Is there a way to determine individual calories burned?

hj1119

Hello all!

I hit my 90-day streak on my logging and while I'm proud that I logged *something* everyday for the last 3 months, I've decided that for the next 90 days, I want to be 100% accurate. No more eyeballing, no more pretending to myself that anything after 3 beers doesn't count My body knows, right?

So while I'm looking forward to being accurate with calories in, I'm curious - is there any way to determine MY calories out? I know there's approximately 15 billion calculators online but I can't help but feel that putting in my height, weight and selecting a predetermined lifestyle feels a bit... generic. I don't want to "eyeball" my calories out - I want to KNOW.

So is there a secret gadget I don't know about? Should I invest in a fitbit, heartrate monitor, or iphone app that follows me around? Is there a website that I can plug in how long I walked the dog and how many ounces of breastmilk my body produced and it will tell me what *I* actually burned as opposed to every other 5'10, 32 year old female who doesn't have a dog or feed a baby?

I know it's a shot in the dark, I'm just curious...

While I'm asking questions - I determined my "macros" on another website (still learning here!) but can't figure out how to change MFP to show those goals other than selecting a percentage - which is off by a couple of grams. Is that right?

cantfail

Everything is an estimate. I think your most accurate will be a HRM.

jkal1979

First, great job on your loss so far!

I use a Fitbit to calculate my calories burned during the day. It determines your calorie burn by using your age, height, weight and how active you are during the day. It's pretty close estimate but I don't think that there is anything out there that will tell you the exact amount of calories burned during the day. A HRM will not be accurate since it's only meant to be used during steady cardio.

jkal1979

Everything is an estimate. I think your most accurate will be a HRM.

HRM's are not meant to be worn all day. She would get an inaccurate reading if she did.

michelleepotter

Everything is an estimate. I think your most accurate will be a HRM.

HRM's are not meant to be worn all day. She would get an inaccurate reading if she did.

I thought the OP was specifically talking about calories burned during exercise. A FitBit is good for regular activity, but it won't give you an accurate reading for exercise. For that you need a HRM.

I don't use a FitBit or anything like that. I logged consistently and accurately for about a month (weighing my food and using a HRM for exercise), then I looked at the calories I took in vs how much weight I lost (3500 calories per pound), then adjusted my goal accordingly.

evileen99

The BodyMedia Fit is the most accurate metabolic monitor out there; FitBit Zip came in at #2 according to a recently published study. Unless you want to spend all day in a body box, one of these is your best bet to determine how many calories you're burning in a day.

Keefypoos

in short No, its all estimated

StaciMarie1974

HRM is great - but only for steady state cardio. Not all day burn. The body bugg (I think they renamed it Body Media?) meaures all day burn but requires a paid subscription. I use a Fitbit - and very happy with it. Its a fancy pedometer, and uses my movement/activity to estimate calories burned. Is it 100% accurate? Of course not. But its more accurate than the random formulas you mentioned, and requires no subscription.

I aim for a 500 deficit daily, officially. I actually like to have an extra 100-200 calorie deficit as a buffer, and I figure this helps offset burn or intake inaccuracies. In my last 4 week measurement period, I lost 3.8 pounds (goal 4) so this is working for me.

0somuchbetter0

I had the same questions about accuracy and I finally gave up. All of them are estimates, some more accurate than others, but none of them are 100%. You could wear a Fitbit, lift weights for an hour and not move your feet, and it would think you're just sitting there reading a book. I have a HRM that I bought for spinning class (Fitbit can't tell when you're biking, either). It was ok but the strap bothered me and I stopped using it. And the end of the day, only your body really knows how many calories it's consuming and burning, but it won't share the info with your brain! Very frustrating!

I have a Fitbit that I wear all day every day and it claims I burn 1 cal per minute just sitting still. So when I do cardio I subtract those cals...i.e. Fitbit says I burn, say, 350 cals during a 30 minute run. I record that as 320 cals. It's not exact but it makes me happy.

hj1119

Thank you all for your advice..

I'll into the BodyMedia Fit - and also start doing like another poster suggested.. perfectly track a few weeks of accurate intake and compare it to weight loss, see what happens. Thanks guys!

