One of them must be wrong, but which?

seamoth

I have been using the MapMyWalk app to track my daily walking workout. It is synced to MFP. So, for the last couple of weeks I have been very pleased with the calorie burn number MapMyWalk has been giving me, which is between 420 and 450. I do exactly the same walk each time, ie 3.25 miles in an average of 65minutes.
Yesterday I was chatting to a friend who uses the NOOM Cardio Training app to track her walking workouts and she was amazed to hear of the calorie burn figures MapMyWalk is giving me. She thinks they are far too high. So, I downloaded the NOOM Cardio Training app, set it all up with my weight and other details, and used it to track my walk this morning. Exactly the same walk, more or less the same time to the minute as yesterday (when I was tracking with MapMyWalk) and low and behold instead of the 434 cals burned yesterday with MApMyWalk, NOOM Cardio Training app gives me only 319 cals burned. More than 100 cals difference!
Now, this is important to me as I usually eat back my burned calories and still keep under my MFP limit. BUT if MapMyWalk is giving me too many cals burned figures, I'm fooling myself......which could explain why my weight loss is not as good as expected.
Does any one have any experience of these two apps, and any knowledge about which app I should trust?
Many thanks!

stuffinmuffin

I'm not sure which one is right. Have you tried comparing with the figures from the MFP database against the time you were walking? I used to use MFP's database and then from comparing with a heart rate monitor (for walking) it slightly underestimated by calories burned, although I do think this had more to do with me underestimating my speed.

If walking is your main source of calorie burning and something you like doing then I would recommend maybe investing in a Fitbit as these will accurately show your calorie burn throughout the day including any walking that you do. That way you can also continue to use Map My Walk to log where you went for your walks and what distance you travelled.

Hope this helps...

dejavuohlala

yes i have been told there are huge differences in various apps. I only use my pedometer for my calorie burn and when i put those calories burnt into MFP it gives a time of much less than it took me to walk. This is why i never eat all may calories just in case but i it is very annoying when you have such differences

_Zardoz_

You have to remember all these figures are estimates. Even HRM figures are an estimate. Are you losing weight? By the looks of your ticker you are. So keep doing what you're doing using the figures that you're using if it's working. If it's not then adjust them accordingly. Sometimes people on MFP get a little obsessed with the numbers without taking a step back and thinking 'Is what I'm doing working?'. In reality it doesn't matter which one is right or not it's if it's working or not. Good luck

GertrudeHorse

The lower figure sounds more accurate to me, but it all depends on your current height, weight and fitness level. Are you breaking a sweat while you walk? Is that a hilly walk or on the flat? I always round down to the nearest 50 calories whatever MFP estimates as my burn. That has worked for me. Others recommend eating 50-75% of the calories back. I suggest you experiment and find what works for you.

seamoth

Thanks all of you for your thoughts. I have decided to continue using MapMyWalk syncing to MFP. I will only eat back half of the burned calories from now on, which should compensate for the inflated cal burn figures. Also, I think FatDoob's advice makes a lot of sense to me, I am losing weight (slowly) so will continue with whats working for me, with the above slight adjustment.
Thanks again, guys!

BenjaminMFP88

You have to remember all these figures are estimates. Even HRM figures are an estimate. Are you losing weight? By the looks of your ticker you are. So keep doing what you're doing using the figures that you're using if it's working. If it's not then adjust them accordingly. Sometimes people on MFP get a little obsessed with the numbers without taking a step back and thinking 'Is what I'm doing working?'. In reality it doesn't matter which one is right or not it's if it's working or not. Good luck

THIS! People are so obsessed. Just keep using the same one, and eating back as you have. If weightloss stalls, lower or calories and move one.

acpgee

A dietician once told me 300 cals an hours is a good ballpark figure for walking, with small adjustments for weight and speed. So I trust the lower figure.

ktsmom430

Monitor by weight loss and or inches lost. Adjust accordingly. Do what works for you
Each individual can be different, just like devices and apps show differences in calories burned.
Nothing is set in stone. You have to get to know what works for you.

MeanderingMammal

I have been using the MapMyWalk app to track my daily walking workout. It is synced to MFP. So, for the last couple of weeks I have been very pleased with the calorie burn number MapMyWalk has been giving me, which is between 420 and 450. I do exactly the same walk each time, ie 3.25 miles in an average of 65minutes.

That's high, I'd expect about 300 calories for that distance.

By way of comparison I just ran 5 miles in 40 minutes and only burned about 550 cals

athensguy

A reasonable calorie estimate to start with is .57*weight in lbs*miles walked


http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn

beattie1

My Fitbit one gives me 129 calories for my regular walk to the newspaper shop and back. It is about 2.5 miles all told, takes about 50 minutes and involves the equivalent of about 12 flights of stairs in hills.

400+ calories for 3.25 miles seems like a big overestimate to me.

PS, ALL of them are wrong, probably!

knra_grl

I would just go with the lowest. Online calculators are always lower than the MFP estimations also. I eat back some exercise calories but not all of them.

scubasuenc

I use MapMyWalk too, but I don't have it sync to MFP because I've found the calories to be too high when compared to my HRM. For my 3.29 mile walk last week MapMyWalk said I burned over 100 calories more than my HRM. I know the HRM is an estimate too, but when I wear it, that is the one I go by. It was only about 20-30 calories different from MFP.

Although I have found MFPs calories to be very high for me for a lot of exercises, for walking they are pretty close. I think the difference is the fact that I walk outside where there are hills, and my speed varies, while the MFP is more like walking on a treadmill with a 0 incline.

brianpperkins

Have you considered one is reporting net calories burned (exercise only) and the other is providing gross calories (exercise + BMR)?

LKArgh

"BUT if MapMyWalk is giving me too many cals burned figures, I'm fooling myself......which could explain why my weight loss is not as good as expected. "

You probably have your answer right here. If you are not losing as expected, do not eat all the calories back.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Annie_01

Here is the estimate that I have run across in several walking sites...

150lb person burns approximately 100 calories per mile walking at a brisk pace(I consider a brisk mile 3.5 - 4.0). Even though I am 189lbs I usually use the 100 calorie per mile. Usually MFP will calculate fairly close to that for me. If I am not worried about the miles and just use my pedometer steps I estimate 100 calories or each 2000 steps (which is the average steps per mile).

I basically use a TDEE plan so I am not worried about how much I eat back...keeping track of it though helps in determining my plan and keeps me accountable for how much I exercise.

RUNNING_AMOK_1958

The lower figure is probably more accurate. Rule of thumb, approximately 100 calories per mile.