Help with calculating calories burned

Gnawcraft

Hi there, I was just wondering whether MFP takes your weight etc. into account when it calculates your calories burned in the exercise tab. I currently exercise on a stationary bike that I don't input my weight or any such information into and the difference between the number of the monitor on the bike and the number given by MFP are pretty far apart. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks! ^_^

Gnawcraft

Well if anyone else was wondering about this type of thing, I used this website; http://www.bhf.org.uk/heart-health/prevention/calorie-calculator.aspx and received the same number as MFP :>

KarenJanine

Yes, MFP does take your weight into accout. When you lose weight you will notice that MFP credits you with less calories for exercise, because usually calorie burns decrease along with weight. Therefore it is important you keep your MFP up to date with your weigh ins.

Shropshire1959

This is an interesting question and raises another interesting question ....

Spinning, is a weight supported form of exercise (you're sat on your *kitten*) - so how much (if at all) should your weight be used in the calculation of of energy used for this (and similar) exercise?

sijomial

Weight (and size) makes a big difference when cycling outdoors but not so much when you are using a stationary bike (unless you are standing up to cycle).
If your exercise bike can measure your power output (watts for example) then it could be pretty accurate.

Shropshire1959

Oo .. just found this artical on that very subject ..... (P.S - not sure what I think of his conclusion yet though)

http://graemethomasonline.com/he-s-a-i-d-she-s-a-i-d-why-spinning-wondoesnt-make-you-slim/

Still not convinced that you need to give up the bike or elliptical? Then maybe some objective data is needed to change your mind… These calorie expenditure numbers are based on a man weighing 180 lbs.

Stationary Cycling (moderate intensity): 572 kcal/hour
Running 8 mph: 950 kcal/hour
Even for those mathematically challenged, it’s apparent that running at a moderate clip burns nearly 2x as many calories as does spinning!

So there you have it, there’s really no other way to “spin” the reality… spin classes are among the worst fat loss tools around.

Gnawcraft

Thanks very much!

sloth3toes

It's pretty much universally accepted that MFP exaggerates calorie burns by quite a bit. I 'assume' that the bike is reporting the lower number? Exercise equipment is often assumed to inflate calorie burns as well. That's why many people don't eat all the reported calories burned, back.

sijomial

Oo .. just found this artical on that very subject ..... (P.S - not sure what I think of his conclusion yet though)

http://graemethomasonline.com/he-s-a-i-d-she-s-a-i-d-why-spinning-wondoesnt-make-you-slim/

Still not convinced that you need to give up the bike or elliptical? Then maybe some objective data is needed to change your mind… These calorie expenditure numbers are based on a man weighing 180 lbs.

Stationary Cycling (moderate intensity): 572 kcal/hour
Running 8 mph: 950 kcal/hour
Even for those mathematically challenged, it’s apparent that running at a moderate clip burns nearly 2x as many calories as does spinning!

So there you have it, there’s really no other way to “spin” the reality… spin classes are among the worst fat loss tools around.

That's nonsense really - the calorie burn is related to intensity and your physical abilities to sustain that intensity not the equipment you use.
I also wouldn't equate an hour running at 8mph to moderate stationary cycling or even a Spinning class to moderate stationary cycling unless it's a beginners class.
Think the author is trying to justify an agenda.....

Marie047

TBH I wouldn`t use either of them as calories burned, go get yourself a HRM and use that as it is much more accurate than a machine or what MFP tells you.

funfang

Thanks for asking this question, I have been wondering about this for a while too. I spend about 15 minutes in my 45 minutes Zumba class to warm up and stretch, when I use MFP data base, do I enter the whole 45 minutes or just 30? I often wonder how accurate it is... I have been looking at fitbit and am wondering if that will be a more accurate? Anyone use a fitbit or anything like it?

Shropshire1959

Oo .. just found this artical on that very subject ..... (P.S - not sure what I think of his conclusion yet though)

That's nonsense really - the calorie burn is related to intensity and your physical abilities to sustain that intensity not the equipment you use.
I also wouldn't equate an hour running at 8mph to moderate stationary cycling or even a Spinning class to moderate stationary cycling unless it's a beginners class.
Think the author is trying to justify an agenda.....

It does sound nonsense - but .... It's on the internet so it MUST be true (much like a lot of posts here :-p )

Anniebotnen

The elliptical and treadmill in my gym asks for your weight if you want them to track calories burned, the stationary bikes do not. I always assumed its because you sit on the bikes so body weight is much less important. Interesting question in regards to the Zumba warmup! I went to my first class last week, which lasted for 1 hour, with a warmup of about 5 minutes. If you eat back exercise calories, it may be beet not to count the warmup time...

MaggieLoo79

Thanks for asking this question, I have been wondering about this for a while too. I spend about 15 minutes in my 45 minutes Zumba class to warm up and stretch, when I use MFP data base, do I enter the whole 45 minutes or just 30? I often wonder how accurate it is... I have been looking at fitbit and am wondering if that will be a more accurate? Anyone use a fitbit or anything like it?

I've wondered about that too! I break it out, just to be sure. I log however many minutes of "stretching" and the rest as the exercise (circuit training, kick boxing, etc.).

m23prime

hey Pidge!

As has already been noted, the best and most accurate way to monitor calorie burn is to get and use a calibrated Heart Rate Monitor.

I use a Fitbit and the MFP database numbers. AND I guesstimate a lot of food logging.

Is it as accurate? Nope.

Has meeting daily step goals and being marginally mindful of what I am eating, if only because I have to account for it in my log worked?

Yes.

What these tools do for you is track your trends.

Life is too short to count calories all the time.

(But it IS long enough to learn that, with practice, smaller, nutritionally balanced portions, water, sleep, and daily activity, can stave off the urges to binge or graze on junk food.)

The logging and the tracking here do not provide hard calorie data. They can help you spot excesses and deficits, and they remind me to shop the perimeter of the grocery store and to look for hidden salt and sugar in the boxes, bags, and tins. The rest must be done with mindfulness and common sense.

I am not an elite athlete. I do not need rocket science metrics. I am a middle-aged fat man with a tragic hair cut who needs to be reminded not to scarf the WHOLE feckin' bag of crisps in one sitting, and if I do, then I had better be prepared to spend time on my bike or elliptical, with a glaze of perspiration on my forehead for my trouble if I want to lose weight that week.

By watching my portions, agonizing a little bit when I made,,,um...less sound nutritional decisions, and walking everywhere for a year, I have reached a point where I am not only optimistic about reaching my original goals--

(I am going to rock this Halloween with something Spectacular that might even involve needing form fitting clothes!)

--I now have to give some serious thought to a series of brand new goals that were UNIMAGINABLE a year ago...

So let the data fall where they may. Eat a little less, move a little more, drink water, sleep, and keep track of the big picture with tools you are comfortable with and ready to use every day.

And relax.

Cheers!
Mark