discrepancy between MFP and fitbit

Options
sfsoccermom2
sfsoccermom2 Posts: 233 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I did 47 minutes of zumba at home last night. I worked up a sweat and was out of breath, but pushed through the workout. MFP said I burned 691 calories and my Fitbit said I burned 292. That's a big discrepancy. I am not sure if the Fitbit picks up all movement or just leg movements. I'm so confused and want to know which is more accurate. Usually my fitbit has a higher calorie burn than MFP for walking and strength training.

Any insight is appreciated.

Replies

  • digitz79
    digitz79 Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    I use a Fitbit also and while it is great for daily activity tracking and step tracking it cannot accurately track the intensity of a cardio workout. I always use a Polar heart rate monitor for my actual workouts.
  • mommyrunning
    mommyrunning Posts: 495 Member
    Options
    MyFitnessPal estimates so it can be off. However that does sound a little low for Zumba. What I usually do is search for a couple different calculators online and take an average. You are probably in the range of 450 calories burned. If you aren't sure of the accuracy of your fitbit you could try a heartrate monitor and then compare the calories burned. Also after a couple weeks look at your weight loss. If you lost more than expected you may have underestimated but if you lose less then it's probably estimated too high.
  • ashowers36
    ashowers36 Posts: 83 Member
    Options
    Fitbit is not going to register anything but your steps. Therefore any arm movements or body movements that don't cause you to take a step will not register.
  • Philp0718
    Philp0718 Posts: 136 Member
    Options
    MFP tends to overestimate a little bit. Fitbit is good for monitoring regular daily activity, but not so much exercise, especially high intensity cardio. A heart rate monitor would be best.
  • csverdin
    csverdin Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    I like my FitBit but really it is only a glorified pedometer. I only tracks what it thinks are step using an accelerometer so it can't track the full intensity of non-walking/running activities. I use a heart rate monitor as my calorie burn for my exercise.
  • BrawlerBella
    BrawlerBella Posts: 400 Member
    Options
    I use a Fitbit also and while it is great for daily activity tracking and step tracking it cannot accurately track the intensity of a cardio workout. I always use a Polar heart rate monitor for my actual workouts.

    +1 True Story!
  • WAS287GOAL170
    WAS287GOAL170 Posts: 44 Member
    Options
    I use a Fitbit also and while it is great for daily activity tracking and step tracking it cannot accurately track the intensity of a cardio workout. I always use a Polar heart rate monitor for my actual workouts.

    ^THIS. Fit bit is for every day use of calc TDEE, Not for workouts. Use a HRM to track that. I have a polar FT4 and LOOOOOOOVE IT! Even on the days that I do Zumba half *kitten*, I still burn at least 400 cals according to my HRM.
  • bigmamabird
    bigmamabird Posts: 55 Member
    Options
    I'm glad you asked this OP, I've been thinking about getting a FitBit and was hesitant due to the price.

    Can any of you suggest a good Heart Rate Monitor? If those are more accurate, I'd rather spend my money on one of them.
  • sara17sb
    sara17sb Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I use a Fitbit also and while it is great for daily activity tracking and step tracking it cannot accurately track the intensity of a cardio workout. I always use a Polar heart rate monitor for my actual workouts.
    I would agree. I love zumba but I think it would be really hard for mfp to accurately calculate calories burned since the intensity can change so much. A heart rate monitor would calculate exactly what you were accomplishing. I know zumba is usually a pretty intense cardio work out. I do think that mfp has over estimated some of my activity so I try not to eat back those calories to be safe. I should get a heart rate monitor too now that I've read these posts! Thanks for bringing up the topic :)
  • FeraFilia
    FeraFilia Posts: 4,664 Member
    Options
    I'm glad you asked this OP, I've been thinking about getting a FitBit and was hesitant due to the price.

    Can any of you suggest a good Heart Rate Monitor? If those are more accurate, I'd rather spend my money on one of them.

    I have both, and I'm glad I do, because they measure different things. The FitBit will measure your basic daily activity, without exercise. The stuff you do that you don't think to log (and gives you exercise "additional" calories, which is why I keep my level of activity on MFP to sedentary, and let the FitBit sync to give me the bump up if I've been more active)... things like chasing kids around, mowing the lawn, walking half a mile to the mailbox at the end of a long drive, etc.

    The heart rate monitor is used to calculate intentional cardio exercise, such as the Zumba that OP did, or other cardio workouts that have you moving a lot more than just a running/walking step. I remove my FitBit and use my HRM for when I'm doing cardio that's not based on a 'stride' motion.

    Which one you should buy depends on the type of moving you plan on doing.
  • Ready2Rock206
    Ready2Rock206 Posts: 9,488 Member
    Options
    When I had my fitbit connected I always figured it was better just to leave it as is. Even if it was a little inaccurate I'm certainly not going to lose weight by adding in an excessive amount of calories and then eating them back.
  • sfsoccermom2
    sfsoccermom2 Posts: 233 Member
    Options
    Thank you all for your responses. It puts it into a little more persepctive for me.

Categories