Completely Confused

Options
13»

Replies

  • Chipmaniac
    Chipmaniac Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    Hooray for swimming! I do water aerobics for an hour and it says I burn 440 calories an hour and more often then not, I break a sweat (yes, in water). I put in "swimming, freestyle, moderate" for 60 minutes and it says I would burn 772.
    I'm new here and am just learning so correct me if I'm wrong but won't the # of calories you burn depend on your current weight? Isn't a 300 lb. woman going to be burn a different amout then a 200 lb. woman?
    Yes, a lot more.
  • tinkermommc
    tinkermommc Posts: 562 Member
    Options
    Hooray for swimming! I do water aerobics for an hour and it says I burn 440 calories an hour and more often then not, I break a sweat (yes, in water). I put in "swimming, freestyle, moderate" for 60 minutes and it says I would burn 772.
    I'm new here and am just learning so correct me if I'm wrong but won't the # of calories you burn depend on your current weight? Isn't a 300 lb. woman going to be burn a different amout then a 200 lb. woman?

    Exactly! I'm burning less and less calories every day ;-)
  • supermodelchic
    supermodelchic Posts: 550 Member
    Options
    Gotta ask what you did to burn 1,400 calories?
  • nmb0717
    nmb0717 Posts: 130 Member
    Options
    I bought a Heart Rate Monitor and come to find out I wasn't burning nearly as many calories as the tools on MFP said I did

    Same here... I strongly suggest purchasing a HRM to wear during exercise and get a precise reading. MFP always overestimates calories burned.
  • TheWinman
    TheWinman Posts: 700 Member
    Options
    Learn to reach you recommended net calorie goal. Netting 500 calories is no good. :)
  • cynthiaj777
    cynthiaj777 Posts: 787 Member
    Options
    I would definitely get a heart rate monitor for better accuracy. Just to give you an idea of how off MFP's calculator can be, my elliptical screen will say I burned about 330 calories in 30 minutes, but MFP will say it's more like 600. If I do eat any of my workout points, I do so as a last resort, and try not to eat more than 25% of them. Good luck!

    And I bet with a HRM, I'd TRULY be burning 200 calories for 30 minutes. Machines and MFP WAY over estimate caloric burn.

    Buy a HRM.
  • mariabee
    mariabee Posts: 212 Member
    Options
    Poor Azdak is going to kill me but...

    Look up member "Azdak" and go to his blog... he is one of the most knowledgeable people on this site and in one way or another he has a blog for almost all of our questions, including "eating back exercise calories" and "heart rate monitors".

    You may even want to "friend" him because he is just so knowledgeable that its inspiring (to me anyways :happy: )
  • Chipmaniac
    Chipmaniac Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    I would definitely get a heart rate monitor for better accuracy. Just to give you an idea of how off MFP's calculator can be, my elliptical screen will say I burned about 330 calories in 30 minutes, but MFP will say it's more like 600. If I do eat any of my workout points, I do so as a last resort, and try not to eat more than 25% of them. Good luck!

    And I bet with a HRM, I'd TRULY be burning 200 calories for 30 minutes. Machines and MFP WAY over estimate caloric burn.

    Buy a HRM.
    It depends on the machine. Some are bad, some others aren't. I would use a heart rate monitor and use the most conservative estimate.

Categories