Can I just say that it's insanely frustrating to see "don't estimate or eyeball your food, weigh it and log it accurately!" but in general, calories burned has to be an estimate. Thanks, biology!

hj1119

First, great job on your loss so far!

Thanks!

hj1119

The BodyMedia Fit is the most accurate metabolic monitor out there; FitBit Zip came in at #2 according to a recently published study. Unless you want to spend all day in a body box, one of these is your best bet to determine how many calories you're burning in a day.

I would absolutely spend my day in a body box - where can I sign up?

SmartAlec03211988

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

StaciMarie1974

That's due to your BMR, which is also factored into the MFP calorie recommendations.

I have a Fitbit that I wear all day every day and it claims I burn 1 cal per minute just sitting still. So when I do cardio I subtract those cals...i.e. Fitbit says I burn, say, 350 cals during a 30 minute run. I record that as 320 cals. It's not exact but it makes me happy.

tibby531

Can I just say that it's insanely frustrating to see "don't estimate or eyeball your food, weigh it and log it accurately!" but in general, calories burned has to be an estimate. Thanks, biology!

here, here! :drinker:

hj1119

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

Definitely worth the $120 down, $6.95 a month eh?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Julzanne72

There are ways around paying a membership for a bodymedia....I have one and have had it for a couple of years, yet to pay for the service.

Julzanne72

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

Definitely worth the $120 down, $6.95 a month eh?

The first year is free I believe, and there are ways to avoid paying the 6.95/month after your first year....

WalkingAlong

I think gadgets can be great motivators, personally. But it's all estimates.

Your best estimate is free and at your fingertips. You just have to estimate your food log as best you can and monitor your weight. From that you can back out your calorie burn. If you lose a pound a week on average, you're burning 500ish more than you eat on average. If you're eating on average 1500, you're burning on average 2000ish.

I don't know why so few people bother to do it. I guess because few people track intake well enough to trust that number? Or they don't track their intake long enough to get some long term averages? Or because it's math and that deters people?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Julzanne72

For me, I use a HRM with my workouts, wear my Bodymedia during the day, log my food. I like knowing what I burn every day. could I do it without, sure. But I like the information. Everyone is different:)

Julzanne72

I think gadgets can be great motivators, personally. But it's all estimates.

Your best estimate is free and at your fingertips. You just have to estimate your food log as best you can and monitor your weight. From that you can back out your calorie burn. If you lose a pound a week on average, you're burning 500ish more than you eat on average. If you're eating on average 1500, you're burning on average 2000ish.

I don't know why so few people bother to do it. I guess because few people track intake well enough to trust that number? Or they don't track their intake long enough to get some long term averages? Or because it's math and that deters people?

I consistently try to tell people if you just track results, this is all really easy. But, I think people want things to be hard. So, the gadgets sell.

To each his own, I don't think i would fail if I didn't have them, but I like using them as additional tools to help me suceed.
My not be for you, but everyone is different.

hj1119

I think gadgets can be great motivators, personally. But it's all estimates.

Your best estimate is free and at your fingertips. You just have to estimate your food log as best you can and monitor your weight. From that you can back out your calorie burn. If you lose a pound a week on average, you're burning 500ish more than you eat on average. If you're eating on average 1500, you're burning on average 2000ish.

I don't know why so few people bother to do it. I guess because few people track intake well enough to trust that number? Or they don't track their intake long enough to get some long term averages? Or because it's math and that deters people?

I like gadgets, first of all. Any excuse to take advantage of my amazon prime membership, I'm in

The other thing I love is spreadsheets. So math would not deter me. You should see the Herculean spreadsheet I use to track my finances. It's mindblowing and I spend a few hours a day on it

The reason I'm looking for a gadget is because *in my eyes* there's so many variables in what you are suggesting. They are:

1. I haven't been logging accurately. I know this. I know there is more than one day that I drank 6 beers and logged 3. The first 6 weeks I was 100% honest in my diary, but I was still eyeballing. So I don't have the data, I'd have to create it. Which deters me It sounds like *gasp* effort

This isn't an issue, it's an excuse, but speaking of...

