Calories Burned, Go by MFP or my treadmill?

leenabeana1

Today I did 98 min of cardiovascular including running 5.5 mph (11) min miles. And walking 3-3.5 for an hr. My treadmill said I burned 820 calories and MFP says only 652! To me that's a big difference! What do you go by? My treadmill always gives me higher numbers!!!

scottb81

I would go by MFP. I find these numbers to be pretty accurate and in line with most other formula estimates for walking and running.

MandaLeigh123

I didn't lose any weight using MFP exercise calorie estimates-- I started using my heart rate monitor & figure out calories burned based on heart rate & it's working

beckajw

Today I did 98 min of cardiovascular including running 5.5 mph (11) min miles. And walking 3-3.5 for an hr. My treadmill said I burned 820 calories and MFP says only 652! To me that's a big difference! What do you go by? My treadmill always gives me higher numbers!!!

Neither is all that accurate. You should get an HRM. However, I would go with MFP. Machines always seem to be much higher than reality.

Vansy

Go buy a heart rate monitor and use that. Treadmills/Ellipticals/Stationary Bikes are extremely inaccurate.

The only time that I actually burned more then the elliptical said I burned was after i had already run 3 miles outside in the 85 degree heat. I came inside and got on the elliptical, so my heart rate was elevated the entire time.

But yeah, MFP and the machines aren't accurate since they don't know where your heart rated was during the workout. It's better to guesstimate under than over.

SHHitsKaty

MFP always seems to tell me I've burned more calories than what the elliptical says when I get off of it. Although, I don't take either that seriously. I just assume it's a ballpark estimate if you aren't using a heart rate monitor but at least it helps me know some sort of number that I just burned.