logging calories burned....

cfergy

How do you REALLY know how many calories you've burned exercising? The machines at the gym and MFP usually say different things. I tend to log the lesser of the two numbers. Any thoughts?

UponThisRock

There's no way to know for sure, everything is an estimate.

Which is why I think estimating calories and "eating them back" is a little silly. I'm a fan of keeping daily calories consistent, and keeping weekly calories consistent. If progress stops, eat a little less and/or move a little more.

therealangd

You can use a heart rate monitor for a more accurate estimate. But I do the same thing, go with the lesser number. I also may check several websites to get a better sense of what might be more accurate.

cfergy

yeah, I'm not usually into eating back my calories either. I can't see wasting that effort for something to cancel it out. If I haul my booty to the gym, it's gonna count, that's for sure.

LorinaLynn

Even a heart rate monitor is an estimate. For me, MFP, machines and sites like RunKeeper give similar numbers, so I got by what has the most precise information. They all have my age and weight. The machine at the gym will know my time, pace and incline/resistance, so I'd take that over MFP, and Runkeeper has my pace and incline if I map my route, so I trust that to be fairly accurate, too. But really, they're all within maybe 10-20 calories of each other anyway, so I don't sweat it much.

Today, I ran 3.66 miles at 6.5mph in just under 34 minutes. Runkeeper calculated 348 calories. Using MFP, running 6 mph for 37 minutes (which would be about the same distance) gives 35, and running 6.7 mph for 33 minutes (equals same distance) is 344 calories. All very close.