1a. I don't know how alcohol metabolizes, but I really feel like beer calories are different than say, sandwich calories. I have to do my research on this but I'd want to go on a booze-fast if I were going to track my calories to determine my average daily burn number.

2. How often am I stepping on the scale here? Once a week? Once a day? Which leads me to...

3. I don't entirely trust the scale I step on. Even if I'm going for the same time, after I pee, wearing the same clothes, etc... What if it's that time of the month and I'm bloaty? What if I ate a heavy meal the night before and the scale reflected no change from the week before? How can I be sure the reading is accurate unless I ate literally the same thing every day, all day, for weeks on end?

hj1119

I think gadgets can be great motivators, personally. But it's all estimates.

Your best estimate is free and at your fingertips. You just have to estimate your food log as best you can and monitor your weight. From that you can back out your calorie burn. If you lose a pound a week on average, you're burning 500ish more than you eat on average. If you're eating on average 1500, you're burning on average 2000ish.

I don't know why so few people bother to do it. I guess because few people track intake well enough to trust that number? Or they don't track their intake long enough to get some long term averages? Or because it's math and that deters people?

I consistently try to tell people if you just track results, this is all really easy. But, I think people want things to be hard. So, the gadgets sell.

So here's my story. I was in a "biggest loser" type challenge for 6 weeks. I tracked my calories as honestly as I could, 100%, without lying to myself. I was estimating, but I tried to estimate fairly and err on the side of deficit if you know what I mean. For example, I'd buy a half pound pork tenderloin, cook it, give more than half of it to my husband and then log 4 ounces of tenderloin.

During this time I was drinking 128+ ounces of water a day as well. I used the same scale, same clothes, same time of day to weigh. I hadn't yet started exercising.

Here are my numbers:

Days 42
Total calories consumed 52141
Average calories per day 1241.452381

Starting weight 207.6
Finishing weight 184.2

Weight lost 23.4
Weight lost - caloric 81900

Calories consumed + lost 134041
Average calories burnt / day 3191.452381

This just doesn't feel right to me! What did I do wrong?

ETA: IIFYM says my BMR is: 1572 CALORIES/DAY and my TDEE is: 2162 CALORIES/DAY.

Because I'm a spreadsheet addict, I did the next 50 days as well. During these 7 weeks, I reintroduced beer into my diet but also started light cardio 3x a week and walking the dogs / getting outside more. I also KNOW I was a lot more lax in my intake tracking. Definitely more than one day during this time I logged 3 beers but actually drank 6 (or whatever.)

Days 50
Total calories consumed 81408
Average calories per day 1628.16

Starting weight 184.2
Finishing* weight 173.6

Weight lost 10.6
Weight lost - caloric 37100

Calories consumed + lost 118508
Average calories burnt / day 2370.16

So my average over the long period of time looks like this:

Days 92
Total calories consumed 133549
Average calories per day 1451.619565

Starting weight 207.6
Current 173.6

Weight lost 34
Weight lost - caloric 119000

Calories consumed + lost 252549
Average calories burnt / day 2745.097826

roroinco

Yes, get the Bodymedia band. It's what they wear on the Biggest Loser. It works awesome!! You wear it 24/7 (except in the shower or swimming). It will give you your individual calorie burn. I thought about the FitBit but it is still guessing because it is basically a pedometer. Get the Bodymedia!! You won't regret it!!!

SmartAlec03211988

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

Definitely worth the $120 down, $6.95 a month eh?

It most definitely is. There's worse things one can spend $7 a month on.

hj1119

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

Definitely worth the $120 down, $6.95 a month eh?

It most definitely is. There's worse things one can spend $7 a month on.

I can amen to that

What makes the BodyMedia fit more accurate than the fitbit?

roroinco

I've had a BodyMedia Fit for two years and I've lost over 75 lbs so far... definitely would recommend it.

Definitely worth the $120 down, $6.95 a month eh?

It most definitely is. There's worse things one can spend $7 a month on.

I can amen to that

What makes the BodyMedia fit more accurate than the fitbit?

