We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Calories Burned? MFP vs Exercise Machines???

PositiveGoals
PositiveGoals Posts: 50
edited September 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
Which is more accurate? The calories burned calculated here at MFP or the calories burned that the exercise machine shows us? There is a huge difference. I know MFP takes into consideration age, weight, lifestyle, height etc. So I would think it is MFP. Any other opinions on this?

Replies

  • mghane
    mghane Posts: 109 Member
    I have the same issue but stick to what the machine tells me. I hear the most accurate would be a heart rate monitor which I still need to invest in :P.
  • AliDarling
    AliDarling Posts: 373
    i go with the machine. the eliptical tells me i burned 876 for 65 min wheres as the MFP tells me 804. but when it comes to walks, or something you cant count, i have no choice but to believe MFP
  • juliapurpletoes
    juliapurpletoes Posts: 951 Member
    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

    definitely a heart rate monitor and read this MFP link first!

    That said, I have an elliptical trainer at home and it take NONE of my personal info and just spits out this incredibly high calorie burn, I guess it is based on some random average given the heart rate it picks up on these sensors....can we just say joke!

    I do wear my HRM and it is about 1/2 the calories that the elliptical reports.........

    How that compares to the MFP database is also suspect.....it is never accurate for me either. Although it does take a few more bits of our info, it cannot take a heart rate which is what your" intensity" would be based on......... and THAT is what makes all the difference in a calorie burn. It just uses an "average" but yeah way better than the machines score for sure, because unless the machine asks for any personal details....well I think you get what I mean!
  • sgrinavi
    sgrinavi Posts: 80
    It's all based on METS which can be expressed as a calorie expenditure based averages for your gender, age & weight. SO, if the machine has a way to enter your gender, age and weight it is a more accurate measure of the calories you expended.

    HRMs are pretty much the same deal : the calories it shows you expending are based on averages @ a specific % of your MaxHR for a person of your age/gender/weight.

    Either way is really not 100% accurate as they don't take into account your lean body mass.
  • I use a treadmill that asks for my age and weight and it's about 10 calories off from MFP--so I go with the machine. I also don't eat back all of my exercise calories though.
  • I use a treadmill that asks for my age and weight and it's about 10 calories off from MFP--so I go with the machine. I also don't eat back all of my exercise calories though.
  • MissChyna
    MissChyna Posts: 358 Member
    I usually go with what the machine says or what my HRM calculates (they are usually either the same or only off by very little). I know it's not all 100% accurate but my doctor once said that it's the best way to go if you are tracking everything.


    Take care ^_^
  • mghane
    mghane Posts: 109 Member
    800-something for 65 min? My elliptical trainer which asks my weight only gives me 130 calorie loss for about 30 min of interval going at 75 rmp. That's a HUGE difference. MFP gives me something closer to 300 for 30 min. I just go with the 130. But how does that work?
This discussion has been closed.