Which one is correct?

faithbelievejoy

Whenever I walk/job on my treadmill I get a totally different amount of calories burned than I do on MFP when I log it.
Granted, I like the MFP amount better, which one is correct?

erickirb

neither. You will need a HRM to get the best estimate of calories burned. having said that, if you don't have one use the lowest estimate, so you ensure you don't over estimate.

amberlee2011

I really think calories are overestimated on here. I want to get one of those HRMs but I'm not sure which is a good brand and what the price range is. I'll have to research.

faithbelievejoy

Thank you!
I will look into buying one.

kalliewelter

But what if you have the tredmill set to an incline or the elliptical set to a higher level? MFP doesn't take that into account. On the elliptical at the gym I burn 365 cals for 30 minutes, but MFP says 280. I have the elliptical set at level 5. What should you go by in this case?

arc918

both are wrong (too high), MFP is often more wrong

faithbelievejoy

That's what I'm doing right now.
Looks like in the price range of 30-40 dollars.

BotsMomJ

Take an average of the 2. :-)

haolegurl07

Yeah, I always take the lower one, and also, I usually under estimate the time that I actually worked out. Like I'll ride my bike for at least 1/2 hour but I'll put in here that I only rode for 15 minutes. That way I don't over estimate and also don't over eat, I usually try not to eat too many of my work out calories back, but you never know how you're going to feel.

I really want to get a HRM as well, just haven't gotten to that point yet...

Hope this all helps!

faithbelievejoy

Take an average of the 2. :-)

Good idea
I might invest in a HRM just to get more accurate readings though.

cranmuffin

I use a MIO watch to calculate how many calories I burn when I'm on the treadmill and I've found that the watch and the machine are pretty well matched to each other, but MFP seems to be way off. It all has to do with heart rate, age, and gender.

helenoftroy1

training machines don't know whether you are male or female and what weight you are. If me and a skinny friend go for a walk, same distance same time, I'll burn more calories because I'm carrying extra weight around.
MFP knows what weight, height and sex you are.
I'm not going to put a bet on it, but MFP caters it more to each individual right?

Jenscan

I would get a HRM. MFP has been underestimating for me. I knew something was going on when I felt horrible, no energy. That's because I was way under net every day and didn't know it!

faithbelievejoy

Yeah, I always take the lower one, and also, I usually under estimate the time that I actually worked out. Like I'll ride my bike for at least 1/2 hour but I'll put in here that I only rode for 15 minutes. That way I don't over estimate and also don't over eat, I usually try not to eat too many of my work out calories back, but you never know how you're going to feel.

I really want to get a HRM as well, just haven't gotten to that point yet...

Hope this all helps!

I'm going to start doing this until I get a HRM
Thank you!!

erickirb

That's what I'm doing right now.
Looks like in the price range of 30-40 dollars.

get one with a chest strap i.e. polar FT7. They will cost $80+ dollars for a good one.

blueliss26

All the machines at my gym take age and weight into account as well. not gender though, and not fitness level... so even if 2 150 pound females are doing the elliptical, one could be much more "in shape" than the other and would burn less cals. I really want a HRM... just need to bite the bullet. In the meantime.. my goal is to eat back only half my work out cals. That way i'm not eating too much, but i am eating some of them back so theres no way i'm going way too low.

Minnie_Moo

Don't know if this will help you any but...........Here is a link that was posted in another thread with a lot of information on HRM's. Also, I would suggest getting one with a chest strap as they are better to calculate an accurate HR.


http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472

faithbelievejoy

That's what I'm doing right now.
Looks like in the price range of 30-40 dollars.

get one with a chest strap i.e. polar FT7. They will cost $80+ dollars for a good one.

Thank you for the recommendation

chrisuy

I'm not so sure I buy the correlation of heart rate to calories burned. It just seems to me that there are ways that heart rate can be elevated that have nothing to do with working out (playing poker, general stress, holding breath, etc).

When I swim, for example, I know that my HR is high mostly due to controlled breathing than it is exertion. A HRM might tell me that I burn more calories for an hour of swimming than I do for an hour of running, but I know otherwise...

faithbelievejoy

Don't know if this will help you any but...........Here is a link that was posted in another thread with a lot of information on HRM's. Also, I would suggest getting one with a chest strap as they are better to calculate an accurate HR.


http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472

Thank you!!
I'm going to read this because I really don't know much about HRM's.
I'm sure this will be helpful

erickirb

I'm not so sure I buy the correlation of heart rate to calories burned. It just seems to me that there are ways that heart rate can be elevated that have nothing to do with working out (playing poker, general stress, holding breath, etc).

When I swim, for example, I know that my HR is high mostly due to controlled breathing than it is exertion. A HRM might tell me that I burn more calories for an hour of swimming than I do for an hour of running, but I know otherwise...

That is true but the HRM are only accurate for, and meant for calculating, calories burned during cardio exercises only. HR is only one of the inputs into its calculation of calories burned. It takes into account age, weight, gender, etc. Using these inputs accounts for 70 some odd % of total calories burned and the remainder are estimated using a linear equation. If you know your V02 Max and have it entered, it will account for 80 some odd % of calories burned, with the remainder being estimated using a linear equation to HR.

Your swimming example may be correct that it is over estimated but probably not by more than 10%, as HR isn't the only factor taken into account.

kamoira23

I have a Polar FT4 and it's great! I got it for around $60 on Amazon, and from the research I did before hand, it seemed to be one of the better values. I would highly suggest investing in SOME HRM though - MFP was over-estimating by double the calories that the HRM said. That made for some annoying weigh-in days when I thought I'd actually been burning way more than I had been.

Good luck!

Minnie_Moo

Here is some info for anyone looking to purchase a HRM........



I purchased a Polar FT40 a few weeks back to replace my old Polar (which didn't calculate calories burned) and I the FT40.

You can search the internet for specials and lowest prices if you are shopping for any HRM on sites like Amazon, sporting stores, ebay, etc.

I searched and bought mine on heartratemonitors dot com and also found an online coupon for it and saved an additional $10.00 in addition to it being on sale at the time I purchased it.


**** Actually I just checked about 2 weeks ago after receiving an email about a sale on heartratemonitors dot com and the FT40 that I bought is now on sale for $129.66 with free UPS 1 - 2 days delivery. I paid around $149.95 on sale when I got my FT40 so this is now a good price for anyone looking at the FT40 !

And for anyone looking at the FT7 (another popular HRM with members on here) - it is also on sale for $82.17 with free shipping !

The FT4 (another popular HRM with members on here) is on sale for $73.99 with free shipping as well ****