Accurate Exercise Calories

MrsLaurenAsh

I feel like MFP really overestimates calories burned on my cardio exercises. I put in all my specs into the gym machines (height, weight, etc) and consistently check my heart rate and the machine might say that I've burned 250 calories. When I log my exercise, it will say 350+. I know both the machine and MFP are estimates, but once I log my exercise and submit my log for the day, I get the "too little calories" warning. I know I'm eating plenty. It just seems a little deceiving.

Again, I don't hold either readings (the machines or MFP calculations) to be exact. But I do rely on MFP to help me keep what I eat in check by logging accurately. Anyone else experience the same concerns or observations? Is it just me that wonders about this?

Kerseygeek

I just ordered a heart rate monitor for this reason but for my calculations I use zumbacalories.com to figure out my calories burned. It includes intensity which I think is a bit more accurate. Hopefully my monitor will confirm what I'm burning. I'd say go by your monitor cuz it's probably the most accurate.

MrsLaurenAsh

That is a good suggestion. I think the intensity of the work out is very important. Work out equipment and MFP seem to give generalized estimates. So if MFP overestimates my calories burned I don't want to over eat and over compensate.

NYLatinaCR

I have a Polar F6 heart rate monitor watch [with chest strap]. That gives me the most accurate readings. The machines at the gym calculate 20-25% higher than your ACTUAL burn. The choices on MFP are input by other people based on their height/weight/age, etc..... I always manually add my calories based on my HRM. Polars are very expensive [for me], so I got mine on Ebay for like 50% off retail..... Hope this helps!! GOD BLESS!!

rhinovr

I would guess the best think to do is take the average of the two until you get one of those "you beaut" gadgets! Thats what I would do.

erickirb

I feel like MFP really overestimates calories burned on my cardio exercises. I put in all my specs into the gym machines (height, weight, etc) and consistently check my heart rate and the machine might say that I've burned 250 calories. When I log my exercise, it will say 350+. I know both the machine and MFP are estimates, but once I log my exercise and submit my log for the day, I get the "too little calories" warning. I know I'm eating plenty. It just seems a little deceiving.

Again, I don't hold either readings (the machines or MFP calculations) to be exact. But I do rely on MFP to help me keep what I eat in check by logging accurately. Anyone else experience the same concerns or observations? Is it just me that wonders about this?

once you put in the exercise in MFP go back into the exercise tab and change the cals burned to the machines number if lower than MFP.

hyde1977

I would not use what MFP gives you- take what the machine says and take 50-100 calories off of that!

HRM is the best! I have the Polar FT4- its a true refelction of your body but this site and the machines at the gym are in fact off!

tigersword

That is a good suggestion. I think the intensity of the work out is very important. Work out equipment and MFP seem to give generalized estimates. So if MFP overestimates my calories burned I don't want to over eat and over compensate.

Workout machines take intensity into account. They base their entire calculations on the intensity you set (resistance/speed/incline settings) and your weight. I would go with the machine over MFP estimates, although for me, MFP underestimates my calorie burn. Never used an HRM for calorie burn, just can't justify the expense. Plus HRM's are only accurate for steady state cardio, which isn't something I ever do.

CMmrsfloyd

I have yet to workout in a gym or on a machine that has the capability to estimate calorie burn, and I'm still new at this so I have no clue how to calculate it myself. So I went to Target and bought a Polar FT4 heartrate monitor (comes with the chest strap), programmed it with my info and now I wear it whenever I workout or even vaccum the house so I know what I'm burning. It was $93.99. I looked at less expensive models but after checking reviews on accuracy, it seemed this was the best way to go (plus it's the one that the majority of people recommended to me). I know it's pricey but I had been saving up and trying to decide what I wanted to get with my 'fun money' and this was my choice. It really helps to actually have an accurate picture of what I'm accomplishing. :-)

armymil

I'm not hard-core like some of the posters on here with their gadgets, but I use the web to my advantage. I take MFP, the machine and another workout calorie calculator (I just google search for any that pop up). I take the lowest of the 3. If I TRUELY burned more, then my body will appreciate it. I don't need to know there are extra calories there. It's not like I eat them anyhow being on a 1500 cal diet. I feel there is nothing wrong with going with the lowest number.

If I am running or walking outside, I use a gps based tracker on my Iphone that calculates the calories for me. I still use the lowest number out of the 3. It just averages your weight and height, how fast you were going, how long you were going and elevation. Sometimes they are hanky though.