This is from the Bodymedia website:

The Science
Your BodyMedia® FIT Armband has multiple sensors. Those innovative sensors take 5 different "views" of your life:



Motion The Armband contains an accelerometer, a device that measures motion. (Your car air bag has an accelerometer in it that lets it know when you've been in an accident.) We use it to measure HOW you move from multiple axis and perspectives, allowing us to better understand your activity.
Steps We count your steps, using the accelerometer to measure the distinct patterns created by walking and/or running.
Galvanic Skin Response When you sweat, your skin becomes more electrically conductive. This measurement helps us see how active you are.
Skin Temperature There's an electronic thermometer inside your armband that helps us know how hot you are.
Heat Flux When you move, your muscles produce heat. We measure the heat that's flowing from your body into the environment.
Once we've gotten these "readings" we can determine what kind of exercise you're getting, and how difficult it is for you. That's important since your body burns calories differently than anyone else's.
Clinically Proven to Accurately Measure the Amount of Physical Activity and Calories
Our clinically proven algorithms crunch your numbers pairing up sensor data with calorie information and presenting it to you via the BodyMedia FIT Activity Manager & so you know how far you are toward reaching your goals!

BodyMedia FIT is Clinically Proven to be Accurate

The BodyMedia FIT System has been Clinically Proven to Accurately Measure the Amount of Physical Activity and Calories.

A recent independent study tested our Armband system in real-life situations. Participants engaged in "free living" activities, including brisk walking, running, bicycling, sedentary activities, home activities, home repair, occupational activities, strength training, and ball games. The study compared the armband to a $40,000 "portable oxygen analyzer", the gold standard for measuring calories. Results showed:
• Total Calories for free living activities: mean error <10%.
• Total Minutes of exercise: mean error <5%.
Source: British Journal of Sports Medicine. July 2008

I would encourage you to checkout their website www.bodymedia.com. It has a lot of information. From my understanding, Fitbit only senses motion like a pedometer. You can get an optional heartrate monitor to wear but that is not to be meant to be worn continuously like the Bodymedia. I highly recommend Bodymedia link band for accurate results. You can link your Bodymedia account with MFP. I log my food into MFP and it carrysover to Bodymedia. My calorie burn also imports into MFP. It works great!!!

WalkingAlong

Yes, get the Bodymedia band. It's what they wear on the Biggest Loser. It works awesome!! You wear it 24/7 (except in the shower or swimming). It will give you your individual calorie burn. I thought about the FitBit but it is still guessing because it is basically a pedometer. Get the Bodymedia!! You won't regret it!!!

It doesn't give you your individual calorie burn. It estimates it just like the Fitbit and everything else. It uses the same main method as the Fitbit (accelerometer) but adds three other skin sensors. I've had both and didn't get any better data from having the thing stuck to me, but some say they did. I prefer the discreet, no-fee Fitbit.

Jawbone who makes the UP device which is just an accelerometer like the Fitbit owns Body Media. I think they just sell to two different markets-- the sporty, $99 market and the Biggest Loser, $129+monthly fee market. If the skin stuff was such an improvement, I think they'd incorporate it on the UP.

Aaron_K123

Its all an estimate based on population averages. The only truly "accurate" way to measure calories out is to hook you up to a breathing aparatus that measures the output of your breath to determine the exchange rate of O2 and CO2 (which is the determinate of your metabolic activity).

That, of course, isn't practical. Next best thing is considered to be a heartrate monitor with a chest strap. Thing is heartrate monitors are only really semi-accurate in steadystate cardio and crap outside of that. That means if you go for a 45 minute run and for 40 minutes of that your heart is beating in your aerobic range then for that 40 minutes its accurate. If you keep it on after your run as you cool down and go get a drink then it stops being accurate...like at all. HRMs are also not accurate for activities that are anaerobic such as weight lifting or bursts of high intensity.

Want to know how to do it? Be consistent with your methods of ballparking, both calories in and calories out, and keep close track of your progress towards your goals (things like scale weight, tape measurer, bodyfat comp). Relate your progress over time to your in and out calculations and adjust if needed.

Trusting implicitly what a device tells you as being somehow 100% accurate would be a mistake, but as long as you take it with a grain of salt that information can still be useful.