not burning enough calories?

Options
emvee
emvee Posts: 3
in Fitness and Exercise
running on the treadmill for ~45 minutes, i burn about 430 calories. when i go to log it and i put in 45 minutes, it fills in calories for 594! am i paying too close attention to the calories since they're usually off on the machine anyways? or should i be burning a lot more than i am?

Replies

  • BigAnn
    BigAnn Posts: 38
    Options
    I just heard on the radio today that these machines generally over-estimate the number of calories burned. You need to factor in height, weight, m/f, etc.
  • Kidvicious28
    Kidvicious28 Posts: 1,613 Member
    Options
    look into getting a heart rate monitor. It'll do you wonders. The exercise machines are off...especially the ones you dont enter your height and weight. Good heart rate monitors to look into are Polar F6 or a Pro-form Precision XT.... i got mine off of Buy.com...it was only 30ish bucks...you can also find cheap finds on ebay and on woot.com

    This is the one I have:
    http://www.buy.com/prod/pro-form-precision-trainer-xt-heart-rate-monitor-with-chest-strap/q/loc/66357/211107597.html
  • aprilvet
    aprilvet Posts: 724 Member
    Options
    You definitely need a HRM. Even then, when you enter in "running on treadmill", you may need to adjust the calories every time, based on the length of time entered.

    Good luck!:flowerforyou:
  • toots99
    toots99 Posts: 3,794 Member
    Options
    I ordered that same heart rate monitor after seeing it on here! I should get it in the next day or two! :smile:
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    running on the treadmill for ~45 minutes, i burn about 430 calories. when i go to log it and i put in 45 minutes, it fills in calories for 594! am i paying too close attention to the calories since they're usually off on the machine anyways? or should i be burning a lot more than i am?

    Try this to check:

    1. multiply speed (mph) x 26.8 to determine meters/min.

    Ex: 6.0 mph x 26.8 = 160.8 m/min

    2. multiply m/min x 0.2

    3. add 3.5 to the total from #2

    4. Divide total from #3 by 3.5--this gives you your intensity in METS

    5. Multiply METS x your weight (in kg) to determine Calories/hour

    6. Multiply Calories/hour by .75 to get Calories burned in 45 minutes.

    Example: 70 Kg (154lb) runner at 6.0 mph

    1. Meters/min= 160.8

    2. 160.8 x 0.2 = 32.16

    3. 32.16 + 3.5 = 35.66

    4. METS = 10.2 (35.66/3.5)

    5. Calories/hour = 714

    6. Calories/45 min = 536

    This is only accurate for running at speeds greater than 5.0 mph, on the level. For a treadmill it probably overestimates by 5% or so because of lack of wind resistance.

    You can use the same formula for walking at speeds less than 4.2 mph--the difference is: In step 2, multiply meters/min by 0.1 instead of 0.2.
  • TheJackyl
    TheJackyl Posts: 88
    Options
    It all depends on you and the machine. After getting an HRM I found I was actually burning double what the machines were telling me.
  • KatWood
    KatWood Posts: 1,135 Member
    Options
    running on the treadmill for ~45 minutes, i burn about 430 calories. when i go to log it and i put in 45 minutes, it fills in calories for 594! am i paying too close attention to the calories since they're usually off on the machine anyways? or should i be burning a lot more than i am?

    I think what you are referring to is the difference between the machine and what MFP says? Are you inputting the speed into MFP? In general, I would use the smaller of the two numbers or take the average. Even though MFP will calculate the calories using the time you enter you can override that and enter in the calories yourself. Most machines are off but it depends on your particular case. At my gym you don't enter in your weight on the treadmills so it under estimates my calories since I am heavier than the average girl :happy:

    I also agree that a heart rate monior would be useful if you can afford one.

Categories