You can't make generalizations about exercise without taking in to account level of effort.

Every estimate comes from generalizations about effort, unless you're undergoing direct calorimetry testing during your run.

That estimate is rough and conservative and talking about an average workout, like with a warm up and cool down period and moderate effort. It's not going to apply well to sprinting for an hour or curling 3 lbs dumbbells in your chair.

knra_grl

I checked calories burned with this yesterday and I think it's more accurate than MFP

http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calories_burned.htm

MFP credited 411 for my very fast paced walk of 50 mins this site gave me 296 which I think would be more accurate

I entered the MFP credit cause I am lazy but kept in mind that it was likely off when I ate so that I wouldn't go over.