What calorie count is more accurate?

petey49

Hi: I have 2questions about exercise and calorie count. I am using an elliptical trainer. I selected manual mode level 5 and entered my weight. Today I was on it for 40 minutes (35 work, 5 cool down) and it says I burned 375 calories. During the work part I kept up a pace of 6.5 - 7 mph and did 3.65 miles.

If I use the exercise search function and check jogging at 6 mph it says I burned 400 calories and elliptical trainier 411 calories.

How do I know how many calories I am actually burning and what should I log?

ckehoe89

You really should get a heart rate monitor. Elliptical tend to tell you you burn more than you actually do and on the website they aren't taking in account your heart rate. I bought one and it works out perfect. It gives me an accurate read!

Cristy_AZ

I'm told the only accurate way is to get a heart rate monitor. I am getting one this weekend. In the meantime, I found this site http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc, it uses your weight, which is probably more accurate than entries here, which are created by other users, so you're just entering how many calories someone else burned doing the same activity.

Egger29

IN generally the machine at the gym will be more accurate...IF you input your age and weight into the machine before the workout.

That being said, each result is going to vary from person to person so you'll have to go with the best estimate that works for you.

Generally, a heavier person does more work on the same machine as the heart has to work harder to pump blood through the body. The fitter and leaner the individual, the more efficient the heart becomes. With that in mind, the same 40 mins for person A won't be the same as for Person B, but for all intensive purposes it's ok to use the rough estimate.

Bear in mind the Food and exercise logs aren't a bible, only a 24hour HR monitor can do that....but it gives you a fair guideline to be aware on your daily choices so that you can make healthy decisions and stay motivated.

I would suggest regardless you go with the lower number as it would be better to under estimate than over estimate.

Cheers!

Azdak

Assuming either one is accurate (not a given), there is no practical difference between 375 and 411. None whatsoever.

cmriverside

I'm told the only accurate way is to get a heart rate monitor. I am getting one this weekend. In the meantime, I found this site http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc, it uses your weight, which is probably more accurate than entries here, which are created by other users, so you're just entering how many calories someone else burned doing the same activity.

It would be more accurate to use a heart rate monitor.

The second part of this quote is not completely true, though. If you click an exercise in the list here on MFP, the database that was input by the administrators of this site DO take into account YOUR individual weight, sex, and age. That's why it asks you these questions at sign up. However, once you use a particular exercise, say, swimming. . . you can change the calories that are suggested by MFP.

If I do 15 minutes of butterfly stroke (swimming) at my current weight, MFP says I burn 217 cals. If I enter my weight as 50 pounds lighter, MFP tells me I burn 157 cals for the same exercise.

If I use my heart rate monitor, it tells me a totally different calorie burn. ( I can't even DO the butterfly, so I have no idea....)

You can change the calories number on any exercise in the database.