RBXChas

I completely agree. I am in Week 7 of Couch to 5K - so basically I am doing 25-minute runs with 10 minutes of brisk warm-up and cool-down walking - and I don't count my calories burned on MFP for running at 5mph for 25 minutes. It just seems like too much! I say running for 15 minutes and walking at 3mph for 20 minutes, and even then I feel like it overestimates at around 250 calories.

Admittedly it kind of burns me when I bust my butt out there 6 days/week doing Couch to 5K, and I log 250 calories burned, then I see in my newsfeed that someone mowed the lawn for an hour and burned twice as many calories, according to MFP, than I did.

Anyway, point being, I underestimate calories on MFP on purpose. There's no way I'm actually burning what it says if I entered what exercise I actually did. While it's great that people are moving and are able to log their activity as a calorie burn, I don't think the apparent overshooting is doing anyone any favors.

CMmrsfloyd

I completely agree. I am in Week 7 of Couch to 5K - so basically I am doing 25-minute runs with 10 minutes of brisk warm-up and cool-down walking - and I don't count my calories burned on MFP for running at 5mph for 25 minutes. It just seems like too much! I say running for 15 minutes and walking at 3mph for 20 minutes, and even then I feel like it overestimates at around 250 calories.

Admittedly it kind of burns me when I bust my butt out there 6 days/week doing Couch to 5K, and I log 250 calories burned, then I see in my newsfeed that someone mowed the lawn for an hour and burned twice as many calories, according to MFP, than I did.

Anyway, point being, I underestimate calories on MFP on purpose. There's no way I'm actually burning what it says if I entered what exercise I actually did. While it's great that people are moving and are able to log their activity as a calorie burn, I don't think the apparent overshooting is doing anyone any favors.

That's exactly why I use my heartrate monitor, so I actually know what's going on. I would be completely clueless otherwise. I have my settings set to 'sedentary' which is why I count my vaccuming. LOL But I only count it if I wear my heartrate monitor and get my calorie estimation from there. I don't count every little thing I do but MFP has me on the 1200 calorie plan and if vaccuming my whole house and dragging the thing up the stairs burns 150 calories, I want to know it so I can have an extra snack! LOL

erickirb

That is a good suggestion. I think the intensity of the work out is very important. Work out equipment and MFP seem to give generalized estimates. So if MFP overestimates my calories burned I don't want to over eat and over compensate.

Workout machines take intensity into account. They base their entire calculations on the intensity you set (resistance/speed/incline settings) and your weight. I would go with the machine over MFP estimates, although for me, MFP underestimates my calorie burn. Never used an HRM for calorie burn, just can't justify the expense. Plus HRM's are only accurate for steady state cardio, which isn't something I ever do.

If you did not use an HRM you do not know that MFP underestimated, most likely the machine over estimated. If you do not use a HRM and have more than one estimate of calories burned I would go with the lowest of them, just to be safe.

cuddlyrunner

For me I felt MFP was overestimating so went on the calories burned on the machines, after 8 weeks on this journey I bought a second hand Polar 4 on ebay for £20. This has proved that the machines aren't accurate either, on Saturday the machines estimated my 2 hour workout at over 1000 calories and my HRM at 800ish. I go on the HRM figures as they are more accurate.

MrsLaurenAsh

Thanks for all the input! I hope I'm doing right in not eating all the "exercise calories" back considering I haven't used any type of heart monitor and don't know how many calories I've actually burned. I'm just going off common sense here. Definitely not starving myself, but I don't need false comfort in an excess of extra calories each day. My routine has worked pretty well so far. Started truly trying to change my lifestyle on 8/9/11 and have consistantly lost 1.5/2 pounds per week. I cut back on processed food, high calorie drinks, started drinking lots of water and have significantly increased my physical activity to about four good and different work outs per week. I feel great!

MrsLaurenAsh

I also use a walking/running GPS app on my iPhone! I usually get a different number on there, too. I guess it's safe to stick with the lowest number.

armymil

I also use a walking/running GPS app on my iPhone! I usually get a different number on there, too. I guess it's safe to stick with the lowest number.

Rock on! Congrats on the weight loss. Sticking with the lowest number is what I found easier. I've actually lost more weight doing it that way, then trying the other way. As sad as this is, I use to think i could eat those extra calories, but now I avoid it. I just stick to my diet and if I have a free meal that goes over, oh well, i'm not worried.

Good luck!

MrsLaurenAsh

Thank you! And I think you're exactly right. Relying too much on the tracker gives me false hope

Kerseygeek

Amazon has some heart rate monitors at some really great prices and with tons of reviews so you get a better idea which ones are worth it. That's where I bought mine and it had 4-5 stars so I felt better about buying it.